Maru Barrera1, Eshetu G Atenafu2, Lillian Sung3, Ute Bartels3, Fiona Schulte4, Joanna Chung5, Danielle Cataudella6, Kelly Hancock1, Laura Janzen1, Amani Saleh1, Douglas Strother7, Andrea Downie6, Shayna Zelcer8, Juliette Hukin9, Dina McConnell5. 1. Psychology Department, Hematology/Oncology Division, Sick Kids Hospital, Toronto, Canada. 2. Biostatistics Department, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada. 3. Hematology/Oncology Division, Sick Kids Hospital, Toronto, Canada. 4. Psychology Department, Hematology/Oncology Division, Alberta Children's Hospital, Calgary, Canada. 5. Psychology Department, Hematology/Oncology Division, BC Children's Hospital, Vancouver, Canada. 6. Psychology Department, Hematology/Oncology Division, London Health Sciences Centre, London, Canada. 7. Hematology/Oncology Division, Alberta Children's Hospital, Calgary, Canada. 8. Hematology/Oncology Division, London Health Sciences Centre, London, Canada. 9. Hematology/Oncology Division, BC Children's Hospital, Vancouver, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To determine if a group social skills intervention program improves social competence and quality of life (QOL) in pediatric brain tumor survivors (PBTS). METHODS: We conducted a randomized control trial in which PBTS (8-16 years old, off therapy for over 3 months) were allocated to receive social skills training (eg, cooperation, assertion, using social cognitive problem solving strategies, role playing, games, and arts and crafts) in 8 weekly 2-hour sessions, or an attention placebo control (games and arts and crafts only). Outcomes were self-reported, proxy-reported (caregiver), and teacher-reported using the Social Skills Rating System (SSRS), to measure social competence, and the Pediatric Quality of Life (PedsQL4.0, generic) to measure QOL at baseline, after intervention, and at 6 months follow-up. At baseline, SSRS were stratified into low and high scores and included as a covariate in the analysis. RESULTS: Compared to controls (n = 48), PBTS in the intervention group (n = 43) reported significantly better total and empathy SSRS scores, with improvements persisting at follow-up. The PBTS in the intervention group who had low scores at baseline reported the greatest improvements. Proxy and teacher reports showed no intervention effect. CONCLUSIONS: Participating in group social skills intervention can improve self-reported social competence that persisted to follow up. The PBTS should be given the opportunity to participate in social skills groups to improve social competence.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: To determine if a group social skills intervention program improves social competence and quality of life (QOL) in pediatric brain tumor survivors (PBTS). METHODS: We conducted a randomized control trial in which PBTS (8-16 years old, off therapy for over 3 months) were allocated to receive social skills training (eg, cooperation, assertion, using social cognitive problem solving strategies, role playing, games, and arts and crafts) in 8 weekly 2-hour sessions, or an attention placebo control (games and arts and crafts only). Outcomes were self-reported, proxy-reported (caregiver), and teacher-reported using the Social Skills Rating System (SSRS), to measure social competence, and the Pediatric Quality of Life (PedsQL4.0, generic) to measure QOL at baseline, after intervention, and at 6 months follow-up. At baseline, SSRS were stratified into low and high scores and included as a covariate in the analysis. RESULTS: Compared to controls (n = 48), PBTS in the intervention group (n = 43) reported significantly better total and empathy SSRS scores, with improvements persisting at follow-up. The PBTS in the intervention group who had low scores at baseline reported the greatest improvements. Proxy and teacher reports showed no intervention effect. CONCLUSIONS: Participating in group social skills intervention can improve self-reported social competence that persisted to follow up. The PBTS should be given the opportunity to participate in social skills groups to improve social competence.
Authors: Fiona Schulte; Tara M Brinkman; Chenghong Li; Taryn Fay-McClymont; Deo Kumar Srivastava; Kirsten K Ness; Rebecca M Howell; Sabine Mueller; Elizabeth Wells; Douglas Strother; Lucie Lafay-Cousin; Wendy Leisenring; Leslie L Robison; Gregory T Armstrong; Kevin R Krull Journal: Cancer Date: 2018-08-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Matthew C Hocking; Julia Parish-Morris; Robert T Schultz; Jane E Minturn; Cole Brodsky; Emily K Shabason; John D Herrington Journal: Neuropsychology Date: 2020-01-30 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Maru Barrera; Eshetu G Atenafu; Fiona Schulte; Ute Bartels; Lillian Sung; Laura Janzen; Joanna Chung; Danielle Cataudella; Kelly Hancock; Amani Saleh; Douglas Strother; Dina McConnell; Andrea Downie; Juliette Hukin; Shayna Zelcer Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2017-04-14 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Ineke M Olsthoorn; Alice Ann Holland; Raymond C Hawkins; Allen E Cornelius; Muhammad Usman Baig; Grace Yang; Daniel C Holland; Wafik Zaky; Peter L Stavinoha Journal: Front Neurosci Date: 2022-06-23 Impact factor: 5.152
Authors: Fiona Schulte; Alicia S Kunin-Batson; Barbara A Olson-Bullis; Pia Banerjee; Matthew C Hocking; Laura Janzen; Lisa S Kahalley; Hayley Wroot; Caitlin Forbes; Kevin R Krull Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2019-10-17 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Peter L Stavinoha; Martha A Askins; Stephanie K Powell; Natasha Pillay Smiley; Rhonda S Robert Journal: Bioengineering (Basel) Date: 2018-09-11