Vera C Kaelin1, Erin R Wallace2, Martha M Werler3, Brent R Collett4, Mary A Khetani1,5,6. 1. Rehabilitation Sciences, College of Applied Health Sciences, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA. 2. Center for Child Health, Behavior, and Development, Seattle Children's Research Institute, Seattle, WA, USA. 3. Department of Epidemiology, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA. 4. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA. 5. Occupational Therapy, College of Applied Health Sciences, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA. 6. CanChild Centre for Childhood Disability Research, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To examine differences in community participation and environmental support for youth with and without craniofacial microsomia. METHODS: This study involved secondary analyses of a subset of data (n = 396) from a longitudinal cohort study. Multiple linear and Poisson regression analyses and Wilcoxon Mann-Whitney tests were used to estimate differences in community participation and environmental support between youth with craniofacial microsomia and youth without craniofacial microsomia, stratified based on their history of education and health-related service use. Chi-square analyses were used to explore item-level group differences in change desired across community activities. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were found in community participation frequency (ES = -0.52; p < 0.001), level of involvement (r = -0.16; p = 0.010), and desire for change in participation when comparing youth with craniofacial microsomia and non-affected peers not receiving services (p < 0.001). There were no statistically significant differences between youth with craniofacial microsomia and non-affected peers receiving services. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest lower community participation in youth with craniofacial microsomia as compared to non-affected peers not receiving services. This may suggest opportunities for designing and testing interventions to promote community participation among youth with craniofacial microsomia, so as to support their transition to adulthood.Implications for rehabilitationYouth with craniofacial microsomia may have unmet rehabilitation needs related to their community participation.Rehabilitation professionals should pay attention to participation of youth with craniofacial microsomia in activities that place a higher demand on involvement with others.Rehabilitation professionals should appraise participation frequency and involvement of youths with craniofacial microsomia to gain accurate insight into their current community participation.
PURPOSE: To examine differences in community participation and environmental support for youth with and without craniofacial microsomia. METHODS: This study involved secondary analyses of a subset of data (n = 396) from a longitudinal cohort study. Multiple linear and Poisson regression analyses and Wilcoxon Mann-Whitney tests were used to estimate differences in community participation and environmental support between youth with craniofacial microsomia and youth without craniofacial microsomia, stratified based on their history of education and health-related service use. Chi-square analyses were used to explore item-level group differences in change desired across community activities. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were found in community participation frequency (ES = -0.52; p < 0.001), level of involvement (r = -0.16; p = 0.010), and desire for change in participation when comparing youth with craniofacial microsomia and non-affected peers not receiving services (p < 0.001). There were no statistically significant differences between youth with craniofacial microsomia and non-affected peers receiving services. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest lower community participation in youth with craniofacial microsomia as compared to non-affected peers not receiving services. This may suggest opportunities for designing and testing interventions to promote community participation among youth with craniofacial microsomia, so as to support their transition to adulthood.Implications for rehabilitationYouth with craniofacial microsomia may have unmet rehabilitation needs related to their community participation.Rehabilitation professionals should pay attention to participation of youth with craniofacial microsomia in activities that place a higher demand on involvement with others.Rehabilitation professionals should appraise participation frequency and involvement of youths with craniofacial microsomia to gain accurate insight into their current community participation.
Authors: Lynette M Dufton; Matthew L Speltz; Judith P Kelly; Brian Leroux; Brent R Collett; Martha M Werler Journal: J Pediatr Psychol Date: 2011-02-23
Authors: Brooke Adair; Anna Ullenhag; Peter Rosenbaum; Mats Granlund; Deb Keen; Christine Imms Journal: Dev Med Child Neurol Date: 2018-07-19 Impact factor: 5.449
Authors: Noah Cohen; Erica Cohen; Alberto Gaiero; Silvia Zecca; Graziella Fichera; Federica Baldi; Joseph Felix Giordanetto; Jacques Marie Mercier; Amnon Cohen Journal: Am J Med Genet A Date: 2017-03-20 Impact factor: 2.802
Authors: Christine Imms; Mats Granlund; Peter H Wilson; Bert Steenbergen; Peter L Rosenbaum; Andrew M Gordon Journal: Dev Med Child Neurol Date: 2016-09-19 Impact factor: 5.449
Authors: Brent R Collett; Matthew L Speltz; Yona Keich Cloonan; Brian G Leroux; Judith P Kelly; Martha M Werler Journal: Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med Date: 2011-02
Authors: Martha M Werler; Jane E Sheehan; Catherine Hayes; Bonnie L Padwa; Allen A Mitchell; John B Mulliken Journal: Cleft Palate Craniofac J Date: 2004-09
Authors: Vera C Kaelin; Mina Valizadeh; Zurisadai Salgado; Julia G Sim; Dana Anaby; Andrew D Boyd; Natalie Parde; Mary A Khetani Journal: Front Rehabil Sci Date: 2022