| Literature DB >> 34847060 |
Yuanhui Luo1, Wei Xia2, Ankie Tan Cheung3, Laurie Long Kwan Ho3, Jingping Zhang4, Jianhui Xie5, Pin Xiao6, Ho Cheung William Li3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Caring for children with cancer can be a stressful experience for parents and may have negative effects on their physical and psychological well-being. Although evidence has shown that resilience is associated with positive psychological well-being, few interventions have been specifically designed to enhance the resilience of parents of children with cancer.Entities:
Keywords: depressive symptoms; mobile phone; parents; pediatric cancer; quality of life; resilience
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34847060 PMCID: PMC8669578 DOI: 10.2196/27639
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Med Internet Res ISSN: 1438-8871 Impact factor: 5.428
Figure 1The total 8 tweets in the mobile device–based resilience training program.
Content of the mobile device–based resilience training program.
| Sessions or tweets and internal resilience factors | Details | ||||||
|
| Objectives | Core content | Assignment | ||||
|
| |||||||
|
| Emotional |
To help the participants understand the purpose of the intervention To help the participants initially understand the intervention content | Definition of resilience, purpose of the study, science of the intervention, general content of all tweets, and encouragement to cultivate positive emotions in daily life | The 3 good things practice: write down 3 things that go well for you that day and reflect on why they went well | |||
|
| |||||||
|
| Emotional and physical |
To practice relaxation techniques To reduce the participants’ stress | Definition of meditation, science and specific practice methods of meditation exercise, and guided meditation audio | Guided breath awareness: sit quietly and be aware of your breath and exercise following the guided meditation audio | |||
|
| |||||||
|
| Behavioral |
To learn problem-solving skills To cultivate a positive coping style | Introduction and science of the problem-solving therapy, specific 7 steps to solve problems, and examples of solving problems encountered in caring for children with cancer | Problem-solving practice: complete the problem-solving worksheet according to the instructions | |||
|
| |||||||
|
| Cognitive |
To help the participants understand their own character strengths To increase confidence in dealing with difficulties in life | Definition of character strength, establishment of character strength assessment system, and science and specific methods of character strength training | Character strength training: finish web-based character strength assessment to find your top 5 strengths. Use your strengths in caring for your child | |||
|
| |||||||
|
| Cognitive and emotional |
To help the participants reframe negative or unhelpful cognition To learn emotion management skills | Recognize and accept emotions, definition of cognition, science of cognition restructuring, examples of cognition restructuring scenarios from parents of children with cancer, and emotion management strategies | Cognition restructuring practice: complete the cognitive reconstructing worksheet according to the instructions | |||
|
| |||||||
|
| Behavioral |
To promote effective communication between parent and child To help the participants build a good relationship with their child | Ways to achieve effective parent–child communication, examples of good communication from parents of children with cancer, and tips for managing children’s emotions | Parent–child activity: accompany the child for an appropriate activity and apply the communication skills in the activity | |||
|
| |||||||
|
| Spiritual |
To help the participants cultivate positive beliefs To help the participants attain personal growth | Manifestations, benefits, science and specific exercise of gratitude; steps to make a realizable goal; and examples of goal setting from parents of children with cancer | Gratitude activity: write a gratitude letter or keep a gratitude diary or prepare a gratitude card | |||
|
| |||||||
|
| Cognitive |
To review the learned skills and related assignments To help the participants make a plan to reinforce the learned skills in their future life | Simple summary for each tweet, emphasis of the learned resilience skills and related assignments, and encourage the participants to make a plan to practice the learned skills | Plan-making: make a plan to practice all skills and choose a favorite exercise to keep up | |||
Figure 2A CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trial) flow diagram.
Baseline characteristics of the participants in the experimental and control groups (N=103).
| Characteristics | Experimental (n=52) | Control (n=51) | Chi-square ( | ||||||||||||
|
| Participant, n (%) | Values, mean (SD) | Participant, n (%) | Values, mean (SD) |
|
|
| ||||||||
|
| N/Ab |
| N/A |
| N/A |
| |||||||||
|
| Female | 35 (67) |
| 37 (73) |
| 0.3 (1) |
| .56 | |||||||
|
| Male | 17 (33) |
| 14 (23) |
| 0.3 (1) |
| .56 | |||||||
|
| N/A |
| N/A |
| N/A |
| |||||||||
|
| Married | 50 (96) |
| 50 (98) |
| 0.3 (1) |
| .99c | |||||||
|
| Divorced | 2 (4) |
| 1 (2) |
| 0.3 (1) |
| .99c | |||||||
|
| N/A |
| N/A |
| N/A |
| |||||||||
|
| Primary school | 5 (10) |
| 3 (6) |
| 1.1 (2) |
| .60c | |||||||
|
| High school | 31 (60) |
| 35 (69) |
| 1.1 (2) |
| .60c | |||||||
|
| College | 16 (31) |
| 13 (25) |
| 1.1 (2) |
| .60c | |||||||
|
| N/A |
| N/A |
| N/A |
| |||||||||
|
| <3000 (<427.35) | 24 (46) |
| 28 (55) |
| 1.2 (2) |
| .54 | |||||||
|
| 3000-5000 (427.35-712.25) | 17 (33) |
| 16 (31) |
| 1.2 (2) |
| .54 | |||||||
|
| >5000 (>712.25) | 11 (21) |
| 7 (14) |
| 1.2 (2) |
| .54 | |||||||
|
| N/A |
| N/A |
| N/A |
| |||||||||
|
| Hematology tumor | 38 (73) |
| 31 (61) |
| 1.8 (1) |
| .19 | |||||||
|
| Solid tumor | 14 (27) |
| 20 (39) |
| 1.8 (1) |
| .19 | |||||||
|
| N/A |
| N/A |
| N/A |
| |||||||||
|
| 0-6 | 44 (85) |
| 41 (80) |
| 0.3 (1) |
| .57 | |||||||
|
| 7-12 | 8 (15) |
| 10 (20) |
| 0.3 (1) |
| .57 | |||||||
|
| N/A |
| N/A |
| N/A |
| |||||||||
|
| Low | 18 (35) |
| 17 (33) |
| 1.0 (2) |
| .61 | |||||||
|
| Intermediate | 22 (42) |
| 18 (35) |
| 1.0 (2) |
| .61 | |||||||
|
| High | 12 (23) |
| 16 (31) |
| 1.0 (2) |
| .61 | |||||||
| Parents’ age in years | N/A | 33.92 (5.4) | N/A | 33.22 (5.0) | N/A | −0.691 (101) | .49 | ||||||||
| Children’s age in years | N/A | 5.48 (3.7) | N/A | 6.41 (3.6) | N/A | 1.278 (101) | .20 | ||||||||
aThe significance of t test is 2 tailed.
bN/A: not applicable.
cFisher exact test.
Comparison of resilience, depressive symptoms, and quality of life in the experimental and control groups (N=103).
| Outcomes measures | Experimental (n=52), mean (SD) | Control (n=51), mean (SD) | Experimental (n=52), median (range) | Control (n=51), median (range) |
| ||||
|
| |||||||||
|
| Baseline | 63.48 (15.1) | 61.73 (14.7) | –0.598 (101) | .55 | 63 (32-96) | 62 (18-84) | –0.376 | .71 |
|
| 2 months | 69.35 (13.4) | 61.90 (14.6) | –2.673 (101) | .005 | 69 (31-96) | 62 (12-94) | –2.846 | .004 |
|
| 6 months | 67.96 (15.8) | 58.27 (19.0) | –3.521 (101) | <.001 | 66 (41-100) | 58 (22-87) | –3.102 | .002 |
|
| |||||||||
|
| Baseline | 45.40 (7.7) | 44.16 (7.1) | –0.852 (101) | .40 | 45 (30-67) | 44 (29-70) | –0.740 | .46 |
|
| 2 months | 40.40 (9.1) | 44.66 (8.0) | 2.554 (101) | .009 | 39 (24-62) | 45 (24-71) | –2.665 | .008 |
|
| 6 months | 40.17 (9.9) | 46.04 (10.9) | 3.467 (101) | <.001 | 40 (25-63) | 45 (31-64) | –3.025 | .002 |
|
| |||||||||
|
| Baseline | 0.77 (0.1) | 0.76 (0.1) | –0.191 (101) | .85 | 0.82 (0.41-1.00) | 0.78 (0.44-0.96) | –0.801 | .42 |
|
| 2 months | 0.77 (0.2) | 0.75 (0.1) | –1.589 (101) | .11 | 0.82 (0.49-0.96) | 0.76 (0.45-1.00) | –1.456 | .15 |
|
| 6 months | 0.79 (0.2) | 0.76 (0.3) | –1.791 (101) | .07 | 0.81 (0.47-1.00) | 0.79 (0.48-1.00) | –1.340 | .18 |
aThe significance of t test is 2-tailed.
A generalized estimating equation model for resilience, depressive symptoms, and quality of life.
| Outcome measures | Intention-to-treat (N=103) | Complete case (N=86) | ||||||||
|
| ||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||
|
| Main effecta | 6.082 (2.360; 1.455 to 10.709) | .01 | 6.055 (2.652; 0.858 to 11.253) | .02 | |||||
|
| Group×time 1b,c | 5.812 (2.363; 1.177 to 10.448) | .01 | 6.373 (2.226; 2.011 to 10.736) | .005 | |||||
|
| Group×time 2b,c | 7.167 (2.921; 1.436 to 12.899) | .01 | 7.605 (2.739; 2.236 to 12.974) | .004 | |||||
|
| ||||||||||
|
| Main effect | −2.772 (1.354; −5.427 to −0.117) | .04 | −2.454 (1.581; −5.553 to 0.644) | .12 | |||||
|
| Group×time 1 | −5.553 (1.233; −7.971 to −3.135) | <.001 | −5.403 (1.177; −7.710 to −3.096) | <.001 | |||||
|
| Group×time 2 | −6.504 (1.592; −9.633 to −3.375) | <.001 | −7.251 (1.417; −10.028 to −4.474) | <.001 | |||||
|
| ||||||||||
|
| Main effect | .020 (0.023; −0.025 to 0.064) | .38 | .014 (0.025; −0.035 to 0.063) | .58 | |||||
|
| Group×time 1 | .021 (0.026; −0.030 to 0.073) | .42 | .021 (0.027; −0.032 to 0.074) | .45 | |||||
|
| Group×time 2 | .023 (0.030; −0.035 to 0.082) | .43 | .021 (0.027; −0.032 to 0.073) | .44 | |||||
aReferred to control group.
bReferred to control group and baseline.
cTime 1 and time 2 refer to 2 and 6 months of follow-up, respectively.