| Literature DB >> 34877447 |
Aubrey S Chiu1, Victor S Blanchette1,2, Maru Barrera1,2, Pamela Hilliard1, Nancy L Young3, Audrey Abad1, Brian M Feldman1,2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients with hemophilia may experience joint damage, which can impair participation, yet few studies have examined the impact hemophilia may have on social participation and quality of life.Entities:
Keywords: Hemophilia; child; quality of life; self concept; social participation; social support
Year: 2021 PMID: 34877447 PMCID: PMC8633242 DOI: 10.1002/rth2.12627
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Res Pract Thromb Haemost ISSN: 2475-0379
FIGURE 1This framework states that a person's functioning and disability is the result of the dynamic interaction between the person's health conditions and the contextual factors in their life
Participant characteristics (N = 50)
| Variable |
|
|---|---|
| Type of hemophilia | |
| A | 41 (82.0) |
| B | 9 (18.0) |
| Phenotype | |
| Moderate | 15 (30.0) |
| Severe | 35 (70.0) |
| Ethnicity | |
| North American | 16 (32.0) |
| Other | 10 (20.0) |
| South Asian | 6 (12.0) |
| European | 5 (10.0) |
| Middle Eastern | 3 (6.0) |
| African | 2 (4.0) |
| Caribbean | 2 (4.0) |
| Chinese | 2 (4.0) |
| Korean | 1 (2.0) |
| Mediterranean | 1 (2.0) |
| South American | 1 (2.0) |
| Vietnamese | 1 (2.0) |
FIGURE 2The distribution frequency of social participation as measured by the Participation Scale for kids, where higher scores indicated more restrictions with participation (N = 45)
Descriptive statistics and correlations with social participation (N = 50)
| Variable | M | SD | Min–Max | Pearson |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Social participation | ||||
| Overall | 6.5 | 6.2 | 0–28 | – |
| Children | 7.6 | 7.2 | 0–28 | – |
| Adolescents | 4.9 | 3.7 | 0–12 | – |
| Self‐perception | ||||
| Social acceptance | 3.3 | 0.7 | 1.2–4.0 | −0.5* |
| Athletic competence | 3.2 | 0.7 | 1.7–4.0 | −0.2 |
| Global self‐worth | 3.5 | 0.6 | 1.7–4.0 | −0.6* |
| Social support | ||||
| Parental support/regard | 3.6 | 0.5 | 1.8–4.0 | −0.6* |
| Teacher support/regard | 3.4 | 0.7 | 1.2–4.0 | −0.5* |
| Classmate support/regard | 3.5 | 0.6 | 1.3–4.0 | −0.6* |
| Close friend support/regard | 3.5 | 0.6 | 1.0–4.0 | −0.4* |
| Impact on the family | ||||
| Total score | 3074.0 | 571.1 | 1275.0–3600.0 | −0.2 |
| Physical functioning | 91.4 | 14.0 | 37.5–100.0 | −0.2 |
| Emotional functioning | 80.8 | 19.7 | 25.0–100.0 | −0.2 |
| Social functioning | 89.8 | 18.9 | 25.0–100.0 | −0.3* |
| Cognitive functioning | 90.5 | 19.9 | 20.0–100.0 | −0.2 |
| Communication | 80.8 | 20.2 | 25.0–100.0 | −0.2 |
| Worry | 73.2 | 22.5 | 15.0–100.0 | 0.0 |
| Daily activities | 88.8 | 19.1 | 33.3–100.0 | −0.3 |
| Family relationships | 87.9 | 18.1 | 20.0–100.0 | −0.2 |
Participation Scale for kids: higher scores indicated greater problems with social participation. Self Perception Profiles for children/adolescents: higher scores indicated higher self‐perception. Social Support Scale for children: higher scores indicated more perceived social support or positive regard. Pediatric Quality of Life (PedsQL) Family Impact Module: higher scores indicated less negative impact on the family and better family functioning.
Abbreviations: M, mean; Max, maximum; Min, minimum; SD, standard deviation.
*Correlation is significant at p < 0.05.
Comparing the means of the self‐perception and social support subscale scores between children and adolescents (N = 50)
| Subscale |
Children M (SD) |
Adolescents M (SD) | df |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Self‐perception | |||||
| Social acceptance | 3.2 (0.7) | 3.5 (0.7) | 40.7 | −1.4 | 0.2 |
| Athletic competence | 3.2 (0.7) | 3.2 (0.7) | 38.3 | −0.2 | 0.8 |
| Global self‐worth | 3.5 (0.6) | 3.6 (0.6) | 42.0 | −0.8 | 0.4 |
| Social support | |||||
| Parental support/regard | 3.6 (0.6) | 3.7 (0.4) | 47.7 | −0.3 | 0.8 |
| Teacher support/regard | 3.4 (0.7) | 3.3 (0.8) | 38.9 | 0.7 | 0.5 |
| Classmate support/regard | 3.4 (0.6) | 3.5 (0.6) | 41.2 | −0.6 | 0.6 |
| Close friend support/regard | 3.5 (0.5) | 3.5 (0.7) | 33.2 | −0.1 | 1.0 |
p is significant at <0.05.
Abbreviations: M, mean; SD, standard deviation; df, degrees of freedom; t, t value.
FIGURE 3Social Participation and Global Self‐Worth is illustrated using the correlation between social participation as measured by the Participation Scale for kids, where higher scores indicated more restrictions with participation, and Global Self‐Worth as measured by the Self‐Perception Profile for children or adolescents, where higher scores indicated more adequate self‐perception. The confidence elliptical curve shows 95% prediction