| Literature DB >> 35345633 |
Moti Zwilling1, Alberto Romano2,3,4, Martina Favetta3, Elena Ippolito5, Meir Lotan6,7.
Abstract
COVID-19 Lockdown was particularly challenging for most mothers of people with intellectual disabilities, including those with Rett syndrome (RTT), leading to feelings of abandonment from healthcare services of their children. Within those days, telerehabilitation has represented a valid alternative to support physical activity and treatment, supporting parents in structuring their children's daily routine at home. This article aims to describe the well-being level of two groups of mothers of girls and women with RTT who were involved in a home-based remotely supervised motor rehabilitation program, respectively, before and during the COVID-19 Italian lockdown. Forty participants with classic RTT were recruited before the lockdown and randomly assigned to two groups that performed the intervention immediately before (Group 1) and during (Group 2) the lockdown, respectively. The intervention included an individualized daily physical activity program carried out for 12 weeks by participants' parents and fortnightly supervised throughout Skype contacts to plan, monitor, and accommodate individual activities in the participant's life at home. The short form Caregivers Well-Being Scale was collected for the mothers in each group 12 weeks before intervention (T1), at intervention initiation (T2), immediately after intervention termination (T3), as well as at 12 weeks after intervention termination (T4). Mothers of participants in the Group 1 showed a stable level of well-being across all four evaluations with a slight improvement during the lockdown, without significant change. Similarly, the well-being level of mothers in the Group 2 showed a statistically significant increase in their well-being between T2 and T3 (during the lockdown) and its reduction to the pre-intervention level between T3 and T4 (after the lockdown). The results suggest that the lockdown did not negatively affect the participants' mothers' well-being, leading to its improvement. Moreover, the proposed intervention could have supported the mothers in managing the new daily routine at home, positively affecting maternal well-being.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; Rett Syndrome; exercise therapy; home exercise program; parental well-being; parents; telerehabilitation
Year: 2022 PMID: 35345633 PMCID: PMC8957072 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.834419
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
Figure 1Research timetable. T1–T4 represent the evaluations meeting occurred with 3 months apart. BP, Baseline Phase; IP, Intervention Phase; and WOP, Wash-Out Phase.
Descriptive statistics of participants’ and parents’ age, RTT severity level (RARS), and CWBS-SF score.
| Participants’ age | Mothers’ age | RARS score | CWBS-SF | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 | T2 | T3 | T4 | |||||
| All participants (No. 40) | Mean (SD) | 15.7(9.7) | 50.0(9.8) | 67.3(9.8) | 3.4(0.6) | 3.5(0.6) | 3.6(0.7) | 3.5(0.8) |
| Median | 13.3 | 48.4 | 67.8 | 3.3 | 3.5 | 3.8 | 3.5 | |
| Max–Min | 40.3–2.8 | 75.1–29.1 | 82.5–45.5 | 4.9–2.2 | 5–2.4 | 4.8–2.1 | 4.8–2 | |
| Group 1 (No. 17) | Mean (SD) | 16.4(7.9) | 53.4(7.1) | 66.5(10.7) | 3.6(0.6) | 3.6(0.6) | 3.6(0.7) | 3.7(0.7) |
| Median | 13.3 | 51.4 | 68.0 | 3.6 | 3.7 | 3.8 | 3.8 | |
| Max–Min | 38.2–5.4 | 67.5–39.5 | 82.5–45.5 | 3.6(0.6) | 3.6(0.6) | 3.6(0.7) | 3.7(0.7) | |
| Group 2 (No. 23) | Mean (SD) | 15.1(11.0) | 48.8(10.8) | 67.8(9.2) | 3.3(0.7) | 3.4(0.6) | 3.7(0.7) | 3.3(0.8) |
| Median | 13.3 | 46.7 | 67.0 | 3.1 | 3.4 | 3.9 | 3.3 | |
| Max–Min | 40.3–2.8 | 75.1–29.1 | 82.5–51.5 | 3.3(0.7) | 3.4(0.6) | 3.7(0.7) | 3.3(0.8) | |
SD, Standard deviation; RTT, Rett syndrome; RARS, Rett assessment rating scale; and CWBS-SF, Caregiver well-being scale—short form.
Figure 2Caregivers’ Well-Being Scale—Short Form (CWBS-SF) score of each group at each evaluation point. The box inferior limits represent first quartile of the distribution, and the upper limits the third quartile (median excluded). The lines across the box show the median score of each group. The crosses inside the boxes mark the mean value of each dataset. The whiskers indicate the minimum and maximum distribution values (outliers excluded). The dots above the upper and below the lower whiskers represent the distribution outliers identified through Tukey’s method (data points that lie above 1.5 times the interquartile range under the first quartile or over the third quartile). In June 2019, Group 1 was evaluated for the first time (T1). In September 2019, the second evaluation was conducted for Group 1 (T2), and the initial assessment occurred for Group 2 (T1). In December 2019, Group 1 was evaluated for the third time (T3) and Group 2 for the second time (T2). In April 2020, Group 1 was assessed for the last time (T4), and the third evaluation was conducted for Group 2 (T3). For Group 2, the last assessment occurred in July 2020 (T4). The black arrow indicates the initiation of the Italian COVID-19 national lockdown, and the grey arrow indicates its end for a total of 2 months. *p ≤ 0.05.
Figure 3Caregivers’ Well-Being Scale—Short Form (CWBS-SF) score of all participants together at each evaluation point. The box inferior limits represent first quartile of the distribution, and the upper limits the third quartile (median excluded). The lines across the box show the median score of each group. The crosses inside the boxes mark the mean value of each dataset. The whiskers indicate the minimum and maximum distribution values. *p ≤ 0.05.