Effects of educational versus peer discussion interventions on perceived competence in adolescents with medulloblastoma

Abstract

Context: Limited documentation exists on the effectiveness of education-based (EG) versus peer discussionbased (PDG) group interventions on perceived competence of adolescents suffering from medulloblastoma. Aims: This study was conducted to investigate which of these approaches offers the more beneficial outcomes to participants. Settings and Design: In a hospital in Zhenjiang, China, a total of 45 pediatric patients with standard risk or high risk medulloblastoma were randomly assigned to the EG or PDG interventions. Methods and Material: The Self-Perception Profile for Children (SPPC) and the Life Orientation Test-Revised (LOT-R) questionnaires were used to measure perceived competence and dispositional optimism or pessimism. Statistical analysis used: Adjustment was measured before the intervention, immediately after the intervention, at two weeks after, and six months after the intervention. Results: Participants in both groups showed improvement over time. The EG participants scored themselves higher on subscales including social acceptance, global self-worth and behavioral conduct at 2 weeks compared with those in the PDG (P<0.05). However, no significant differences were found between the groups at 6 months. Moreover, pessimists did not benefit more by attending an EG intervention than they did by attending a PDG intervention. Conclusion: The results show EG intervention seeming to enhance shortterm, rather than long-term, perceived competence. Longitudinal studies are warranted to further identify targeted interventions to maximize healthy survivorship.

Psychosocial interventions for rehabilitation and reintegration into daily life of pediatric cancer survivors and their families: A systematic review

“…In most studies (n = 15), the childhood cancer patient was the target person of the intervention [ 47 – 50 , 63 , 64 , 67 , 70 – 75 , 78 , 79 ]. The remaining studies describe interventions for the family (n = 9) [ 51 , 52 , 55 – 59 , 62 , 68 ], for the patient and the parents (n = 4) [ 53 , 54 , 60 , 77 ], for the parents only (n = 3) [ 65 , 66 , 69 ], and for the siblings only (n = 1) [ 76 ] or the siblings and the patient (n = 1) [ 61 ].…”

“…More than half of the studies describe interventions for patients or family members of patients with any type of childhood cancer (67%, n = 22) [ 51 – 59 , 61 , 62 , 65 , 66 , 68 – 74 , 76 , 79 ]. Thirty percent of the papers (n = 10) evaluate studies for CNS tumor patients or their family members [ 47 – 50 , 60 , 63 , 64 , 67 , 75 , 77 ] and one study focusses on leukemia [ 78 ]. Most of the studies focus on interventions for children from approximately 8 to 18 years (76%, n = 25).…”

“…The studies cover a wide range of different intervention settings. Most of the studies describe interventions conducted in an outpatient group setting (n = 15) [ 47 – 52 , 60 , 67 , 69 , 70 , 73 , 75 – 77 , 79 ]. The other studies describe inpatient rehabilitation programs (n = 5) [ 55 – 59 ], interventions in an outpatient individual setting (n = 4) [ 53 , 54 , 63 , 64 ], interventions in a camp setting (n = 4) [ 61 , 62 , 71 , 72 ], computer-based interventions (n = 3) [ 65 , 66 , 74 ], and home-based interventions (n = 2) [ 68 , 78 ].…”

“…The primary aims of the interventions vary across the studies. One study compared two interventions, one with a psychoeducational focus and one focusing on social support [ 67 ]. Therefore, we categorized 34 interventions from 33 studies regarding their primary aim: Reduction of psychological burden (n = 9) [ 51 – 53 , 63 , 66 , 68 , 69 , 74 , 76 ], reduction of physical and psychological burden (n = 9) [ 54 – 59 , 70 , 78 , 79 ], improvement of social skills (n = 8) [ 47 – 50 , 60 , 64 , 75 , 77 ], increase of social support (n = 6) [ 61 , 62 , 65 , 67 , 71 , 72 ], and psychoeducation (n = 2) [ 67 , 73 ].…”

“…15 studies describe interventions in an outpatient group setting [ 47 – 52 , 60 , 67 , 69 , 70 , 73 , 75 – 77 , 79 ]. Most of these interventions target childhood cancer survivors and cover a wide range of different programs (e.g.…”