View in EDS

Acceptability and Feasibility of a Problem‐Solving Intervention for Maternal Caregivers of Young Adult Survivors of Childhood Brain Tumors.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Acceptability and Feasibility of a Problem‐Solving Intervention for Maternal Caregivers of Young Adult Survivors of Childhood Brain Tumors.
Authors: Barakat, Lamia P. (AUTHOR), Hammer, Shannon N. (AUTHOR), Knafl, George J. (AUTHOR), Stevens, Evelyn (AUTHOR), Hobbie, Wendy L. (AUTHOR), Minturn, Jane E. (AUTHOR), Knafl, Kathleen A. (AUTHOR), Deatrick, Janet A. (AUTHOR)
Source: Psycho-Oncology. Feb2026, Vol. 35 Issue 2, p1-13. 13p.
Subjects: Problem-solving therapy, Caregivers, Cancer survivors, Family support, Human behavior, Self-management (Psychology), Quality of life, Brain tumors
Abstract: Background: Young adult survivors of childhood brain tumors (YAS) are at risk for limited health‐related quality of life (HRQOL) and extended dependence on their maternal caregivers during the transition to adulthood. A problem‐solving intervention was adapted to address challenges to family management, self‐management, and HRQOL. Aims: To evaluate the acceptability, feasibility, and preliminary efficacy of a problem‐solving intervention (TIPS; Training in Problem‐solving) for condition‐focused maternal caregivers of YAS. Methods: Maternal caregivers who screened positive for condition‐focused family management were randomized to TIPS (n = 26) or Enhanced Usual Care (EUC; n = 27) and completed measures of problem‐solving, family management, YAS self‐management, and caregiver and YAS HRQOL at baseline and post‐intervention (T3)Acceptability and feasibility data were collected at T3 and described. Results: Both TIPS and EUC had moderate to high acceptability ratings with higher ratings for TIPS utility in meeting family needs. Feasibility, as measured by retention (70% for TIPS) and limited, minor technical glitches, was supported. Session length was a notable exception for feasibility. The largest between‐group differences were observed in condition management ability, favoring TIPS (d = −0.85), and condition management effort, favoring TIPS (d = 0.58). Smaller, yet notable, between group differences were identified for YAS self‐management (d = 0.44), YAS HRQOL (d = −0.40), and Parent Mutuality (d = −0.32) in the hypothesized direction except for YAS self‐management. Conclusions: TIPS was highly acceptable and moderately feasible. EUC was also acceptable, but the TIPS group demonstrated improved family management and YAS HRQOL highlighting the role of active intervention for caregivers of YAS. Clinical trials registration: NCI Clinical Trials Reporting Program (NCI‐2019‐05353) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Psycho-Oncology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
Description
Abstract:Background: Young adult survivors of childhood brain tumors (YAS) are at risk for limited health‐related quality of life (HRQOL) and extended dependence on their maternal caregivers during the transition to adulthood. A problem‐solving intervention was adapted to address challenges to family management, self‐management, and HRQOL. Aims: To evaluate the acceptability, feasibility, and preliminary efficacy of a problem‐solving intervention (TIPS; Training in Problem‐solving) for condition‐focused maternal caregivers of YAS. Methods: Maternal caregivers who screened positive for condition‐focused family management were randomized to TIPS (n = 26) or Enhanced Usual Care (EUC; n = 27) and completed measures of problem‐solving, family management, YAS self‐management, and caregiver and YAS HRQOL at baseline and post‐intervention (T3)Acceptability and feasibility data were collected at T3 and described. Results: Both TIPS and EUC had moderate to high acceptability ratings with higher ratings for TIPS utility in meeting family needs. Feasibility, as measured by retention (70% for TIPS) and limited, minor technical glitches, was supported. Session length was a notable exception for feasibility. The largest between‐group differences were observed in condition management ability, favoring TIPS (d = −0.85), and condition management effort, favoring TIPS (d = 0.58). Smaller, yet notable, between group differences were identified for YAS self‐management (d = 0.44), YAS HRQOL (d = −0.40), and Parent Mutuality (d = −0.32) in the hypothesized direction except for YAS self‐management. Conclusions: TIPS was highly acceptable and moderately feasible. EUC was also acceptable, but the TIPS group demonstrated improved family management and YAS HRQOL highlighting the role of active intervention for caregivers of YAS. Clinical trials registration: NCI Clinical Trials Reporting Program (NCI‐2019‐05353) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:10579249
DOI:10.1002/pon.70388