- Browse by Subject
Browsing by Subject "Adaptation, Psychological"
Now showing 1 - 6 of 6
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Early Impact of the U.S. COVID-19 Pandemic on Drinking Motives and Alcohol Use(Taylor & Francis, 2021) Prestigiacomo, Christiana J.; Liu, Melissa A.; Plawecki, Martin H.; Cyders, Melissa A.; Psychology, School of ScienceBackground: The goal of this study was to empirically examine the degree to which alcohol use and drinking motives changed during the first month of the pandemic and to examine individual differences associated with such changes. Methods: A U.S. nationwide survey of 500 adults was conducted; data from 201 individuals (Mage=38.98, SD=12.04, 52.2% female, 76.1% White) who endorsed current alcohol use were included in this study. Results: Paired-samples t-tests indicated that there was a significant decrease in drinking quantity [t(199)=3.74, p<.001], but no change in drinking frequency [t(198)=0.19, p=.849] overall during the first month of the U.S. pandemic. There were significant decreases in enhancement [t(201)=4.55, p<.001], social [t(201)=9.39, p<.001] and conformity [t(201)=3.58, p<.001] motives, but a significant increase in coping motives [t(201)=-3.71, p<.001]. Regression analyses showed that increases in enhancement [β=0.46, p<.001] and coping [β=0.27, p=.004] motives were significantly related to increases in drinking frequency, and increases in coping motives [β=0.32, p=.002] were related to increases in drinking quantity. Riskier drinking prior to the pandemic was significantly related to greater increase in drinking quantity in the first month of the U.S. pandemic [β=0.31, p<.001]. Conclusion: Results of this study provide initial support that changes in drinking motives were important predictors for changes in alcohol use during the first month of the U.S. pandemic. Contrary to anecdotal reports, drinking decreased overall during the first month of the U.S. pandemic; however, those with existing risky patterns of drinking prior to the start of the U.S. pandemic were at greatest risk for drinking escalation during this time.Item The Minimal Clinically Important Difference for the Mayo-Portland Adaptability Inventory(Wolters Kluwer, 2017-07) Malec, James F.; Kean, Jacob; Monahan, Patrick O.; Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, School of MedicineOBJECTIVES: To determine the Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) and Robust Clinically Important Difference (RCID) of the Mayo-Portland Adaptability Inventory-4 (MPAI-4) as measures of response to intervention. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of existing data. Both distribution- and anchor-based methods were used to triangulate on the MCID and to identify a moderate, that is, more robust, level of change (RCID) for the MPAI-4. These were further evaluated with respect to clinical provider ratings. PARTICIPANTS: Data for individuals with acquired brain injury in rehabilitation programs throughout the United States in the OutcomeInfo Database (n = 3087) with 2 MPAI-4 ratings. MAIN MEASURES: MPAI-4, Supervision Rating Scale, Clinician Rating of Global Clinical Improvement. RESULTS: Initial analyses suggested 5 T-score points (5T) as the MCID and 9T as the RCID. Eighty-one percent to 87% of clinical raters considered a 5T change and 99% considered a 9T change to indicate meaningful improvement. CONCLUSIONS: 5T represents the MCID for the MPAI-4 and 9T, the RCID. Both values are notably less than the Reliable Change Index (RCI). While the RCI indicates change with a high level of statistical confidence, it may be insensitive to change that is considered meaningful by providers and participants as indicated by the MCID.Item Pain Coping Skills Training for Patients Who Catastrophize About Pain Prior to Knee Arthroplasty: A Multisite Randomized Clinical Trial(Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc., 2019-02-06) Riddle, Daniel L.; Keefe, Francis J.; Ang, Dennis C.; Slover, James; Jensen, Mark P.; Bair, Matthew J.; Kroenke, Kurt; Perera, Robert A.; Reed, Shelby D.; McKee, Daphne; Dumenci, Levent; Medicine, School of MedicineBACKGROUND: Pain catastrophizing has been identified as a prognostic indicator of poor outcome following knee arthroplasty. Interventions to address pain catastrophizing, to our knowledge, have not been tested in patients undergoing knee arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to determine whether pain coping skills training in persons with moderate to high pain catastrophizing undergoing knee arthroplasty improves outcomes 12 months postoperatively compared with usual care or arthritis education. METHODS: A multicenter, 3-arm, single-blinded, randomized comparative effectiveness trial was performed involving 5 university-based medical centers in the United States. There were 402 randomized participants. The primary outcome was the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Scale, measured at baseline, 2 months, 6 months, and 12 months following the surgical procedure. RESULTS: Participants were recruited from January 2013 to June 2016. In 402 participants, 66% were women and the mean age of the participants (and standard deviation) was 63.2 ± 8.0 years. Three hundred and forty-six participants (90% of those who underwent a surgical procedure) completed a 12-month follow-up. All 3 treatment groups had large improvements in 12-month WOMAC pain scores with no significant differences (p > 0.05) among the 3 treatment arms. No differences were found between WOMAC pain scores at 12 months for the pain coping skills and arthritis education groups (adjusted mean difference, 0.3 [95% confidence interval (CI), -0.9 to 1.5]) or between the pain coping and usual-care groups (adjusted mean difference, 0.4 [95% CI, -0.7 to 1.5]). Secondary outcomes also showed no significant differences (p > 0.05) among the 3 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among adults with pain catastrophizing undergoing knee arthroplasty, cognitive behaviorally based pain coping skills training did not confer pain or functional benefit beyond the large improvements achieved with usual surgical and postoperative care. Future research should develop interventions for the approximately 20% of patients undergoing knee arthroplasty who experience persistent function-limiting pain. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.Item Perceptions of communication, family adaptability and cohesion: a comparison of adolescents newly diagnosed with cancer and their parents(Walter de Gruyter GmbH, 2014) Phillips-Salimi, Celeste R.; Robb, Sheri L.; Monahan, Patrick O.; Dossey, Amy; Haase, Joan E.; School of NursingPURPOSE: To describe and compare adolescent and parent perspectives on communication, family adaptability and cohesion, as well as relationships among these variables, during the first month of an adolescent's cancer diagnosis. METHODS: Seventy adolescent-parent dyads were enrolled as part of a larger multi-site study. The adolescents ranged in age from 11 to 19, and 61% were males. Parents were predominately mothers (83%). Dyads were predominately non-Hispanic Caucasian (63%). Measures included the Parent-Adolescent Communication Scale and the Family Adaptability and Cohesion Evaluation Scale (FACES II). Paired t-tests, Pearson correlations, intra-class correlation coefficients and multiple linear regression analyses were completed. RESULTS: Adolescent scores on communication, family adaptability and cohesion were significantly lower than parent scores. The inter-dyadic agreement between adolescents and parents was low. Communication, family adaptability and cohesion were examined separately for adolescents and for parents, and significant relationships were found. Both adolescent- and parent-perceived communication was significantly associated with family adaptability and cohesion outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Differences were found in adolescent and parent perceptions of communication, family adaptability and cohesion. When both adolescents and parents had better perceived communication, this was associated with better perceived family adaptability and cohesion. Results suggest that the development of interventions to enhance adolescent-parent communication could help foster better family adaptability and cohesion, which may ultimately impact their psychological adjustment. In addition, understanding the degree to which adolescents and parents disagree on their perceptions, including the results that parents generally have more favorable perceptions, may be a useful starting point when developing interventions.Item The Resilience in Illness Model Part 2: Confirmatory Evaluation in Adolescents and Young Adults With Cancer(Wolters Kluwer, 2017-11) Haase, Joan E.; Kintner, Eileen K.; Robb, Sheri L.; Stump, Timothy E.; Monahan, Patrick O.; Phillips, Celeste; Stegenga, Kristin A.; Burns, Debra S.; School of NursingBACKGROUND: Empirically derived and tested models are necessary to develop effective, holistic interventions to improve positive health outcomes in adolescents and young adults (AYA) with cancer, yet few exist. This article is the second of 2 articles reporting on evaluation of the Resilience in Illness Model (RIM) as a predictive model to guide positive health research and practice. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to report the confirmatory model evaluation of the RIM. METHODS: A confirmatory evaluation of RIM was done using baseline data from a sample of 113 AYA aged 11 to 24 years who were undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplant and enrolled in a randomized controlled trial of a behavioral intervention to enhance resilience. Data were analyzed using latent variable structural equation modeling. RESULTS: Goodness-of-fit indices supported RIM as a confirmed model that accounted for large amounts of variance in the outcomes of self-transcendence (62%) and resilience (72%), and in 3 of 5 mediators, specifically social integration (74%), courageous coping (80%), and hope-derived meaning (87%), as well as small to moderate amounts of variance in the remaining mediators of defensive coping (1%) and family environment (35%). CONCLUSIONS: Findings establish the RIM as a plausible predictive framework for explaining ways AYA with cancer transcend their illness and achieve resilience resolution and for guiding intervention studies in this population. Additional research is needed to explore RIM's transferability based on stage of illness, other chronic diseases, and cultural diversity. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Results support the RIM as an appropriate guide for developing and evaluating interventions to foster positive adjustment in AYA with cancer.Item The resilience in illness model, part 1: exploratory evaluation in adolescents and young adults with cancer(Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer) - Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2014-05) Haase, Joan E.; Kintner, Eileen K.; Monahan, Patrick O.; Robb, Sheri L.; IU School of NursingBACKGROUND: Resilience is a positive health outcome identified by the Committee on Future Direction for Behavioral and Social Sciences as a research priority for the National Institutes of Health. The Resilience in Illness Model (RIM) was developed from a series of qualitative and quantitative studies, to increase understanding of how positive health protective factors (ie, social integration, family environment, courageous coping, and derived meaning) may influence resilience outcomes. The RIM also includes 2 risk factors: illness-related distress and defensive coping. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this 2-part article was to report on evaluation of the RIM for adolescents/young adults (AYAs) with cancer. Here, in part 1, our purpose was to describe the exploratory RIM evaluation, and in part 2 we describe the confirmatory RIM evaluation. METHODS: An exploratory evaluation of RIM was done using exploratory latent variable structural equation modeling with a combined sample from 2 studies of preadolescents and AYAs with cancer aged 10 to 26 years (n = 202). RESULTS: Results, including goodness-of-fit indices, support the RIM as a theory with a high level of explained variance for outcomes of resilience (67%) and self-transcendence (63%). Variance explained for proximal outcomes ranged from 18% to 76%. CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicate that, following confirmatory testing, the RIM may be a useful guide to developing targeted interventions that are grounded in the experiences of the AYAs. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Understanding of the AYA cancer experience to improve holistic care is increased.