Search

Purpose: How cancer history and distress relate to sleep outcomes of adolescents and young adults (AYAs) is unclear. The current study compares AYA cancer survivors to controls on indicators of sleep and fatigue; examines the concurrent association between psychological status, sleep, and fatigue; and investigates the lagged relationship between sleep and fatigue problems with psychological functioning.Methods: AYA cancer survivors (n = 167) and controls (n = 170), ages 16 to 30, completed measures at a survivorship clinic/primary care visit (time 1) and 2 months later (time 2). Participants completed questions about sleep quality, quantity, sleep medication use, self-reports of sleep problems, and fatigue in addition to measures of depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS).Results: There were no differences in sleep quantity or quality between survivors and controls, but survivors reported significantly more fatigue. Within groups, AYAs with self-reported sleep and fatigue problems reported significantly higher depression, anxiety, and PTS symptoms. Controlling for baseline depression, sleep, and fatigue problems at time 1 significantly predicted depression at time 2 in survivors but not in controls.Conclusion: This study offers important insight into the psychological functioning of childhood cancer survivors and prospectively describes sleep and fatigue as risk factors for poor psychological functioning in survivors. These findings support screening for sleep problems in AYA survivors as these difficulties are closely related to mental health functioning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: How screening for psychosocial risk in pediatric oncology may relate to the number and type of psychosocial services provided is a critical step in linking screening with treatment. We predicted that screening at diagnosis would be associated with the delivery of more psychosocial services over 8 weeks and that these services would be consistent with Universal, Targeted, or Clinical psychosocial risk level based on the Pediatric Psychosocial Preventative Health Model (PPPHM). Methods: Parents of children newly diagnosed with cancer received either the Psychosocial Assessment Tool (PAT; n = 49) or psychosocial care as usual (PAU; n = 47), based on their date of diagnosis and an alternating monthly schedule. Medical record review and surveys completed by social workers and child life specialists were used to determine psychosocial services provided to patients and their families over the first eight weeks of treatment. Results: As predicted, families in the PAT condition received more services than those in PAU based on social worker and child life specialist report and medical record review. Within the PAT group, families at the Targeted and Clinical levels of risk received more intensive services than those at the Universal level. Conclusions: This initial report shows how psychosocial risk screening may impact psychosocial care in pediatric cancer, supporting the importance of screening as well as matching services to risk level. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To guide assessment and intervention for patients and families, a model for assessing and treating pediatric medical traumatic stress (PMTS) is presented that integrates the literature across pediatric conditions. Methods A model with three general phases is outlined—I, peritrauma; II, early, ongoing, and evolving responses; and III, longer-term PMTS. Relevant literature for each is reviewed and discussed with respect to implications for intervention for patients and families. Results Commonalities across conditions, the range of normative responses to potentially traumatic events (PTEs), the importance of preexisting psychological well-being, developmental considerations, and a social ecological orientation are highlighted. Conclusions Growing empirical support exists to guide the development of assessment and intervention related to PMTS for patients with pediatric illness and their parents. The need for interventions across the course of pediatric illness and injury that target patients, families, and/or healthcare teams is apparent. The model provides a basis for further development of evidence-based treatments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]