Family Forward: Promoting Family Adaptation Following Pediatric Acquired Brain Injury

Family involvement in rehabilitation programmes for children and adolescents with acquired brain injury: A scoping literature review

Paediatric acquired brain injury (ABI) can adversely impact families, and it is widely accepted that families should be involved in the rehabilitation of children/adolescents with ABI. However, there is limited guidance about how to best involve families in paediatric ABI rehabilitation. Several programmes involving the families of children/adolescents with ABI have been developed, but there are no published reviews outlining their characteristics. This scoping literature review aimed to synthesize information about these programmes and develop an understanding of how families are involved in them. Four databases were systematically searched to identify sources of evidence that described programmes in paediatric ABI rehabilitation that involve family members. One hundred and eight sources of evidence describing 42 programmes were included. Programmes were categorized as: service coordination (n = 11), psychosocial (n = 17), support groups (n = 4), training/instruction (n = 9), and education (n = 1). Families' involvement in these programmes varied across programme development, delivery, and evaluation stages. The findings of this scoping literature review outline how families can be involved in paediatric ABI rehabilitation. While this review outlines many approaches to supporting families, it also highlights the need for models of family-centred care to better articulate how clinicians and services can involve families in paediatric ABI rehabilitation.

[Formula: see text] Interventions to improve executive functions in children and adolescents with acquired brain injury: a systematic review and multilevel meta-analysis

To investigate the effectiveness of interventions aiming to improve hot and cold executive functions (EFs) in children and adolescents with acquired brain injury (ABI) and to examine whether characteristics of the intervention, participants, etiology of ABI (Traumatic-brain-injury [TBI] or non-TBI), time of assessment, or study quality moderate intervention effects. Whereas cold EFs refer to purely cognitive EFs, hot EFs refer to the affective aspects of these cognitive skills. A total of 970 participants from 23 randomized-controlled-trial studies (112 effect sizes [ES]) were included. A three-level random effects approach (studies, ES, individual participants) was used. Moderation analyses were conducted through meta-regressions. The three-level random effects model showed a better fit than the two-level model. Almost all individual studies showed non-significant ES across outcomes but in combination interventions were effective (Cohen's d = 0.38, CI 0.16 ~ 0.61). Lower methodological quality, inclusion of participants with non-TBI, and parental participation predicted larger ES. Participants' age, time of assessment, number of sessions, and focus on hot or cold EFs were not related to ES. We found no evidence of publication bias. Interventions are effective with small to medium ES according to conventional criteria. Intervention effects do not seem to fade away with time. Parent participation in the intervention is important to improve EFs. The efficacy of interventions seems larger when non-TBI is part of the etiology of ABI. Variation between studies is relevant for tracing the effective intervention characteristics. Most studies are conducted in adolescence, and studies in early childhood are needed.

Family-centred service in paediatric acquired brain injury rehabilitation: perspectives of children and adolescents and their families

PURPOSE

Family-centred service is considered best practice in paediatric acquired brain injury (ABI) rehabilitation. However, there is no universal model to guide clinicians and services in implementing this approach with a lack of research evidence informed by the lived experience of families. This study explored experiences of family-centred service during rehabilitation from the perspectives of parents/caregivers, siblings, and children/adolescents with ABI.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants from eight families, and included 10 parents/caregivers, five siblings, and four children/adolescents with moderate to severe ABI. Interview transcripts and additional data were analysed using constructivist grounded theory methods.

RESULTS

Two themes and five sub-themes were developed: (1) Working together as a team: Valuing clinicians' expert knowledge; Doing rehabilitation together; and Sharing family knowledge; and (2) Navigating rehabilitation as a family: Recognising family needs; Juggling family life; and Making rehabilitation work for the family. Participants reflected on the centrality of the child/adolescent with ABI during rehabilitation, and the ways that family needs, life, and involvement in rehabilitation change over time.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings highlight the importance of clinicians actively seeking to understand families' unique contexts, needs, and priorities during rehabilitation through two-way information sharing with families. Through developing a greater understanding of families' unique contexts, clinicians can be better placed to tailor rehabilitation according to their unique circumstances and needs.Implications for rehabilitationRehabilitation involves active collaboration between families and clinicians that is responsive to changing needs over time.Family involvement in rehabilitation is shaped by family life, and families have unique needs following paediatric acquired brain injury.It is important that clinicians strive to develop an understanding of families' unique needs, values, preferences, and lives to determine how to best support and involve them in rehabilitation.

Family-centred service in paediatric acquired brain injury rehabilitation: Bridging the gaps

Background

Children and adolescents who sustain an acquired brain injury (ABI) can experience acute and ongoing difficulties in a range of cognitive and functional domains, and their families often experience significant life changes and challenges. Family-centred service is therefore considered best practice in paediatric ABI rehabilitation. Despite widespread acceptance of family-centred service in this context, recent literature indicates that family needs are often unrecognised and unmet following paediatric ABI. Although family-centred service was introduced in the field of developmental disability over five decades ago, there remains a lack of clarity about how this approach is implemented in practice. Additionally, limited literature has discussed the implementation of family-centred service in paediatric ABI rehabilitation despite key differences between ABI and developmental disability, including nature and timing of onset, rehabilitation foci, and impacts on families.

Aims

In this review, we aim to: (i) outline common sequelae of paediatric ABI with a focus on family outcomes; (ii) summarise paediatric rehabilitation and highlight opportunities for family support and involvement; (iii) discuss and synthesise literature across paediatric ABI rehabilitation and family-centred service to highlight gaps in knowledge and practice; and (v) identify clinical implications and future research directions.

Conclusions

There is a clear need for greater clarity and consensus regarding the implementation of family-centred service in paediatric ABI rehabilitation. This review highlights the importance of providing professional development opportunities for clinicians to increase competency in practising in a family-centred manner, and opportunities to actively involve, empower and support families within rehabilitation. This review also emphasises the importance of services implementing relevant supports to address family needs where possible and developing clear referral pathways so that families can access further support elsewhere when needed.

Australian parent and sibling perspectives on the impact of paediatric acquired brain injury on family relationships during the first 6 weeks at home

This study explores the impact of paediatric acquired brain injury (ABI) on family relationships. Twenty-three families (n = 18 mothers, n = 7 fathers, and n = 4 siblings) of children who sustained an ABI requiring treatment from inpatient acute and rehabilitation services reported on their perceptions regarding changes in family relationships since the injured child's return home. Thematic analysis of survey data was conducted. Family members (parents and siblings) described four themes: (1) negative changes in sibling interactions; (2) role changes arising from an increase in parental expectations of non-injured siblings; (3) family system challenges in balancing needs within the parent-child dyad and sibling subsystems; and (4) supporting emotional responses within the family system. Findings reveal a critical time for families as they resume full care of the injured child at home. Clinical implications for social workers and other rehabilitation clinicians are explored.

Family appraisal of paediatric acquired brain injury: a social work clinical intervention trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of a new intervention 'Family Forward' with 'Usual Care' social work practice in optimising family appraisal of a child's acquired brain injury to ensure better adaptation during the inpatient rehabilitation phase of care and early transition home.

RESEARCH DESIGN

Single site, prospective, sequential comparison group design.

METHODS AND PROCEDURES

Families were recruited on admission to an inpatient rehabilitation service based at a tertiary paediatric hospital. The 'Usual Care' group (n = 22; 29 parents) recruitment, intervention and data collection were completed first (Phase 1), followed by the 'Family Forward' group (n = 25; 43 parents) (Phase 2). Parents/caregivers completed measures: (Impact of Event Scale- Revised: IES-R; Parents Experience of Childhood Illness and Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire: Brief IPQ) at the time of their child's inpatient rehabilitation admission, inpatient rehabilitation discharge, and 6 weeks post-discharge.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND RESULTS

There were more children with traumatic brain injuries in the Family Forward group (n = 13) than Usual Care (n = 6) and the Family Forward group had a longer hospital admission (days, M = 56.4, SD = 46.1 vs. M = 37.5, SD = 16.4, p = 0.019). No significant group differences were found for family appraisal outcomes at any of the three time-points. Both groups reported reductions in trauma and grief responses, emotional experiences and perceptions of their child's injury at post-intervention and follow-up. Both groups continued to have depleted emotional resources (PECI scale) at 6 weeks post-discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

The study contributes important insights into family appraisal experience in the early stages following paediatric acquired brain injury. In this context, 'Family Forward' needs to incorporate interventions that support and promote ongoing family appraisal as issues related to their child's injury arise over time. Future research is needed to focus on whether the Family Forward approach does sustain family system adaptation (a key aim informing the design of the intervention) over the longer term.