Parent–child interactions during pediatric venipuncture: Investigating the role of parent traits, beliefs, and behaviors in relation to child outcomes

IF 2 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Rachel L. Moline, C. McMurtry, M. Noel, P. McGrath, C. Chambers
{"title":"Parent–child interactions during pediatric venipuncture: Investigating the role of parent traits, beliefs, and behaviors in relation to child outcomes","authors":"Rachel L. Moline, C. McMurtry, M. Noel, P. McGrath, C. Chambers","doi":"10.1080/24740527.2021.1952065","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Background: The social context is critical to children’s pain, and parents frequently form a major aspect of this context. We addressed several gaps in our understanding of parent–child interactions during painful procedures and identified intrapersonal contributions to parental affective responses and behaviors. We used the pain empathy model framework to examine parent–child interactions during venipuncture to determine predictors of parent distraction and reassurance. Aims: We examined relations among parent and child behaviors along with parent fear and child pain and fear. We empirically tested the contribution of top-down influences in predicting the use of two common parent utterances, reassurance and distraction during venipuncture, including parent beliefs about these behaviors. Methods: Venipunctures of 100 5- to 10-year-old children were filmed, and parent–child interactions were coded using the full 35 item Child Adult Medical Procedure Interaction Scale. Two codes were of particular interest: reassurance and distraction. Self-report measures included child fear and pain, parent fear, trait anxiety, empathy, pain catastrophizing, and beliefs about reassurance and distraction. Results: Findings supported original Child–Adult Medical Procedure Interaction Scale codes linking parent “distress-promoting” behaviors with poorer child outcomes and parent “coping-promoting” behaviors with improved child outcomes. Parent traits accounted for a small portion of the variance in parent reassurance and distraction. Conclusions: Findings are consistent with research on coping and distress promoting behaviors. Using a novel framework of the pain empathy model, we found that parent traits largely did not predict their procedural behaviors, which were more strongly related to child distress behaviors during the needle and parent beliefs about the behaviors.","PeriodicalId":53214,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Pain-Revue Canadienne de la Douleur","volume":"5 1","pages":"151 - 165"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/24740527.2021.1952065","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Pain-Revue Canadienne de la Douleur","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24740527.2021.1952065","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

ABSTRACT Background: The social context is critical to children’s pain, and parents frequently form a major aspect of this context. We addressed several gaps in our understanding of parent–child interactions during painful procedures and identified intrapersonal contributions to parental affective responses and behaviors. We used the pain empathy model framework to examine parent–child interactions during venipuncture to determine predictors of parent distraction and reassurance. Aims: We examined relations among parent and child behaviors along with parent fear and child pain and fear. We empirically tested the contribution of top-down influences in predicting the use of two common parent utterances, reassurance and distraction during venipuncture, including parent beliefs about these behaviors. Methods: Venipunctures of 100 5- to 10-year-old children were filmed, and parent–child interactions were coded using the full 35 item Child Adult Medical Procedure Interaction Scale. Two codes were of particular interest: reassurance and distraction. Self-report measures included child fear and pain, parent fear, trait anxiety, empathy, pain catastrophizing, and beliefs about reassurance and distraction. Results: Findings supported original Child–Adult Medical Procedure Interaction Scale codes linking parent “distress-promoting” behaviors with poorer child outcomes and parent “coping-promoting” behaviors with improved child outcomes. Parent traits accounted for a small portion of the variance in parent reassurance and distraction. Conclusions: Findings are consistent with research on coping and distress promoting behaviors. Using a novel framework of the pain empathy model, we found that parent traits largely did not predict their procedural behaviors, which were more strongly related to child distress behaviors during the needle and parent beliefs about the behaviors.
儿童静脉穿刺期间的亲子互动:调查父母特质、信念和行为在儿童结局中的作用
背景:儿童疼痛的社会环境是至关重要的,而父母往往构成了这一环境的主要方面。我们解决了我们在痛苦过程中对亲子互动的理解中的几个空白,并确定了父母情感反应和行为的内在贡献。我们使用疼痛共情模型框架来检查静脉穿刺期间的亲子互动,以确定父母分心和安慰的预测因素。目的:探讨父母与儿童行为以及父母恐惧与儿童痛苦恐惧的关系。我们通过实证检验了自上而下的影响在预测静脉穿刺过程中两种常见的父母话语,安慰和分心的使用方面的贡献,包括父母对这些行为的信念。方法:对100例5 ~ 10岁儿童静脉穿刺进行录像,采用35项儿童成人医疗程序互动量表对亲子互动进行编码。有两种密码特别有趣:安抚和分散注意力。自我报告的测量包括孩子的恐惧和痛苦,父母的恐惧,特质焦虑,同理心,痛苦灾难,以及对安慰和分心的信念。结果:研究结果支持原始的儿童-成人医疗程序互动量表代码,该代码将父母的“促进痛苦”行为与较差的儿童结果联系起来,并将父母的“促进应对”行为与改善的儿童结果联系起来。父母特质在父母安慰和分心的差异中只占一小部分。结论:研究结果与应对和痛苦促进行为的研究结果一致。运用疼痛共情模型的新框架,我们发现父母特质在很大程度上不能预测他们的程序性行为,而程序性行为与儿童在针刺过程中的痛苦行为和父母对这些行为的信念有更强的相关性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
12.50%
发文量
36
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信