Top

Published in:

01-12-2012 | Original Article

Acceptability and feasibility of family use of The Cellie Cancer Coping Kit

Authors: Meghan L. Marsac, Aimee K. Hildenbrand, Kathleen Clawson, Leela Jackson, Kristen Kohser, Lamia Barakat, Nancy Kassam-Adams, Richard Aplenc, Anne Vinsel, Melissa A. Alderfer

Published in: Supportive Care in Cancer | Issue 12/2012

Abstract

Purpose

This study aims to examine the acceptability and feasibility of child and parent use of The Cellie Cancer Coping Kit (Cellie Kit). The Cellie kit is designed to promote coping and decrease distress in children undergoing pediatric cancer treatment. It includes a plush toy, coping cards, and book for caregivers.

Methods

In study 1, 15 children (ages 6–12) undergoing cancer treatment and their parents reviewed the Cellie Kit materials and provided feedback on its acceptability and perceived feasibility of use. In study 2, 15 additional children (ages 6–12) and their parents participated in a pilot intervention of the Cellie Kit and completed follow-up interviews and a satisfaction measure.

Results

In study 1, all parents reported that they could understand the book and enact its coping tips and that the Cellie Kit was relevant to their families' cancer experience. Children explained they would use the Cellie Kit for emotional expression, fun, and comfort. The Cellie Kit was revised after study 1 to integrate additional material suggested by families. In study 2, all families completing follow-up assessments reported utilizing the Cellie Kit. A majority (86 % of children and 100 % of parents) indicated that they would recommend the Cellie Kit to others, and most (64 % of children and 93 % of parents) reported learning new information and/or skills from the Cellie Kit.

Conclusions

The Cellie Kit is an engaging, helpful, and easy-to-use coping tool for families facing pediatric cancer treatment. Future research should examine the efficacy of brief interventions using the Cellie Kit to promote adjustment to pediatric cancer.

The stuffed toy was originally conceptualized as a healthy cell, which led to its name. However, during early development, we reconceptualized Cellie as a neutral, nondescript toy so that children could interpret and tailor it to their own situation/feelings. Because children responded well to the name, we did not modify the name.

Of note, the stressor “fear of death” was intentionally excluded from the Cellie Kit materials. Though this emerged as a potential stressor for families, several parents explained that the inclusion of a reference to death would prevent them from using the Cellie Kit with their child. Additionally, while one parent reported providing coping assistance to his/her child by encouraging religion, we elected not to integrate this coping assistance strategy into the Cellie Kit to respect the diversity of families' belief systems.

American Cancer Society (2010). Childhood leukemia: detailed guide. [cited 2011 Jan 24]; Available from: http://www.cancer.org/Cancer/LeukemiainChildren/DetailedGuide/index

Hedström M et al (2003) Distressing events for children and adolescents with cancer: child, parent, and nurse perceptions. J Pediatr Oncol Nurs 20(3):120–132PubMedCrossRef

Whitsett SF et al (2008) Chemotherapy-related fatigue in childhood cancer: correlates, consequences, and coping strategies. J Pediatr Oncol Nurs 25(2):86–96PubMedCrossRef

Collins JJ et al (2000) The measurement of symptoms in children with cancer. J Pain Symptom Manag 19(5):363–377CrossRef

Novakovic B et al (1996) Experiences of cancer in children and adolescents. Cancer Nurs 19(1):54–59PubMedCrossRef

Hildenbrand AK et al (2011) Coping with pediatric cancer: strategies employed by children and their parents to manage cancer-related stressors during treatment. J Pediatr Oncol Nurs 28(6):344–354PubMedCrossRef

Adler NA, Page AEK (eds) (2008) Cancer care for the whole patient: meeting psychosocial health needs. National Academies, Washington (DC)

Wiener LS et al (eds) (2009) Quick reference for pediatric oncology clinicians: The psychiatric and psychological dimensions of pediatric cancer symptom management. IPOS, Charlottesville

Kazak AE et al (2007) Evidence-based assessment, intervention and psychosocial care in pediatric oncology: a blueprint for comprehensive services across treatment. J Pediatr Psychol 32(9):1099–1110PubMedCrossRef

10.

Surbone A et al (2010) Psychosocial care for patients and their families is integral to supportive care in cancer: MASCC position statement. Support Care Cancer 18(2):255–263PubMedCrossRef

11.

Selove R et al (2011) Psychosocial services in the first 30 days after diagnosis: results of a web-based survey of children's oncology group (COG) member institutions. Pediatr Blood Cancer 58(3):435–440PubMedCrossRef

12.

Kazak AE (2005) Evidence-based interventions for survivors of childhood cancer and their families. J Pediatr Psychol 30(1):29–39PubMedCrossRef

13.

Kato PM et al (2008) A video game improves behavioral outcomes in adolescents and young adults with cancer: a randomized trial. Pediatrics 122(2):e305–e317PubMedCrossRef

14.

Beale IL et al (2007) Improvement in cancer-related knowledge following use of a psychoeducational video game for adolescents and young adults with cancer. J Adolesc Health 41(3):263–270PubMedCrossRef

15.

Brokstein RT, Cohen SO, Walco GA (2002) Starbright World and psychological adjustment in children with cancer: a clinical series. Child Health Care 31(1):29–45CrossRef

16.

Battles HB, Wiener LS (2002) Starbright World: effects of an electronic network on the social environment of children with life-threatening illnesses. Child Health Care 31(1):47–68CrossRef

17.

Wiener L et al (2011) ShopTalk: a pilot study of the feasibility and utility of a therapeutic board game for youth living with cancer. Supportive Care in Cancer 19(7):1049–1054PubMedCrossRef

18.

Marsac ML, Vinsel AM (2010) Kit and method for promotion of positive adjustment to illness and trauma. The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia

19.

Kuppenheimer WG, Brown RT (2002) Painful procedures in pediatric cancer. A comparison of interventions. Clin Psychol Rev 22(5):753–786PubMedCrossRef

20.

Powers SW (1999) Empirically supported treatments in pediatric psychology: procedure-related pain. J Pediatr Psychol 24(2):131–145PubMedCrossRef

21.

Uman LS et al (2008) A systematic review of randomized controlled trials examining psychological interventions for needle-related procedural pain and distress in children and adolescents: an abbreviated cochrane review. J Pediatr Psychol 33(8):842–854PubMedCrossRef

22.

Beatty PC, Willis GB (2007) Research synthesis: the practice of cognitive interviewing. Public Opin Q 71(2):287–311CrossRef

23.

Hruschka DJ et al (2004) Reliability in coding open-ended data: lessons learned from HIV behavioral research. Field Methods 16(3):307–333CrossRef

24.

Patton MQ (ed) (2002) Qualitative research & evaluative methods, 3rd edn. Sage Publications, Inc., Thousand Oaks

25.

Padgett D (ed) (2008) Qualitative methods in social work research, 2nd edn. Sage Publications, Inc., Thousand Oaks

26.

Bowen GA (2008) Naturalistic inquiry and the saturation concept: a research note. Qual Res 8(1):137–152CrossRef

27.

Klosky JL et al (2007) Predicting pediatric distress during radiation therapy procedures: the role of medical, psychosocial, and demographic factors. Pediatrics 119(5):e1159–1166PubMedCrossRef

28.

Bruce M (2006) A systematic and conceptual review of posttraumatic stress in childhood cancer survivors and their parents. Clin Psychol Rev 26(3):233–256PubMedCrossRef

29.

Reinfjell T et al (2009) Children in remission from acute lymphoblastic leukaemia: mental health, psychosocial adjustment and parental functioning. Eur J Cancer Care 18(4):364–370CrossRef

30.

Butler RW, Rizzi LP, Handwerger BA (1996) Brief report: the assessment of posttraumatic sterss disorder in pediatric cancer patients and survivors. J Pediatr Psychol 21(4):499–504PubMedCrossRef

31.

Erickson SJ, Steiner H (2001) Trauma and personality correlates in long-term pediatric cancer survivors. Child Psychiatry Hum Dev 31(3):195–213PubMedCrossRef

32.

Brown RT, Madan-Swain A, Lambert R (2003) Posttraumatic stress symptoms in adolescent survivors of childhood cancer and their mothers. J Trauma Stress 16(4):309–318PubMedCrossRef

33.

Kazak AE et al (2001) Posttraumatic stress in survivors of childhood cancer and mothers: development and validation of the impact of traumatic stressors interview schedule (ITSIS). J Clin Psychol Med Settings 8(4):307–323CrossRef

34.

Landolt MA et al (2006) Health-related quality of life in children with newly diagnosed cancer: a one year follow-up study. Health Qual Life Outcomes 4:63PubMedCrossRef

35.

Speechley KN et al (2006) Health-related quality of life among child and adolescent survivors of childhood cancer. J Clin Oncol 24(16):2536–2543PubMedCrossRef

36.

Kazak AE et al (2005) Feasibility and preliminary outcomes from a pilot study of a brief psychological intervention for families of children newly diagnosed with cancer. J Pediatr Psychol 30(8):11CrossRef

37.

Stehl ML et al (2009) Conducting a randomized clinical trial of an psychological intervention for parents/caregives of children with cancer shortly after diagnosis. J Pediatr Psychol 34(8):803–816PubMedCrossRef

38.

Sahler OJ et al (2005) Using problem-solving skills training to reduce negative affectivity in mothers of children with newly diagnosed cancer: report of a multisite randomized trial. J Consult Clin Psychol 73(2):272–283PubMedCrossRef

Title: Acceptability and feasibility of family use of The Cellie Cancer Coping Kit
Authors: Meghan L. Marsac
Aimee K. Hildenbrand
Kathleen Clawson
Leela Jackson
Kristen Kohser
Lamia Barakat
Nancy Kassam-Adams
Richard Aplenc
Anne Vinsel
Melissa A. Alderfer
Publication date: 01-12-2012
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: Supportive Care in Cancer / Issue 12/2012
Print ISSN: 0941-4355
Electronic ISSN: 1433-7339
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-012-1475-y

Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Watch now

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras

Prof. Fabrice Barlesi

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 12/2012

An international prospective study establishing minimal clinically important differences in the EORTC QLQ-BM22 and QLQ-C30 in cancer patients with bone metastases

Low body mass index as a risk factor of moderate to severe oral mucositis in oral cancer patients with radiotherapy

The cancer outpatient satisfaction with care questionnaire for chemotherapy, OUT-PATSAT35 CT: a validation study for Spanish patients

What does the term ‘survivor’ mean to individuals diagnosed with a haematological malignancy? Findings from Australia

Identifying the informational and psychosocial needs of Chinese immigrant cancer patients: a focus group study

Randomised controlled trials of yoga interventions for women with breast cancer: a systematic literature review

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer