SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Medical Records / 2024 / Cilt: 6 Sayı: 3

Determinants of Parental Satisfaction with Rehabilitation Service Delivery to Children with Childhood-Onset Physical Disabilities: A Turkish Sample

Hasan Bingöl(BİNGÖL ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-3185-866X
Nazım Tolgahan Yıldız(KARAMANOĞLU MEHMETBEY ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-2404-2884
Hikmet Kocaman(KARAMANOĞLU MEHMETBEY ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-5971-7274
Pages
401–412
Publication Date
2024-09-24
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conclusion: Factors or determinants identified in the current study as having the potential to increase parents’/caregivers’ satisfaction with rehabilitation services should be considered when providing rehabilitation services.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: Studies have demonstrated that family centeredness, or family involvement in decision-making and care provision, is crucial for achieving the best results in pediatric rehabilitation and is also directly associated to parental/caregiver satisfaction with rehabilitation services.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Material and Method: Authors included the parents/caregivers of 120 children with physical disabilities aged 5-18 years (mean 10.14 years, SD 4.17).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: Factors or determinants identified in the current study as having the potential to increase parents’/caregivers’ satisfaction with rehabilitation services should be considered when providing rehabilitation services.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Childhood disability · rehabilitation service · family-centered service

Abstract

Aim: Studies have demonstrated that family centeredness, or family involvement in decision-making and care provision, is crucial for achieving the best results in pediatric rehabilitation and is also directly associated to parental/caregiver satisfaction with rehabilitation services. This study aimed to explore the potential determinants of parents’/caregivers’ satisfaction with rehabilitation services based on the various elements of family centeredness. Material and Method: Authors included the parents/caregivers of 120 children with physical disabilities aged 5-18 years (mean 10.14 years, SD 4.17). The Measure Process of Care-20 (MPOC-20) was used to assess parents'/caregivers' perceptions of the family centeredness in provision of rehabilitation services and therefore parental/caregiver satisfaction with rehabilitation service delivery to children. Results: Service-related and child-related factors accounted for 78% and 67% of the variances in the parents’/caregivers’ satisfaction with being provided opportunities for them to make decisions about rehabilitation services (MPOC-20-Enabling and Partnership subscale), respectively. Parental/caregiver satisfaction with service delivery in the context of sharing information about child’s progress was correlated with service-related, child-related, and parent/caregiver-related factors (adjusted R2=0.75, 0.71, and 0.68, respectively). Satisfaction with service delivery regarding coordinated and comprehensive care was significantly influenced by the service provider and the parent/caregiver-related variables (R2=0.63 and R2=0.59, respectively). Finally, in the event of satisfaction with services in terms of respectful and supportive care, each factor accounted for a small and approximately equal amount of variance in the mean score of relevant MPOC-20 subdomain (range of adjusted R2=0.10–0.18). Conclusion: Factors or determinants identified in the current study as having the potential to increase parents’/caregivers’ satisfaction with rehabilitation services should be considered when providing rehabilitation services.

🔖

Cite This Article

Bingöl, H., Yıldız, N. T., Kocaman, H. (2024). Determinants of Parental Satisfaction with Rehabilitation Service Delivery to Children with Childhood-Onset Physical Disabilities: A Turkish Sample. Medical Records, Cilt: 6 Sayı: 3, 401–412. https://doi.org/10.37990/medr.1506052

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (31)

  1. Ellingsen KM, Simeonsson RJ. Defining childhood disability: ICF-CY developmental code sets. Disabil Rehabil. Published online January 19, 2024. doi:10.1080/09638288.2024.2303385.
  2. Picton-Howell Z. The human rights of children with disabilities: how can medical professionals better fulfil rather than breach them?. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2023;65:1429-35.
  3. Faccioli S, Pagliano E, Ferrari A, et al. Evidence-based management and motor rehabilitation of cerebral palsy children and adolescents: a systematic review. Front Neurol. 2023;14:1171224.
  4. Novak I, Morgan C, Fahey M, et al. State of the evidence traffic lights 2019: systematic review of interventions for preventing and treating children with cerebral palsy. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep. 2020;20:3.
  5. Jenkin T, Anderson VA, D'Cruz K, et al. Family-centred service in paediatric acquired brain injury rehabilitation: Bridging the gaps. Front Rehabil Sci. 2022;3:1085967.
  6. Antunes AAM, Vaz DV. Family-Centered practice in a Brazilian rehabilitation network service. Braz J Phys Ther. 2021;25:544-51.
  7. Jackman M, Lannin N, Galea C, et al. What is the threshold dose of upper limb training for children with cerebral palsy to improve function? A systematic review. Aust Occup Ther J. 2020;67:269-80.
  8. Poojari DP, Umakanth S, Maiya GA, et al. Effect of family-centered care interventions on well-being of caregivers of children with cerebral palsy: a systematic review. F1000Res. 2023;12:790.
  9. United Nation: Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/convention-rights-persons-disabilities access date 12.11.2006
  10. McCoy SW, Palisano R, Avery L, et al. Physical, occupational, and speech therapy for children with cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2020;62:140-6.
  11. Mendoza BA, Fortier MA, Trinh LN, et al. Factors impacting parental and child satisfaction in the perioperative setting. Paediatr Anaesth. 2021;31:932-43.
  12. Hao Z, Ruggiano N. Family-centeredness in dementia care: what is the evidence?. Soc Work Health Care. 2020;59:1-19.
  13. McCarthy E, Guerin S. Family-centred care in early intervention: a systematic review of the processes and outcomes of family-centred care and impacting factors. Child Care Health Dev. 2022;48:1-32.
  14. Law M, Hanna S, King G, et al. Factors affecting family-centred service delivery for children with disabilities. Child Care Health Dev. 2003;29:357-66.
  15. El Ö, Baydar M, Berk H, et al. Interobserver reliability of the Turkish version of the expanded and revised gross motor function classification system. Disabil Rehabil. 2012;34:1030-3.
  16. Palisano R, Rosenbaum P, Walter S, et al. Development and reliability of a system to classify gross motor function in children with cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol. 1997;39:214-23.
  17. CanChild. Gross motor function classification system - expanded & revised. https://canchild.ca/en/resources/42-gmfcs-e-r access date 03.04.2022
  18. Palisano RJ, Rosenbaum P, Bartlett D, Livingston MH. Content validity of the expanded and revised Gross Motor Function Classification System. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2008;50:744-50.
  19. Towns M, Rosenbaum P, Palisano R, Wright FV. Should the gross motor function classification system be used for children who do not have cerebral palsy?. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2018;60:147-54.
  20. King S, King G, Rosenbaum P. Evaluating health service delivery to children with chronic conditions and their families: Development of a refined measure of processes of care (MPOC− 20). Children's Health Care. 2004;33:35-57.
  21. King SM, Rosenbaum PL, King GA. Parents ‘perceptions of caregiving: development and validation of a measure of processes. Dev Med Child Neurol. 1996;38:757-72.
  22. King G, Kertoy M, King S, et al. A measure of parents' and service providers' beliefs about participation in family-centered services. Children's Health Care. 2003;32:191-214.
  23. Türker D, Özal C, Karahan S, Günel M. Measure of processes of care (MPOC-56 and 20): Turkish adaptation, reliability, and validity study. Turkish Journal of Pediatrics. 2023;65:512-22.
  24. Geijen M, Ketelaar M, Sakzewski L, et al. Defining functional therapy in research involving children with cerebral palsy: a systematic review. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr. 2020;40:231-46.
  25. Jackman M, Sakzewski L, Morgan C, et al. Interventions to improve physical function for children and young people with cerebral palsy: international clinical practice guideline. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2022;64:536-49.
  26. Araneda R, Ebner-Karestinos D, Paradis J, et al. Changes Induced by early hand-arm bimanual intensive therapy including lower extremities in young children with unilateral cerebral palsy: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Pediatr. 2024;178:19-28. Erratum in: JAMA Pediatr. 2024;178:206.
  27. Errante A, Saviola D, Cantoni M, et al. Effectiveness of action observation therapy based on virtual reality technology in the motor rehabilitation of paretic stroke patients: a randomized clinical trial. BMC Neurol. 2022;22:109.
  28. Ramey SL, DeLuca SC, Stevenson RD, et al. Constraint-induced movement therapy for cerebral palsy: a randomized trial. Pediatrics. 2021;148:e2020033878.
  29. Mutlu A, Kara OK, Gunel MK, et al. Agreement between parents and clinicians for the motor functional classification systems of children with cerebral palsy. Disabil Rehabil. 2011;33:927-32.
  30. Beshir M, Tilahun T, Hordofa DF, et al. Caregiver satisfaction and its associated factors in pediatric wards of Jimma University Medical Center, Southwest Ethiopia. BMC Health Serv Res. 2022;22:1058.
  31. Cacioppo M, Lucas C, Dai S, et al. Parent satisfaction with medical and rehabilitation services for children with physical disabilities during lockdown. Ann Phys Rehabil Med. 2023;66:101726.