Perceived Social Support and Quality of Life of Children with and without Developmental Disabilities and Their Caregivers during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Brazil: A Cross-Sectional Study
-
Published:2023-03-02
Issue:5
Volume:20
Page:4449
-
ISSN:1660-4601
-
Container-title:International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:IJERPH
Author:
Da Costa Isabelle Gansella Rocha1, Brugnaro Beatriz Helena1ORCID, Lima Camila Resende Gâmbaro1, Kraus de Camargo Olaf2ORCID, Fumincelli Lais3, Pavão Silvia Letícia4ORCID, Rocha Nelci Adriana Cicuto Ferreira1
Affiliation:
1. Child Development Analysis Laboratory (LADI), Department of Physical Therapy, Federal University of São Carlos (UFSCar), São Carlos 13565-905, SP, Brazil 2. CanChild, Department of Pediatrics, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON L8S 1C7, Canada 3. Department of Nursing, Federal University of São Carlos (UFSCar), São Carlos 13565-905, SP, Brazil 4. Department of Prevention and Rehabilitation in Physical Therapy, Federal University of Paraná (UFPR), Curitiba 80060-000, PR, Brazil
Abstract
Background: Social support and Quality of life (QoL) are important aspects of life and should be explored during the specific scenario of the pandemic. Aims: (i) to compare the perceived social support (PSS) in caregivers and the domains of QoL of the caregiver and the child with developmental disabilities (DD) and typical development (TD); (ii) to verify the existence of the association, in each group, between the PSS, and the domain of QoL of the caregiver and the child. Methods and Procedures: 52 caregivers of children with DD and 34 with TD participated remotely. We assessed PSS (Social Support Scale), children’s QoL (PedsQL-4.0-parent proxy) and caregivers’ QoL (PedsQL-Family Impact Module). The groups were compared for the outcomes using the Mann–Whitney test, and Spearman’s test evaluated the correlation between the PSS and the QoL (child and caregiver) in each of the groups. Outcomes and Results: There was no difference between groups for PSS. Children with DD presented lower values in PedsQL total, psychosocial health, physical health, social activities, and school activity. Caregivers of children with TD presented lower values in PedsQL family total, physical capacity, emotional aspect, social aspect, daily activities, and higher value in communication. In the DD group, we found a positive relationship between PSS with child: Psychosocial Health (r = 0.350) and Emotional Aspect (r = 0.380), and with family: Total (r = 0.562), Physical Capacity (r = 0.402), Emotional Aspect (r = 0.492), Social Aspect (r = 0.606), Communication (r = 0.535), Concern (r = 0.303), Daily Activities (r = 0.394) and Family Relationships (r = 0.369). In the TD group, we found that PSS was positively associated with Family: Social Aspect (r = 0.472) and Communication (r = 0.431). Conclusions and Implications: During the COVID-19 pandemic, despite both groups presenting similar PSS, there are important differences in QoL between them. For both groups, greater levels of perceived social support are associated with greater caregiver-reported in some domains of the child’s and caregiver’s QoL. These associations are more numerous, especially for the families of children with DD. This study provides a unique view into the relationships between perceived social support and QoL during the “natural experiment” of living through a pandemic.
Funder
Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technological Development São Paulo Research Foundation Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior—Brasil
Subject
Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis,Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
Reference60 articles.
1. The impact of caring for children with mental retardation on families as perceived by mothers in Karachi, Pakistan;Lakhani;JPMA. J. Pak. Med. Assoc.,2013 2. Measures for social support in raising a child with a disability: A scoping review;Dada;Child Care Health Dev.,2019 3. Factors related to positive perceptions in mothers of children with intellectual disabilities;Hastings;J. Appl. Res. Intellect. Disabil.,2002 4. Stigma and restriction on the social life of families of children with intellectual disabilities in Vietnam;Ngo;Singap. Med. J.,2012 5. Living stigma: The impact of labeling, stereotyping, separation, status loss, and discrimination in the lives of individuals with disabilities and their families;Green;Sociol. Inq.,2005
|
|