Self-management and independence behaviors are associated with improved health conditions
common to spina bifida such as skin integrity and bowel and bladder management. While most
children with spina bifida ultimately achieve basic self-care behaviors, (e.g., dressing
appropriately, planning activities with peers, or cooking pre-planned meals), they often
lag 2–5 years behind their typically-developing peers in these activities [1]. Valid and
reliable condition-specific assessments of self-management and independence are critical
to optimizing outcomes for this population. Partnerships among parents, clinicians, and
youths with spina bifida are essential to implementing tailored interventions based on
these assessments. The guidelines delineated in this article are informed by current
self-management research for people with spina bifida and offer recommendations to promote
self-management and independence across the lifespan.
Research suggests that more than 75% of individuals born with spina bifida [SB]
will survive into adulthood [2] with evidence
underscoring the critical importance of self-management in extending life expectancy.
According to the Guidelines for the Care of People with Spina Bifida [3]:
Self-management for youth and emerging adults with Spina Bifida is an active daily and
flexible process in which youth and their parents share responsibility and
decision-making for managing their condition, health, and well-being through a wide
range of knowledge, attitudes, activities, and skills. The goal of this increasing
responsibility is to develop the self-management behaviors needed to achieve
independence and transition to adulthood and independent living [4, 5].
Self-management may also be thought of as the interaction of health behaviors
that affected individuals and families engage in to care for a chronic condition [6]. Within the SB population, effective
self-management is particularly important for preventing co-morbidities and secondary
complications such as skin breakdown, renal dysfunction, and bladder and bowel
incontinence [7, 8]. Self-management is also central to a successful transition from
adolescence into emerging adulthood, participating fully in society, and combating
vulnerability, stigma, and discrimination. SB is a congenital condition; therefore the
building blocks of self-management must begin early in childhood and in partnership with
families and multi-disciplinary providers [9].
Therefore, these guidelines begin in infancy and progress through adulthood.
Child autonomy provides a critical foundation for developing self-management and
independence. For all children, autonomy begins early and is fostered by opportunities to
make choices and to develop a sense of mastery. Most children with SB ultimately achieve
basic self-management and independence behaviors (e.g., dressing appropriately, planning
activities with peers, or cooking pre-planned meals) yet often lag 2–5 years behind their
typically-developing peers in these behaviors [1].
This gap may be due to the child’s difficulties performing common everyday motor and
processing activities in efficient and independent ways [1]. Adaptation of performance and initiation of new steps may be especially
challenging [10].
Social skills in children are also important building blocks for independence.
Many children with SB need assistance building adaptive social behaviors in peer
interactions, specifically basic social skills such as reading social cues, clarity of
thought, and collaboration [10]. Monitoring
self-management learning is needed for all with cognitive functioning challenges, especially
those with executive functioning, inattention, and working memory issues [11, 12, 13, 14,
15]. Educational programs in the home, school,
and broader community that offer opportunities to practice new behaviors are critical.
Youth with SB often do not enter adolescence with a comprehensive knowledge base
of how to self-manage their condition (i.e. watching for signs of skin breakdown, bowel
problems, shunt failure, and urinary tract infections) yet most develop this knowledge
before age eighteen [1, 4, 16]. Advanced
self-management behaviors for community living (i.e., managing a bank account, cooking
independently) are typically achieved by peers without complex disabilities by age 18, but
not as commonly by individuals with SB [1]. It is
not clear if these difficulties reflect a delay in development for youth with SB or are due
to a lack of expectations and support in the home, school, health system, or broader
community. However, research suggests healthy family functioning characterized by open
communication and shared decision-making is related to more optimal self-management outcomes
across all developmental stages [13, 16].
Since there is evidence that responsibility in the home (e.g., chores and
general decision-making) promotes self-management and skill-building, individuals and
families should be encouraged to expand the range of everyday living skills and
responsibilities for youth with SB [1, 16, 17,
18, 19, 20, 21]. These findings are complicated by longitudinal studies indicating that older
school-age children with SB perceive themselves as being more independent relative to parent
assessment [21]. Moreover, while health care
providers expect school-age and older children to perform self-management behaviors related
to bladder programs, bowel programs, skin checks, and prevention of other secondary
conditions [22], older children have reported
that self-catheterization and bowel programs were a challenge and often required parent
involvement [4]. In addition, both the families
and children have had difficulty carrying out diet recommendations, bowel programs, and skin
care [23]. Thus, tailored interventions are
needed to support growth in these areas [23].
Adolescents with SB transitioning to emerging adulthood are generally poorly
prepared to self-manage their condition or live independently and are therefore at risk for
preventable secondary conditions such as skin breakdown and UTIs [24]. This vulnerability appears to persist into adulthood [25]. Other research has identified associations
between lower self-management behaviors and higher hospitalization rates in this
population [7, 26]. However, there is evidence that improved self-management in
young adults is associated with decreased depressive symptomology [27]. In addition, there is evidence in other conditions such as
asthma that increased self-management improves health outcomes and healthcare
utilization [28, 29, 30, 31]. Most adults with SB over 18 years of age have not
achieved optimal independence milestones in education, employment, and independent
living [32]. However, they were reported to have
higher independence than those with other severe conditions such as fragile X syndrome or
muscular dystrophy [33].
Self-management interventions for youth with SB and other chronic health
conditions generally show significant improvement in at least one area, although a short
workshop-based intervention for older children with SB yielded no significant differences in
intervention and control groups [34, 35]. Family-oriented self-management interventions may
be most effective in younger adolescents [36].
Camp-based psychosocial interventions promoting skills-development in goal-setting and
problem-solving have shown promise in developmentally-diverse samples of children,
adolescents, and adults with SB [11, 37]. Another intervention using a problem-solving
model combining education and home/community practice similarly improved perceived family
stress associated with SB condition management but not youth self-management [36]. Rehabilitation interventions in young and
middle-aged adults have improved all aspects of self-management and independence, with
moderate- to large-effect sizes including self-efficacy, management of bowel and bladder
incontinence, cognitive function, and psychosocial symptoms [8, 26]. Although tested
mostly in adults, technology-based interventions hold promise for expanding self-management
behaviors in youth as well [20, 38, 39, 40, 41,
42].
Guidelines, goals and outcomes
The goals and desired outcomes of the Self- Management and Independence
Guidelines were developed to be both practical and aspirational.
Primary outcomes
The aspirational objectives of these guidelines were to improve our
developmental methodology to facilitate children and adults with spina bifida to:
Perform effective self-management behaviors at the highest level of
their abilities.
Achieve optimal independent living and employment, as well as
maximal participation in society.
Develop autonomy, responsibility, and other foundational skills for
self-management and independent living.
Secondary outcomes
The guidelines address practical goals to achieve these
aspirational objectives, including:
Interventions that address the foundational skills necessary for
complex self-management and independence behaviors are introduced throughout the
lifespan, as appropriate.
Targeted foundational skills include executive functioning skills,
self-efficacy, self-regulation, and engaging in social activities.
Self-management and independence goals are evaluated yearly with
the family, child, adolescent, and adult.
Tertiary outcomes
By supporting development of these important self-management and
independence skills, the guidelines aim to promote independent behaviors and activities
of adolescents and adults with SB, including:
Adults over 18 with SB who have a guardian responsible for their
health care perform self-management behaviors in the areas of medication
management, prevention of complications, implementation of bladder and bowel
programs, skin surveillance, and have the ability to communicate their findings to
their guardians and/or health care providers at their highest level of
ability.
Adults over 18 with SB who do not need a guardian are fully
responsible to self-manage their condition and independence (e.g., making
appointments, ordering medications, arranging for transportation, conducting basic
living skills like cooking and doing the laundry, managing money, managing
insurance, and communicating with their health care provider).
Individuals with SB interact effectively with family, health care
providers, and others in the external environment in an independent manner.
Clinical questions that informed the self-management and independence
guidelines
Age group
Clinical questions
0–11
months
What approaches optimize individual and family
self-management and eventual independence?
1–2
years11 months
What approaches optimize individual and family
self-management and eventual independence?
3–5
years11 months
What approaches optimize independence along with
individual and family self-management in children with spina
bifida?
6–12
years11 months
What skills, abilities, and self-management behaviors
should be targeted during age 6–12 years?
What are the most effective approaches to teach these
skills and behaviors to children with spina bifida and their
families?
Does specific skill training improve self-management
behaviors (e.g., taking medication) and other independence
behaviors
What are optimal age expectations for specific
self-management skills and behaviors (e.g. ability to
self-catheterize; conduct skin checks; describe their medication, its
uses and side effects, and take it on schedule; and describe their
condition to a new professional) in children with spina bifida?
What instruments are available to measure
self-management skills, abilities, and behaviors in children?
13–17 years11 months
What approaches optimize individual and family
self-management?
What skills, abilities and self-management behaviors
should be targeted at age 13–17 years?
What are the most effective approaches to teaching
these skills and behaviors to children age 13–17 years with spina
bifida and their families?
Does specific skill training improve self-management
behaviors (e.g., taking medication) and other independence
behaviors?
What are optimal age expectations for specific
self-management skills and behaviors (e.g. ability to
self-catheterize; conduct skin checks; describe their medication, its
uses and side effects, take it on schedule, and describe their
condition to a new professional) in children with spina bifida?
What instruments are available to measure
self-management skills, abilities, and behaviors?
18 years
What approaches optimize individual and family
self-management?
What self-management skills, abilities, and behaviors
lead to self-management and independent living in adults?
Does specific self-management skill training improve
independence with self-management behaviors (e.g., taking medication
and monitoring skin status)?
Is performing more self-management behaviors
independently related to improved or positive health or functional
outcomes (depression, quality of life, secondary conditions such as
urinary tract infections, and pain)?
What health care and community supports optimize
self-management, independence, and health outcomes?
Does increased independence with self-management
increase community participation?
How can comprehensive preparation for self-management
and independence be integrated into primary or specialty health care
settings?
What instruments measure the individual’s performance
of self-management and independence behaviors in adulthood?
Self-management guidelines
Age group
Guidelines
Evidence
0–11
months
1.
Provide instruction and support to families regarding knowledge and skills
needed to manage their child’s spina bifida and related issues.
Clinical consensus
2.
Provide orientation to families that include the expectation for eventual
self-management and independence according to the individual’s age and the
status of their spina bifida.
Identify and make referrals to early intervention programs.
Clinical consensus Appendix: Early Intervention Services, Individualized
Educational Plans [IEP] and 504 Plans [59]
1–2
yrs11 months
1.
Provide instruction and support to families regarding knowledge and skills
needed to manage their child’s spina bifida and related issues.
Clinical consensus
2.
Provide anticipatory guidance regarding developmental needs of children (such
as exploration of environment, routines, and age-appropriate choices).
Clinical consensus
3.
Teach families to offer daily age-appropriate choices such as choosing
between two articles of clothing, two cereals for breakfast, or two books to
read.
Clinical consensus
4.
Encourage families to expect participation in daily life activities,
including tasks such as picking up toys, cleaning up, and imitating
housework.
Clinical consensus
5.
Identify and make referrals to early education programs.
Clinical consensus Appendix: Early Intervention Services, Individualized
Educational Plans (IEP) and 504 Plans [59]
3–5
years11 months
1.
Provide instruction and support to families regarding knowledge, skills, and
behaviors needed to manage their child’s spina bifida and related issues.
Clinical consensus
2.
Discuss the need to expand the range of daily life activities and chores, as
well as strategies to accommodate the child’s learning style and/or
mobility.
Provide anticipatory guidance so that autonomy skills are maximized when
positive behaviors are reinforced, and clear and consistent consequences for
inappropriate behavior are used.
Clinical consensus Mental Health Guidelines [62], Neuropsychology Guidelines [63]
4.
Refer to community resources such as early education programs that promote
autonomy, self-efficacy, and other foundational independence skills.
Clinical consensus Appendix: Early Intervention Services, Individualized
Educational Plans (IEP) and 504 Plans [59]
6–12
years11 months
1.
Provide instruction and support to children and families regarding the
knowledge and skills needed to manage spina bifida and related independence
issues. Teach the child basic self-management skills, including skills to
prevent secondary conditions (clean intermittent catheterization, skin care,
equipment care, bowel and bladder care, wheelchair maintenance, and
propulsion) based on individual abilities. Focus on self-efficacy. Children
with spina bifida may develop foundational skills and self-management
behaviors at a slightly later age (2–5 year delay) and may need more
deliberate practice. However, most self-management behaviors are achievable by
adults with spina bifida.
Assist families in learning how to incrementally involve the child in
organizing schoolwork and self-management activities. Specifically, encourage
transition to having the child complete these activities initially with
parental oversight and eventually independently.
Discuss the need to expand the range of daily life activities and chores as
well as strategies to accommodate the child’s learning style and/or
mobility.
Assess for potential patient, family, or environmental barriers to developing
autonomy and independence (including family stress and conflict) and address
in action plan.
Discuss with parents the need to help their child develop basic money
management skills [1]. If the child
has an Individualized Educational Plan (IEP), encourage parents and the school
to include money management skills in the child’s IEP.
Encourage families to facilitate their child’s language performance by
creating intellectually- and culturally-enhancing activities in the child’s
typical environment.
Set
beginning expectations for independent living.
Clinical consensus
13.
Encourage use of technology to enhance self-management.
Clinical consensus
13–17 years11 months
1.
Evaluate self-management in appropriate areas (e.g. managing medications,
prevention of complications, skin care, equipment care, bowel and bladder
care, and making health care appointments). Assess self-efficacy for these
activities, considering that the child’s ability to assume responsibility for
health care encounters and other self-management of spina bifida can progress.
Full responsibility for self-management is critical for successful
transition.
Assist families in knowing how to incrementally involve the child in
organizing self-management activities. Specifically, encourage transition to
having the child complete these activities initially with parental oversight
and eventually independently.
Initiate a discussion and develop action plans to address deficits in
self-management and independence skills, abilities, and behaviors as
needed.
Clinical consensus
Use a valid and reliable instrument to assess
self-management skills, abilities, and performance of self-management
and independence behaviors (Table 3).
Evaluate and monitor cognitive functions as they
underpin decision-making, goal-setting, self-regulation,
self-management, socialization, and transition issues.
Assess the child’s ability to use transportation.
Encourage their enrollment in driver’s education (adaptive, if needed)
if the teen possesses the necessary cognitive and motor abilities. If
driving is not realistic, teach (or encourage the family to teach)
them how to use public transportation, van services for individuals
with disabilities, or other transportation options.
Expand self-management interventions to encompass
everyday living activities such as laundry, meal preparation, money
management, managing finances, and making health care
appointments.
Evaluate the potential to eventually live
independently [for those later in this age range] and connect them
with housing resources (e.g. Centers for Independent Living).
Clinical consensus
4.
Encourage participation in IEP/504 planning that addresses self-management
and transition skills. For those with an IEP, transition planning must be
initiated by age 14.
Latex and Latex AllergyGuidelines [76] Men’s Health Guidelines [77] Sexual Health and Education Guidelines [78] Women’s Health Guidelines [79]
9.
Assess individual and system barriers to self-management and transition from
pediatric to adult health care (e.g., responsibility for health management,
advocacy, assertiveness, and insufficient adult services).
Evaluate full responsibility for implementing condition-specific
self-management behaviors in appropriate areas, as needed (e.g. managing
medications, preventing complications, monitoring skin care, maintaining
equipment, bowel and bladder care, and ability to make health care
appointments).
Reinforce the need for daily skin assessment, given the high incidence of
skin breakdown on lower extremities (e.g. due to poor fitting leg braces) and
risk for wound-related hospitalization.
Evaluate if the adult has expanded self-management to encompass everyday
living activities such as laundry, meal preparation, managing finances, making
health care appointment, and ordering supplies.
Clinical consensus
4.
Initiate a discussion and develop an action plans to address deficits in
self-management skills, abilities, and behaviors as needed.
Clinical consensus
Use a valid and reliable instrument to assess
self-management skills, abilities, and performance of self-management
or independence behaviors over time in adults (Table 3).
Support development of knowledge and skills necessary
for self-management (e.g., self-efficacy, decision-making, goal
setting, self-regulation, and communication).
Assess the adult’s ability to use transportation;
encourage enrollment in driver’s education (adaptive, if needed) if
the adult possesses the necessary cognitive and motor abilities and
has not done so already. If driving is not realistic, teach [or
encourage the family to teach) the adult how to use transportation
(e.g. public transportation, van services for individuals with
disabilities, or other transportation options).
Clinical consensus
Evaluate the young adult’s ability to live
independently and connect with him or her with housing resources, such
as Centers for Independent Living.
Clinical consensus
5.
Encourage the use of technology in developing basic self-management skills.
For instance, using email, a personal online health record, or patient portal
to contact the clinic coordinator and physician with questions. Offer
alternatives if this form of access is not available or appropriate.
Clinical consensus
6.
Encourage the use of technology programs to enhance self-management outcomes
[e.g. using mobile health (mHealth) or telehealth tools to monitor skin
breakdown or report response to medication for UTI].
Expand the discussion on child rearing and parenting issues and resources as
appropriate.
Clinical consensus
9.
Discuss strategies for safe infant handling (e.g., holding an infant if you
use a wheelchair or accessing a crib or car seat) with parents or expectant
parents with mobility limitations.
Clinical consensus
10.
Encourage involvement in empowerment activities and organizations (e.g.,
sports, mentoring, camps, and local, national and international spina bifida,
and other disability organizations).
Refer to vocational rehabilitation, independent living centers, or other
community agencies as appropriate.
Clinical consensus
14.
Provide information about accessible housing, financing, and appropriate
outside agencies.
Clinical consensus
15.
Encourage planning and use of support services (e.g., in a college setting,
services for students with disabilities) for self-management and independence
in new environments.
Evaluate and support patients as their parents and caregivers age and assist
individuals with spina bifida with planning for changes in self-management and
independence when their parents and caregivers will not be available.
Clinical consensus
Methods
The methods for the review of the literature and development of the
recommendations were designed by the Executive Committee of the SB Guidelines [43]. Independence had been a topic in previous
guidelines, however self-management was added in this edition. The central staff conducted a
search of the literature from 2006 to 2016 using the search terms “independence and spina
bifida” or “independence and myelomeningocele”. This search yielded 18 studies that
addressed independence. In addition, because the search for self-management studies was
inadvertently omitted from the central search process, one author (Au 2) conducted a search
of three databases, PubMed, CINAHL, and Psychinfo for the dates 2006–2016 using the terms
“spina bifida and self-management or spina bifida and independence.” This search yielded an
additional 25 studies. References of these publications were searched for any earlier
self-management studies; three additional studies were added. In addition, later during the
review process two studies were identified and included. Early in the literature review, it
became apparent that the recommendations of the self-management and independence working
groups were similar. Therefore, the decision was made to combine the two sections. The
blended working group consisted of: a PhD social worker, a PhD physical therapist, a PhD
nurse, a rehabilitation physician, and a developmental pediatrician. Forty-eight studies
informed the combined recommendations. In addition to the age-specific recommendations, the
combined work group created a table describing the SB self-management instruments identified
in this search and seven additional generic self-management instruments with references
supporting their reliability and validity. Clinical questions were created to guide the
organization of the guidelines (Table 1). The results
of the 48 studies that addressed these concepts along with expert opinion informed the
guidelines.
Results
Evidence continues to mount in support of assessment and education of families
and children/adolescents/young adults with SB around self-management issues (Table 2). The importance of these issues in adulthood is
undisputed. Using valid and reliable tools to measure these concepts is well-supported
(Table 3). Evidence is emerging for the success of
community-based educational and training programs to improve self-management. More research
is needed to support and refine these programs. In addition, we do not yet know the most
effective developmental steps that encourage independence from a young age in this
population.
Discussion
There are several themes that have emerged from these guidelines. While it is
important to understand the risk factors that complicate self-management such as level of
the lesion, cognitive ability, and functional mobility, the trajectory of self-management
skill development can be positively impacted independent of these complicating elements.
Families and clinicians must work together to assess child readiness for self-management and
collaboratively cultivate those skills over time. Clinicians should consider using one of
the valid and reliable generic or SB-specific measures of self-management and
independence [13, 44, 45, 46]. Clinical assessment of the level of
self-management and independence in those with SB should specifically distinguish between
the skills and behaviors the individual knows how to do and the behaviors they actually
execute independently [47]. The evidence supports
the need to have a structured, planned, and incremental approach to building self-management
and independence skills beginning in early childhood, conveying expectations for
developmentally-appropriate household responsibilities, and increasingly involving the child
in their care. Plans that accommodate cognitive learning styles or executive functioning
status and purposefully, incrementally increase skills with multiple opportunities to
practice new behaviors are central to achieve successful self-management and independence.
While the science of self-management for individuals with SB is not completely established,
the general health behavior literature supports the powerful effect of expectations and
self-efficacy [48, 49]. The expectation that children with spina bifida will grow into
independent teenagers and adults must be supported by health care providers starting in
infancy and increasing over time [50]. Typical
developmentally appropriate expectations of putting away toys for preschoolers and
participating in chores for children set the stage for the development of later skills and
confidence. Facilitating both toddlers’ and older children’s decision-making ability is
necessary for building skills needed for managing the challenges of SB [51]. Similar to school teachers assessing and addressing the unique
learning needs of children with SB, clinicians and families should engage in intentional and
targeted planning for self-management skill development. This plan needs to integrate and
address the child’s challenges with executive functioning, working memory, or other unique
learning needs, as well as attend to the child’s inherent strengths and interests.
The process of developing self-management skills is one that needs to be
addressed early and include multiple supervised opportunities for practice in the home,
healthcare provider’s office, and broader community. Ideally, these building blocks are core
components of clinical encounters and addressed in a systematic and incremental manner
during both primary and specialty care visits or through other regular self-management
interventions or programs specifically tailored for individuals with SB and their
caregivers. It is also important to continue to work on developing these self-management
skills incrementally as adolescents age into adulthood, while at the same time assessing and
planning for any self-management supports a young adult with SB will need to maintain
optimal health and independence as an adult.
Multiple research gaps were identified by the working group. A critical need is
to understand what foundational skills and abilities in young children with SB facilitate
the development of self-management and independence behaviors in later childhood and
adulthood. Once those foundational skills are identified, interventions that optimize the
development of these skills and abilities need to be evaluated. The complex timing and
skills needed for incremental transfer of responsibility for condition self-management in
adolescents is unknown. In addition, the multi-faceted and multi-level barriers and
facilitators for developing autonomy, self-management, and independent living skills across
the lifespan need to be better delineated. Increased attention should also be placed on
testing interventions aimed at closing the gap between self-management behaviors in
individuals with SB and their typically-developing peers. Similarly, family-centered
interventions that identify the support needs of parents and facilitate parental transition
from direct care to coach and
Short description: Number of
items; age range; type of instrument; subscales
Psychometric evidence:
reliability and validity
Recommended use
Spina
bifida-specific instrument developed with samples of youth with spina bifida
KKIS-SB
Kennedy Krieger Independence Scales-Spina Bifida (KKIS-SB) The Kennedy Krieger
Independence Scales-Spina Bifida Version: A Measure of Executive Components of
Self-Management (KKIS-SB) [13].
Twenty-two items.
Caregiver-reported measure of self-care skills for
individuals ages 10 and above.
Based on assumption that self-care skills require adequate
executive functioning and that other scales do not assess the executive
burden of these tasks.
Four response pattern options:
More than 90% of the time
10–90% of the time
Less than 10% of the time
Not necessary or no opportunity
Two subscales: Initiation of Routines and Prospective
Memory.
Psychometric analysis with a sample of 122 parents of
individuals with spina bifida ages 10–29.
Reliability
Internal reliability 0.89
Test-retest not reported
Validity
Exploratory factor analysis, reliability and construct
validity using BRIEF (Behavior Report Inventory of Executive Function)
were conducted.
Factor analysis supported two subscales.
Correlations between KISS-SB initiation of routines
subscale and BRIEF summary scales (0.031–0.56) as well as five of the 8 BRIEF
subscales (inhibit, shift, working memory and monitor)
(29 to 62) support validity of the KKIS-SB.
Age-related changes and correlation with the Adaptive
Behavior Assessment System scales also support validity of both KKIS-SB
subscales.
Parent scales are recommended.
Child report version exists but psychometric data have not
been published.
Contact developers for more information on child-report
KKIS-SB.
KKIS-SB provides a highly-specialized assessment of
self-management abilities based on a known area of challenge in
individuals with spina bifida (executive functioning).
Short description: Number of
items; age range; type of instrument; subscales
Psychometric evidence:
reliability and validity
Recommended use
AMIS
II(Interview)The Development of the AdolescentYoung Adult Self-Management and Independence
Scale-AMIS II: Psychometric Data [46].
AMIS II is a 17-item structured interview instrument that
measures self-management behaviors in individuals ages 12 to adult.
Parallel versions are available:
parent
adolescent/young adult/adult
These generic instruments have 3 questions (complication
prevention, medication, and knowledge) that can be tailored to a specific
condition.
The individual is rated on how much of the behavior they
actually perform and thus can be used as an outcomes measure.
Response pattern: 7 options from 0–100%.
Two subscales: Condition Self-Management and Independent
Living Self-Management.
Condition Self-Management subscale:
condition knowledge
medication management
complication prevention
advocacy
family involvement
Independent Living Self-Management subscale:
Making health care appointments
Ordering supplies
Household skills
Community living skills
Managing finances
Managing insurance
Evidence reported [46] Initial
psychometric analysis with a sample of 201 adolescents/young adults ages 12–25
with spina bifida and 129 of their parents. Reliability
Factor analyses supported the two- factor AMIS II.
Validity supported by age-related changes and by moderate
correlations with other related variables (parent-reported chores,
responsibility and functional status and adolescent/young adult report of
decision-making and functional status ( 0.30–0.61).
Validity also supported by use in published studies of
transition-aged young adults. Increase in self-management over one year
was related to decrease in depressive symptoms.
Parent and adolescent/young adult/
adult versions are recommended.
Scoring manual available from authors.
Self-report version now available but no psychometric
evidence to date.
Additionally, self-report instruments have been developed
and are available for field testing:
Short description: Number of
items; age range; type of instrument; subscales
Psychometric evidence:
reliability and validity
Recommended use
Medical
Self-Management andTransition ReadinessMeasurement of medical self-management and
transition readiness among Canadian adolescents with special health care
needs [86].
Twenty-one-item measure of self-management and transition
readiness for individuals ages 11–18 and their parents aimed at assessing
awareness of their health care condition and ability to make decisions
relating to health care.
Response pattern: 1–5 Likert-type “strongly agree” to
“strongly disagree”
Item stems are primarily “know, can, understand.” For
example:
“I know what medical insurance I have.”
“I can get myself to medical appointments.”
“I have discussed sexuality-related topics with
my medical professionals.”
Short description: Number of
items; age range; type of instrument; subscales
Psychometric evidence:
reliability and validity
Recommended use
Spina
Bifida Self-ManagementProfile (SBSMP)Sharing of Spina Bifida Responsibilities
Scale (SOSBMR)Spina Bifida Independence Scales (SBIS)Condition self-management in
pediatric spina bifida: A longitudinal investigation of medical adherence,
responsibility-sharing, and independence skills [23].
A series of instruments adapted from diabetes measures.
Each measure collected from mother, father, and child.
SBSMP: 14-item structured interview of adherence to
treatments (diet, catheterization, bowel program, skin checks and exercise
subscales). Indicates that the task is being completed but not by whom it
was done. Items scored as either adherent or non-adherent (1,0).
Sharing of Spina Bifida Responsibilities Scale (SOSBMR):
34 items showing who is primarily responsible for each task. Scoring (1
parent, 2 equal, or child 3).
Spina Bifida Independence Scales (SBIS). Parent evaluation
using 50 items of child’s knowledge and ability to do skills to manage
spina bifida care (yes, no, not sure, or NA) but does not measure if the
child does them on a consistent basis.
These measures reported in a study of 140 children with
spina bifida and their families.
Reliability
No internal reliability computed for SBSMP due to large
number of “not applicable items” (internal reliability for SOSBMR reported
as Cronbach’s alpha 0.60) for the 9 subscales.
No-test-retest reliability reported for any of the
scales.
Validity
Validity was generally supported by several relationships
in the expected direction.
Increased age was related to increased ability and
responsibility.
Increased ability was related to increased
responsibility.
However, the relationship between adherence and age was
more variable.
Although these scales have been used extensively in
studies of children with diabetes, no formal assessment of validity in
populations of children with spina bifida were reported.
May have promise for future use, especially for comparison
to diabetes.
Several scales are needed to measure these concepts and
may have item burden in clinical practice.
Generic Self-Management/Transition Readiness Instruments. No reported use
in spina bifida
TRAQ(Transition Readiness Assess-ment Questionnaire)Measures the
transition-readiness of youth with special health care needs [69].
Twenty-item scale created to reflect stages of change
theory (pre-contemplation, contemplation, preparation, action,
maintenance) in individuals ages 12 years and older.
Pilot tested with a sample of 185 children/adults ages
12–20 with different chronic illnesses.
Reliability
Internal reliability supported by Item- total correlation
scores (0.34 0.74).
Inter-rater reliability was strong (kappa 0.71).
No test-retest data reported.
Validity
Content and construct validity were satisfactory.
Factor analysis not available.
Overall score was sensitive to advancing age (about a
one-point increase in total score for each year of age).
Promising generic tool.
Each program should review items and determine if
interview version is compatible with their clinic to determine use.
PEDI-CATPediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory (PEDI) Computer Aided Test
(CAT) [60, 61].
PEDI-CAT for children and adults ages 0–21. Instrument
uses item-response theory to measure basic activities of daily living,
mobility, social/cognitive and a new scale – responsibility by youth based
on parent report.
Responsibility scale has 51 item-bank.
Five, 10 or 15 items are based on previous answers.
Extension of the previous paper measure; addresses
functional outcomes and adds responsibility.
Response pattern for responsibility domain:
Adult/caregiver has full responsibility; the
child does not take any responsibility.
Adult/caregiver has most responsibility and child
takes a little responsibility.
Adult/caregiver and child share responsibility
about equally.
Child has most responsibility with a little
direction, supervision or guidance from an adult or caregiver.
Child takes full responsibility without any
direction, supervision or guidance from an adult or caregiver.
Psychometric assessment included a sample of parents of
children and adolescents with disabilities ( 2205) as well as typically developing
children ( 703).
Only responsibility (self-management) scale data reported
here.
Reliability
PEDI-CAT is more reliable and valid than the legacy
(paper) PEDI measures.
Validity
Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed unidimensionality
of the responsibility scale (CFI 0.0.99, RMSEA 0.057).
5,10, or 15-item scales highly correlated with total item
bank ( 0.99).
Paper version addressing functional outcomes has been used
for children with spina bifida [88].
Additional validity testing needed on responsiveness and
feasibility of use by parents with limited English.
Excellent test of independence. One of few to span the
0–21 age group.
Useful for measuring many daily and social foundational
skills as well as the incremental performance of independence of
behaviors.
Recommended if clinic/program/organization has purchased
technology and if technology available on routine basis.
Theoretically could be used with young adults without
intellectual disabilities as the reporter.
Use of item-response theory means a small number of items
can tap a domain, e.g. responsibility.
Limitation: only validated with a parent reporter at the
time this guideline was written.
Short description: Number of
items; age range; type of instrument; subscales
Psychometric evidence:
reliability and validity
Recommended use
STARxSelf-Management and Transition to Adulthood with Rx
TreatmentSelf-management and transition readiness
assessment: development, reliability, and factor structure of the STARx
questionnaire [89].
Eighteen-item self-report survey for adolescents/young
adult (AYA) and parent report of three areas of transition readiness,
disease knowledge, communication with medical provider, and
self-management.
Both paper and web-based administration versions
available.
Response pattern: 1–5 with “never” to “always” for
behaviors; “nothing” to “a lot” for knowledge and “very hard” to “very
easy” for self-management.
The instrument was developed in three phases including
interviews of 29 AYA with a variety of chronic health conditions studies
with strong input from AYA.
Initial psychometric assessment using sample of 194 AYA
for reliability and factor structure after extensive item generation and
pilot studies. Samples from 8 sites were for concurrent
( 267) and predictive validity
( 847).
Reliability
Internal reliability of total scale was strong (Cronbach
alpha 0.80). Subscale reliabilities were moderate
( 0.44 to 0.77 with half below 0.70),
Stability ( 26) was supported by ANOVCA analysis
finding of no significant difference in two administrations of STARx.
Validity
Exploratory analysis yielded 6 factors:
4 factors had 3 items.
1 factor had 4 items (medication).
1 factor had 2 items (resources).
Factor loadings were 0.31 to 0.88.
Concurrent validity supported by strong relationships to
other transition measures (e.g. TRAQ 0.78). Relationship of subscales of STARx
to medication use, number of hospitalizations and length of
hospitalizations support STARx predictive validity.
Strong support for a brief measure of overall transition
readiness.
Recommended for self-report of AYA perceptions of
knowledge, communication and select self-management behaviors in the last
three months.
Heavy emphasis on medication management.
Legend: Table 3 used with permission and
obtained from Guidelines for the Care of People with Spina Bifida 2018:
(https://www.spinabifidaassociation.org/guidelines/). Additional
resource: The SBA “Beyond Crayons” resources are useful in developing the knowledge,
self-efficacy, attitudes and skills necessary for self-management. They can be found
here: https://www.
spinabifidaassociation.org/resource/beyond-crayons-resource-packet/.
consultant are presently limited in scope and availability. It is also important
to determine if routine clinical assessments of self-management behaviors that result in the
development of action plans tailored toward the adolescent and their family yield improved
outcomes. It is unclear if these types of interventions enhancing self-management and
independence can be delivered in the clinical setting or if alternative structures need to
be developed, such as implementation within school settings. Further, the optimal structures
for coordinated, comprehensive transition to adult care have yet to be determined. As
longevity in SB increases, understanding the self-management and independence needs in
young, middle-age, and older adults with SB as they age becomes imperative. Finally, the
role of the health care provider and the larger health care system in optimizing
self-management and independence outcomes needs to be explored.
Addressing these gaps should provide a map for future care-providers to
effectively help families prepare children with SB to become independent. In the meantime,
it is hoped that these guidelines will steer care-givers to have developmentally appropriate
expectations for the development of self-management skills. Since the publication of the
guidelines, there has been emerging evidence which, in the view of the authors, is currently
shaping the dialogue relevant to these guidelines [52, 53, 54]. These findings will need to be integrated into ongoing
care.
Two additional publications build on Self- Management and Independence Work
Group’s work. Both reflect the importance of assessment in order to meet the person with SB
at the appropriate readiness level for change in this area [55, 56].
Footnotes
Acknowledgments
This edition of the Journal of Pediatric Rehabilitation Medicine includes
manuscripts based on the most recent “Guidelines For the Care of People with Spina Bifida,”
developed by the Spina Bifida Association. Thank you to the Spina Bifida Association for
allowing the guidelines to be published in this forum and making them Open Access.
The Spina Bifida Association has already embarked on a systematic process for
reviewing and updating the guidelines. Future guidelines updates will be made available as
they are completed.
Executive Committee
Timothy J. Brei, MD, Spina Bifida Association Medical Director;
Developmental Pediatrician, Professor, Seattle Children’s Hospital
Sara Struwe, MPA, Spina Bifida Association President & Chief
Executive Officer
Patricia Beierwaltes, DNP, CPNP, Guideline Steering Committee
Co-Chair; Associate Professor, Nursing, Minnesota State University, Mankato
Brad E. Dicianno, MD, Guideline Steering Committee Co-Chair; Associate
Medical Director and Chair of Spina Bifida Association’s Professional Advisory
Council; Associate Professor, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation,
University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine
Nienke Dosa MD, MPH, Guideline Steering Committee Co-Chair; Upstate
Foundation Professor of Child Health Policy; SUNY Upstate Medical University
Lisa Raman, RN, MScANP, MEd, former Spina Bifida Association Director,
Patient and Clinical Services
Jerome B. Chelliah, MD, MPH, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public
Health
Julie Bolen, PhD, MPH, Lead Health Scientist, Rare Disorders Health
Outcomes Team, National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities,
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Adrienne Herron, PhD Behavioral Scientist, Intervention Research Team,
National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention, Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention
Judy Thibadeau, RN, MN, Spina Bifida Association Director, Research
and Services; former Health Scientist, National Spina Bifida Program, National Center
on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention
Funding
The development of these Guidelines was supported in part by Cooperative
Agreement UO1DD001077, funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Its
contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the
official view of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention or the Department of Health
and Human Services.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
References
1.
DavisBE, ShurtleffDB, WalkerWO, SeidelKD, DuguayS.
Acquisition of autonomy skills in adolescents with
myelomeningocele. Dev Med Child Neurol.
2006; 48(4):
253–8. doi: 10.1017/s0012162206000569.
LoganLR, SawinK,
BellinM, BreiT,
WoodwardJ. Self
Management and Independence Guidelines. In: AssociationSB, ed.
Guidelines for the Care of People with Spina Bifida. 2018. pp.
78–94.
4.
SawinKJ, BellinMH, RouxG,
BuranCF, BreiTJ.
The experience of self-management in adolescent women with spina
bifida. Rehabil Nurs. 2009;
34(1): 26–38. doi: 10.1002/j.2048-7940.2009.tb00245.x.
5.
SchillingLS, GreyM,
KnaflKA. A
review of measures of self-management of type 1 diabetes by youth and their
parents. The Diabetes Educator. 2002;
28(5): 796–808. doi:
10.1177/014572170202800520.
6.
ModiAC, PaiAL,
HommelKA, HoodKK,
CortinaS, HilliardME, et al.
Pediatric self-management: a framework for research, practice, and
policy. Pediatrics. 2012;
129(2): e473–e85. doi:
10.1542/peds.2011-1635.
7.
DiciannoBE, WilsonR.
Hospitalizations of adults with spina bifida and congenital spinal cord
anomalies. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2010;
91(4): 529–35. doi:
10.1016/j.apmr.2009.11.023.
8.
KhanF, AmatyaB, NgL,
GaleaM.
Rehabilitation outcomes in persons with spina bifida: a randomised
controlled trial. J Rehabil Med. 2015;
47(8): 734–40. doi:
10.2340/16501977-1999.
9.
PetersonPM, RauenKK, BrownJ,
ColeJ. Spina
bifida: the transition into adulthood begins in infancy. Rehabil
Nurs. 1994; 19(4):
229–38. doi: 10.1002/j.2048-7940.1994.tb00811.x.
10.
HolbeinCE, LennonJM, KolbuckVD, ZebrackiK, RoacheCR, HolmbeckGN.
Observed differences in social behaviors exhibited in peer interactions
between youth with spina bifida and their peers: neuropsychological
correlates. J Pediatr Psychol. 2015;
40(3): 320–35. doi:
10.1093/jpepsy/jsu101.
11.
HolbeinCE, MurrayCB, PsihogiosAM, WassermanRM, EssnerBS, O’HaraLK, et al.
A camp-based psychosocialiIntervention to promote independence and social
function in individuals with spina bifida: moderators of treatment
effectiveness. J Pediatr Psychol. 2013;
38(4): 412–24. doi:
10.1093/jpepsy/jst003.
12.
HeffelfingerAK,
KoopJI, FastenauPS, BreiTJ,
ConantL, KatzensteinJ, et al.
The relationship of neuropsychological functioning to adaptation outcome
in adolescents with spina bifida. J Int Neuropsychol
Soc. 2008; 14(5):
793–804. doi: 10.1017/s1355617708081022.
13.
JacobsonLA, TaraziRA, McCurdyMD, SchultzS, LeveyE,
MahoneEM, et al.
The kennedy krieger independence scales-spina bifida version: a measure
of executive components of self-management. Rehabil
Psychol. 2013; 58(1):
98–105. doi: 10.1037/a0031555.
14.
BarfHA, PostMW,
VerhoefM, GooskensRH, PrevoAJ. Is
cognitive functioning associated with subjective quality of life in young adults with
spina bifida and hydrocephalus? J Rehabil Med.
2010; 42(1):
56–9. doi: 10.2340/16501977-0481.
15.
PsihogiosAM, MurrayC, ZebrackiK, AcevedoL, HolmbeckGN.
Testing the utility of a bio-neuropsychosocial model for predicting
medical adherence and responsibility during early adolescence in youth with spina
bifida. J Pediatr Psychol. 2017;
42(9): 910–21. doi:
10.1093/jpepsy/jsw092.
16.
SawinKJ, BuranCF, BreiTJ,
FastenauPS.
Correlates of functional status, self-management, and developmental
competence outcomes in adolescents with spina bifida. SCI
Nurs. 2003; 20(2):
72–85.
17.
Peny-DahlstrandM,
AhlanderAC, Krumlinde-SundholmL,
Gosman-HedstromG.
Quality of performance of everyday activities in children with spina
bifida: a population-based study. Acta Paediatr.
2009; 98(10):
1674–9. doi: 10.1111/j.1651-2227.2009.01410.x.
18.
BuranCF, SawinKJ, BreiTJ,
FastenauPS.
Adolescents with myelomeningocele: activities, beliefs, expectations, and
perceptions. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2004;
46(4): 244–52. doi:
10.1111/j.1469-8749.2004.tb00479.x.
19.
DiciannoBE, BellinMH, ZabelAT. Spina
bifida and mobility in the transition years. Am J Phys Med
Rehabil. 2009; 88(12):
1002–6. doi: 10.1097/PHM.0b013e3181c1ede3.
20.
van
StaaAL, JedelooS, van
MeeterenJ, LatourJM.
Crossing the transition chasm: experiences and recommendations for
improving transitional care of young adults, parents and providers.
Child Care Health Dev. 2011;
37(6): 821–32. doi:
10.1111/j.1365-2214.2011.01261.x.
21.
PsihogiosAM, HolmbeckGN.
Discrepancies in mother and child perceptions of spina bifida medical
responsibilities during the transition to adolescence: associations with family conflict
and medical adherence. J Pediatr Psychol.
2013; 38(8):
859–70. doi: 10.1093/jpepsy/jst047.
22.
GreenleyRN.
Health professional expectations for self-care skill development in youth
with spina bifida. Pediatr Nurs. 2010;
36(2): 98–102.
23.
PsihogiosAM, KolbuckV, HolmbeckGN.
Condition self-management in pediatric spina bifida: a longitudinal
investigation of medical adherence, responsibility-sharing, and independence
skills. J Pediatr Psychol. 2015;
40(8): 790–803. doi:
10.1093/jpepsy/jsv044.
24.
WagnerR, LinrothR, GanglC,
MitchellN, HallM,
CadyR, et al.
Perception of secondary conditions in adults with spina bifida and impact
on daily life. Disabil Health J. 2015;
8(4): 492–8. doi: 10.1016/j.dhjo.2015.03.012.
25.
SoeMM, SwansonME, BolenJC, ThibadeauJK, JohnsonN.
Health risk behaviors among young adults with spina
bifida. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2012;
54(11): 1057–64. doi:
10.1111/j.1469-8749.2012.04402.x.
26.
MahmoodD, DiciannoB, BellinM.
Self-management, preventable conditions and assessment of care among
young adults with myelomeningocele. Child Care Health
Dev. 2011; 37(6):
861–5. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2214.2011.01299.x.
27.
BellinMH, DiciannoBE, LeveyE,
DosaN, RouxG,
MarbenK, et al.
Interrelationships of sex, level of lesion, and transition outcomes among
young adults with myelomeningocele. Dev Med Child
Neurol. 2011; 53(7):
647–52. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8749.2011.03938.x.
28.
Dineen-GriffinS,
Garcia-CardenasV,
WilliamsK, BenrimojSI.
Helping patients help themselves: a systematic review of self-management
support strategies in primary health care practice. PLoS
One. 2019; 14(8). doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0220116.
29.
JovicicA, Holroyd-LeducJM,
StrausSE.
Effects of self-management intervention on health outcomes of patients
with heart failure: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.
BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2006;
6(1): 43. doi: 10.1186/1471-2261-6-43.
30.
BrittoAS, Jr, SabourinR, OliveiraLE.
Dynamic selection of classifiers – a comprehensive
review. Pattern Recognition. 2014;
47(11): 3665–80. doi:
10.1016/j.patcog.2014.05.003.
31.
HarrisK, KnealeD, LassersonTJ, McDonaldVM, GriggJ,
ThomasJ. School-based
self-management interventions for asthma in children and adolescents: a mixed methods
systematic review. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2019(1). doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011651.pub2.
32.
BellinMH, DosaN,
ZabelTA, AparicioE, DiciannoBE, OsteenP.
Self-management, satisfaction with family functioning, and the course of
psychological symptoms in emerging adults with spina bifida. J
Pediatr Psychol. 2013; 38(1):
50–62. doi: 10.1093/jpepsy/jss095.
33.
DerocheCB, HollandMM, McDermottS, RoyerJA, HardinJW, MannJR,
et al. Development of a tool to describe overall health, social
independence and activity limitation of adolescents and young adults with
disability. Res Dev Disabil. 2015;
38: 288–300. doi: 10.1016/j.ridd.2014.12.009.
34.
LindsayS, KingsnorthS, McDougallC, KeatingH. A
systematic review of self-management interventions for children and youth with physical
disabilities. Disabil Rehabil. 2014;
36(4): 276–88. doi:
10.3109/09638288.2013.785605.
35.
BetzCL, SmithK,
MaciasK.
Testing the transition preparation training program: a randomized
controlled trial. Int J Child Adolesc Health.
2010; 3(4):
595–607.
36.
GreenleyR, HolmbeckG, ZukermanJ, BuckC.
Psychosocial adjustment and family relationships in children and adolescents with spina
bifida. In: WyszynskiDF, (Ed). Neural
tube defects: from origin to treatment New York: Oxford University Press.
2006. pp. 307–24.
37.
O’MaharK, HolmbeckGN, JandasekB, ZukermanJ. A
camp-based intervention targeting independence among individuals with spina
bifida. J Pediatr Psychol. 2010;
35(8): 848–56. doi:
10.1093/jpepsy/jsp125.
38.
DiciannoBE, GainesA, CollinsDM, LeeS.
Mobility, assistive technology use, and social integration among adults
with spina bifida. Am J Phys Med Rehabil.
2009; 88(7):
533–41. doi: 10.1097/PHM.0b013e3181aa41d4.
39.
DiciannoBE, FairmanAD, McCueM,
ParmantoB, YihE,
McCoyA, et al.
Feasibility of using mobile health to promote self-management in spina
bifida. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2016;
95(6): 425–37. doi:
10.1097/phm.0000000000000400.
40.
FairmanAD, YihET,
McCoyDF, LoprestiEF, McCueMP, ParmantoB, et al.
Iterative design and usability testing of the Imhere system for managing
chronic conditions and disability. Int J Telerehabil.
2016; 8(1):
11–20. doi: 10.5195/ijt.2016.6194.
41.
ParmantoB, PramanaG, YuDX,
FairmanAD, DiciannoBE, McCueMP.
iMHere: a novel mHealth system for supporting self-care in management of
complex and chronic conditions. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth.
2013; 1(2): e10. doi:
10.2196/mhealth.2391.
42.
YuDX, ParmantoB, DiciannoBE, PramanaG.
Accessibility of mHealth self-care apps for individuals with spina
bifida. Perspect Health Inf Manag. 2015;
12: 1h.
43.
DiciannoBE, BeierwaltesP, DosaN,
RamanL, ChelliahJ, StruweS, et al.
Scientific methodology of the development of the guidelines for the care
of people with spina bifida: an initiative of the spina bifida
association. Disabil Health J. 2020;
13(2): 100816. doi: 10.1016/j.dhjo.2019.06.005.
44.
BealSJ, RiddleIK, KichlerJC, DuncanA, HouchenA, CasnellieL, et al.
The associations of chronic condition type and individual characteristics
with transition readiness. Acad Pediatr.
2016; 16(7):
660–7. doi: 10.1016/j.acap.2016.06.007.
45.
BakanieneI, PrasauskieneA, Vaiciene-MagistrisN.
Health-related quality of life in children with myelomeningocele: a
systematic review of the literature. Child Care Health
Dev. 2016; 42(5):
625–43. doi: 10.1111/cch.12367.
46.
SawinKJ, HeffelfingerA, CashinSE, BreiTJ.
The development of the adolescent/young adult self-management and
independence scale II: psychometric data. J Pediatr Rehabil
Med. 2018; 11(4):
311–22. doi: 10.3233/PRM-170479.
47.
StrömforsL, WilhelmssonS, FalkL,
HöstGE.
Experiences among children and adolescents of living with spina bifida
and their visions of the future. Disabil Rehabil.
2017; 39(3):
261–71. doi: 10.3109/09638288.2016.1146355.
48.
GoodwinB.
The power of parental expectations. Educational
Leadership. 2017; 75(1):
80–1.
49.
FanX, ChenM.
Parental involvement and students’ academic achievement: a
meta-analysis. Educ Psychol Rev. 2001;
13(1): 1–22. doi: 10.1023/A:1009048817385.
50.
RauenKK, SawinKJ, BarteltT, WaringWP, OrrM,
O’ConnorRC.
Transitioning adolescents and young adults with a chronic health
condition to adult healthcare – an exemplar program. Rehabil
Nurs. 2013; 38(2):
63–72. doi: 10.1002/rnj.74.
51.
LundbergS, RomichJL, TsangKP.
Decision-making by children. Review of Economics
of the Household. 2009; 7(1):
1–30. doi: 10.1007/s11150-008-9045-2.
52.
FaleirosF, WarschauskyS, KapplerC, SchuttW, CintraMM, RabehSAN, et al.
Bladder self-management in the transition to adulthood with spina bifida
in 3 countries: a comparative study. J Wound Ostomy Continence
Nurs. 2019; 46(4):
321–6. doi: 10.1097/won.0000000000000545.
53.
YunHJ, ChoiEK,
HanSW. Parents’ Perception
of Self-Management Behaviors for Their Children With Spina Bifida in South Korea: A
Qualitative Study. Rehabilitation Nursing: the Official Journal of the Association of
Rehabilitation Nurses. 2020. doi: 10.1097/rnj.0000000000000261.
54.
JohnsonK, RocqueB, HopsonB, BarnesK, OmoikeOE, WoodD.
The reliability and validity of a newly developed spina bifida-specific transition
readiness assessment questionnaire: Transition readiness assessment
questionnaire-supplement (TRAQ-SB). J Pediatr Rehabil Med. 2019 (Preprint):
1–8. doi: 10.3233/PRM-180599.
55.
SawinK, MargolisR, MacFarlaneJ, BookmanM, LoganL,
WoodwardJ, et al.
Analysis of Self-Management and Transition Readiness Instruments for Clinic Practice. In:
BetzCL, CoyneIT, (Eds). Transition
from pediatric to adult healthcare services for adolescents and young adults with
long-term conditions: An Internation Perspective on Nurses Roles and Interventions. NY,
NY: Springer nature Publishing. pp. 71–109. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-23384-6.
56.
SawinK, MargolisR, RidoshM, BellinM, WoodwardJ, BreiT,
et al. Self-Management and Spina Bifida: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Disabil
Health J. 2020. doi: 10.1016/j.dhjo.2020.100940 in press.
57.
ChurchP, BerndlA, BreiT,
CastilloJ, HeuerG,
HowellL, et al. Prenatal
Counseling Guidelines. In: AssociationSB, ed.
Guidelines for the Care of People with Spina Bifida. 2018.
pp. 28–32.
58.
HolmbeckG, RobinA.
Family Functioning Guidelines. In: AssociationSB, ed.
Guidelines for the Care of People with Spina Bifida. 2018. pp.
41–9.
59.
Spina Bifida Association. Appendix: Early
Intervention Services, Individualized Educational Plans (IEP) and 504 Plans. In:
AssociationSB, ed.
2018. pp. 243–4.
60.
HaleySM, CosterWJ, DumasHM, Fragala-pinkhamMA,
KramerJ, NiP, et
al. Accuracy and precision of the pediatric evaluation of disability
inventory computer-adaptive tests (PEDI-CAT). Dev Med Child
Neurol. 2011; 53(12):
1100–6. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8749.2011.04107.x.
61.
HaleySM, AndrellosPJ, CosterW, HaltiwagnerJT, LudlowLH. Pediatric
evaluation of disability inventory: New England Medical Center Hospitals;
1992.
62.
HolmbeckG, GreeneT, SmithK.
Mental Health Guidelines. In: AssociationSB, ed.
Guidelines for the Care of People with Spina Bifida. 2018. pp.
50–9.
63.
Turek
QuellJ, BarnesM, CastilloH, CastilloJ, FletcherJ. Neuropsychology
Guidelines. In: AssociationSB, ed.
Guidelines for the Care of People with Spina Bifida. 2018. pp.
95–106.
64.
YunHJ, KimHS.
Self-management behaviors of children with spina bifida.
J Neurosci Nurs. 2017;
49(1): 15–21. doi: 10.1097/jnn.0000000000000223.
65.
VerhoefM, BarfHA,
PostMWM, van
AsbeckFWA, GooskensRHJM, PrevoAJH.
Functional independence among young adults with spina bifida, in relation
to hydrocephalus and level of lesion. Dev Med Child
Neurol. 2006; 48(2):
114–9. doi: 10.1017/S0012162206000259.
66.
BeierwaltesP,
AmbartsumyanL,
BailleS, ChurchP, DickerJ, GordonT, et al. Bowel
Guidelines. In: AssociationSB, ed.
Guidelines for the Care of People with Spina Bifida. 2018.
pp. 186–91.
67.
VachhaB, AdamsR.
Implications of family environment and language development: comparing
typically developing children to those with spina bifida. Child
Care Health Dev. 2009; 35(5):
709–16. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2214.2009.00966.x.
68.
SawinKJ, BellinMH, RouxG,
BuranC, BreiTJ,
FastenauPS.
The experience of parenting an adolescent with spina
bifida. Rehabil Nurs. 2003;
28(6): 173–85. doi:
10.1002/j.2048-7940.2003.tb02057.x.
69.
WoodDL, SawickiGS, MillerMD, SmothermanC, Lukens-BullK, LivingoodWC, et al.
The transition readiness assessment questionnaire (TRAQ): its factor
structure, reliability, and validity. Acad Pediatr.
2014; 14(4):
415–22. doi: 10.1016/j.acap.2014.03.008.
70.
BeierwaltesP,
MunozS, WilhelmyJ. Integument
(Skin) Guidelines. In: AssociationSB, ed.
Guidelines for the Care of People with Spina Bifida. 2018. pp.
201–5.
71.
JosephD, BailleS, BaumM,
FrimbergerD, KhavariR, MisseriR, et al. Urology
Guidelines. In: AssociationSB, ed.
Guidelines for the Care of People with Spina Bifida. 2018. pp.
162–75.
72.
CampbellF, BiggsK,
AldissSK, O’NeillPM, ClowesM, McDonaghJ, et al.
Transition of care for adolescents from paediatric services to adult
health services. Cochrane Database Syst Rev.
2016; 4: Cd009794. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009794.pub2.
73.
GrimsbyG, BurgessR, CulverS, SchlomerB, JacobsM.
Barriers to transition in young adults with neurogenic
bladder. J Pediatr Urol. 2016;
12(4): 258. e1-. e5. doi: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2016.04.015.
74.
FremionE, KaufmanM, LaneJ,
LeiboldS, ModrcinA, MukherjeeS, et al.
Transition Guidelines. In: AssociationSB, ed.
Guidelines for the Care of People with Spina Bifida. 2018. pp.
33–40.
75.
BellinMH, DiciannoBE, OsteenP, DosaN,
AparicioE, BraunP,
et al. Family satisfaction, pain, and quality-of-life in emerging adults
with spina bifida. Am J Phys Med Rehabil.
2013; 92(8):
641–55. doi: 10.1097/PHM.0b013e31829b4bc1.
76.
AdamsR, KellyK,
LockwoodS, NetworkAA, McKeeS,
WalkerC. Latex and Latex
Allergy Guidelines. In: AssociationSB, ed.
Guidelines for the Care of People with Spina Bifida. 2018. pp.
206–14.
77.
WoodH, FrimbergerD, WienerJ. Men’s Health
Guidelines. In: AssociationSB, ed.
Guidelines for the Care of People with Spina Bifida. 2018. pp.
148–54.
78.
HoutrowA, RolandM. Sexual Health &
Education Guidelines. In: AssociationSB, ed.
Guidelines for the Care of People with Spina Bifida. 2018. pp.
155–61.
79.
BerndlA, NosekM,
WaddingtonA. Women’s
Health Guidelines. In: AssociationSB, ed.
Guidelines for the Care of People with Spina Bifida. 2018. pp.
176–84.
80.
LotsteinDS, InkelasM, HaysRD,
HalfonN, BrookR.
Access to care for youth with special health care needs in the transition
to adulthood. J Adolesc Health. 2008;
43(1): 23–9. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2007.12.013.
81.
FairmanAD, DiciannoBE, DattN,
GarverA, ParmantoB, McCueM.
Outcomes of clinicians, caregivers, family members and adults with spina
bifida regarding receptivity to use of the iMHere mHealth solution to promote
wellness. Int J Telerehabil. 2013;
5(1): 3–16. doi: 10.5195/ijt.2013.6116.
82.
FairmanAD. Developing
self-management skills in persons with spina bifida through mHealth applications: design
and clinical efficacy: University of Pittsburgh; 2013.
83.
GreenleyRN, HolmbeckGN, RoseBM.
Predictors of parenting behavior trajectories among families of young
adolescents with and without spina bifida. J Pediatr
Psychol. 2006; 31(10):
1057–71. doi: 10.1093/jpepsy/jsj011.
84.
Spina Bifida Association. Guidelines for the care
of people with spina bifida Washington, DC: Spina Bifida Association; 2018.
WilliamsT, ShermanE, DunseithC, MahJ,
BlackmanM, LatterJ.
Measurement of medical self-management and transition readiness among
Canadian adolescents with special health care needs. Int J Child
Adolesc Health. 2011; 3(4):
527–35.
87.
FerrisME, HarwardDH, BickfordK, LaytonJB, FerrisMT, HoganSL, et al.
A clinical tool to measure the components of health-care transition from
pediatric care to adult care: the UNC TR(x)ANSITION scale. Ren
Fail. 2012; 34(6):
744–53. doi: 10.3109/0886022x.2012.678171.
88.
SchoenmakersMA,
UiterwaalCS, GulmansVA, GooskensRH, HeldersPJ.
Determinants of functional independence and quality of life in children
with spina bifida. Clin Rehabil. 2005;
19(6): 677–85. doi:
10.1191/0269215505cr865oa.
89.
FerrisM, CohenS,
HabermanC, JavalkarK, MassengillS, MahanJD, et al.
Self-management and transition readiness assessment: development,
reliability, and factor structure of the STARx questionnaire. J
Pediatr Nurs. 2015; 30(5):
691–9. doi: 10.1016/j.pedn.2015.05.009.
90.
CohenSE, HooperSR, JavalkarK, HabermanC, FentonN, LaiH,
et al. Self-management and transition readiness assessment: concurrent,
predictive and discriminant validation of the STARx questionnaire.
J Pediatr Nurs. 2015;
30(5): 668–76. doi: 10.1016/j.pedn.2015.05.006.