3.8 Review

Families Affected by Huntington's Disease Report Difficulties in Communication, Emotional Involvement, and Problem Solving

期刊

JOURNAL OF HUNTINGTONS DISEASE
卷 6, 期 3, 页码 169-177

出版社

IOS PRESS
DOI: 10.3233/JHD-170250

关键词

Affective involvement; communication; family; family functioning; Huntington's disease; problem solving

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Family functioning in Huntington's disease (HD) is known from previous studies to be adversely affected. However, which aspects of family functioning are disrupted is unknown, limiting the empirical basis around which to create supportive interventions. Objective: The aim of the current study was to assess family functioning in HD families. Methods: We assessed family functioning in 61 participants (38 HD gene-expanded participants and 23 family members) using the McMaster Family Assessment Device (FAD; Epstein, Baldwin and Bishop, 1983), which provides scores for seven domains of functioning: Problem Solving; Communication; Affective Involvement; Affective Responsiveness; Behavior Control; Roles; and General Family Functioning. Results: The most commonly reported disrupted domain for HD participants was Affective Involvement, which was reported by 39.5% of HD participants, followed closely by General Family Functioning (36.8%). For family members, the most commonly reported dysfunctional domains were Affective Involvement and Communication (both 52.2%). Furthermore, symptomatic HD participants reported more disruption to Problem Solving than pre-symptomatic HD participants. In terms of agreement between pre-symptomatic and symptomatic HD participants and their family members, all domains showed moderate to very good agreement. However, on average, family members rated Communication as more disrupted than their HD affected family member. Conclusion: These findings highlight the need to target areas of emotional engagement, communication skills and problem solving in family interventions in HD.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据