Select Page

Table 6 Mentorship for Independence and Social Integration Post ABI

Author Year Country Study Design Sample Size Methods Outcome
Hanks et al. (2012) USA RCT PEDro=5 N=158   Population: TBI=96, Caregivers=62; Gender: Male=120, Female=38. TBI Mentored Group: Mean Age=38.46yr; Mean GCS=9.39. TBI Control Group: Mean Age=40.90yr; Mean GCS=9.8. Caregiver Mentored Group: Mean Age=51.87 yr. Caregiver Control Group: Mean Age=50.18 yr. Intervention: Participants and caregivers were randomly assigned to either a peer mentoring program or to a control group. Outcome Measures: Community Integration Measure (CIM), Family Assessment Device (FAD), Coping Inventory for Stressful Situations (CISS), 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12). 1.        The TBI mentored group exhibited better behavioural control and less chaos in the living environment (FAD), good physical quality of life (SF-12), less emotion-focused coping (CISS; all p=0.04), less avoidance coping (CISS; p=0.03) and lower alcohol usage (p=0.01) compared to the control group. 2.        The TBI mentored group did not show an improvement in task-oriented coping (CISS; p=0.61). 3.        The TBI mentored group and control group were not significantly different in terms of community integration following treatment (CIM, p=0.35); however the caregiver mentored group exhibited significantly less community integration than their non-mentored counterparts (CIM, p=0.03).
Struchen et al. (2011) USA RCT PEDro=5 N=28 Population: TBI; Mean Age=31.7yr; Gender: Male=24, Female=6; Mean Time Post Injury=3.5mo; Mean GCS=6.3. Intervention: Participants were randomly assigned to either receive a social peer mentor (treatment group) or be waitlisted (control group). Outcome Measures: Craig Handicap Evaluation and Reporting Technique-Short Form, Social Activity Interview, Centre for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D), 6-Item Interpersonal Support Evaluation List, Weekly Social Activity Survey, UCLA Loneliness Scale-Version 3, Peer Partner Satisfaction Survey, Mentor Satisfaction Survey. 1.        No significant differences were found between groups on social integration, social network size, or social activity level measures following intervention. 2.        Following intervention, the treatment group reported higher perceived levels of social support than the control group (p<0.05), who showed a decline. 3.        Following intervention, CES-D scores were higher for the treatment group than for the control group (p<0.01). 4.        84% of participants enjoyed spending time with their mentor but only 67% felt the mentor assisted them with decreasing loneliness and increasing social activities.
Hibbard et al. (2002) USA Post-Test N=20 Population: TBI=11, Caregivers=9; Age Range=19-45yr; Gender: Male=6, Female=14. Intervention: Participants and caregivers received peer support from a TBI Mentoring Partnership Program. Outcome Measures: Delighted-Terrible Scale, Questionnaire adapted from the Resources and Stress-Short Form, Frequency of Family Coping Behaviors, Social Support Questionnaire Short Form and the Empowerment Scale. 1.        Participants reported that the program had some or major impact on their ability to cope (82%), feelings of control (54%), and overall quality of life (63%); 82% reported that the program had no impact on social support (friends, family, or community). 2.        Family members reported that the program had some impact on their ability to cope (100%) and quality of life (56%) but limited impact on social support.