PubMed · 10542757
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
F DeCesare. 1998-07-27. First days.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10542757/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Sibling illness may contribute to an increased risk of adjustment problems in healthy siblings. Previous studies have reported a variety of effects on healthy individuals who have an ill sibling, but the psychosocial effects of treatable inherited disease on healthy siblings have not yet been investigated. We report the results of a survey study conducted in families with both unaffected and affected children with classic phenylketonuria (PKU), an inherited inborn error of metabolism. The survey included a knowledge test about PKU, and four previously validated instruments designed to assess psychosocial adjustment of unaffected siblings compared to age and sex matched norms. The responses revealed that unaffected adolescent and adult siblings had gaps in their knowledge about the genetic basis of PKU, and had evidence for the presence of adverse psychosocial sequelae. These findings suggest a role for genetic services providers, including genetic counselors, in assisting all members of a family adjust, when the diagnosis of an inborn error of metabolism has been made.
Since predictive testing has been available for Huntington disease (HD) and similar adult-onset neurodegenerative disorders, research into the psychosocial impact of test results has focussed on those receiving results, and to a lesser extent, on their partners. Few studies have examined the impact of predictive testing on the couple relationship, particularly from the perspective of family systems theory. This longitudinal study compared the level of marital adjustment of 23 couples in which the at-risk partner is undergoing predictive testing for HD (the testing group) with that of 20 couples in which the at-risk partner is not undergoing testing (the non-testing group). Participating couples completed a relationship measure, the Dyadic Adjustment Scale, at baseline and on two subsequent occasions. Using non-parametric tests, comparisons were made at each phase between the couple scores of the testing and non-testing groups but no significant differences were found in the levels of marital adjustment. Within the testing group the same comparisons were made for the carrier and non-carrier subgroups, and a significant difference was found at the final phase. There was an increase in the level of marital adjustment for the carrier group and a decrease for the non-carrier group. Together with trends observed in the data, this finding suggests a need for greater attention to be given to the potential impact of predictive testing on the couple relationship. Offering couples pre-result relationship assessment and referral for couple therapy, if warranted, may enhance the quality of professional support during the predictive testing process.
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Studies on laboratory animals have provided conflicting results regarding the actions of stressors on the rewarding effects of alcohol. In the present study, we first examined the effects of footshock or social defeat, given during deprivation, on the alcohol deprivation effect (ADE). We then tested the effects of stressors on place conditioning to alcohol, another technique used to measure drug reward. METHODS: Male Wistar rats were trained to drink 10% alcohol in a 24 h access, free-choice design and received intermittent footshock or defeat 5 times during a 2-week alcohol deprivation period, followed by 2 weeks of free access to alcohol. There were three such cycles. In the place conditioning studies, animals received footshock, defeat, or no stress immediately prior to conditioning sessions where they received alcohol (0.6 or 1.0 g/kg, i.p.) or vehicle injections. RESULTS: Alcohol intake of footshock-treated animals was significantly higher than that of controls following the first and second, but not the third period of alcohol deprivation and stress exposure. Defeat caused a smaller increase in alcohol intake that was significant only after the first deprivation and stress cycle. In the place conditioning studies, we found that either stressor blocked the place aversion induced by 1.0 g/kg alcohol. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate that stressors can modify the rewarding and aversive properties of alcohol, measured using two different paradigms. Footshock and defeat produced transient, but significant increases in the magnitude of ADE, while exposure to either stressor reduced the aversive effects of a high dose of alcohol measured using the place conditioning paradigm.