Management of nut allergy influences quality of life and anxiety in children and their mothers

Nut allergy is known to impact on the quality of life (QoL) and anxiety of both the allergic child and their parents, but little is known about how the management of food allergy is associated with these variables. To investigate the impact of nut allergy on QoL and anxiety in mothers and children with nut allergy in order to identify management strategies that may influence these factors. Forty-one nut allergic children (age 6–16 yrs) and their mothers completed questionnaires to assess maternal and children’s QoL (PedsQL™, WHOQOL-BREF, FAQL-PB), anxiety (SCAS, STAI) and perceived stress scale (PSS). Children also completed a nut allergy specific QoL questionnaire. Demographic data, details of previous reactions, test results and management plans were collected using parent-report questionnaires and hospital notes. Children with nut allergy had poorer emotional (p = 0.004), social (p = 0.043), and psychological (p = 0.006) QoL compared to healthy normative data. Maternal and child QoL and anxiety were not influenced by the severity of previous reactions. Mother and child reported lower anxiety (p = 0.043 and p < 0.001 respectively) when the child was prescribed an epinephrine auto-injector. Anxiety was not associated with whether the child carried the auto-injector or whether they strictly avoided traces of nuts in foods. Prescribing auto-injectors is associated with reduced anxiety for food allergic children and their mothers, but is not associated with improved adherence with medical management or reduced risk-taking behavior.

Impact of peanut allergy on quality of life, stress and anxiety in the family

Background: Peanut allergy (PA) is known to impact on quality of life (QoL) of the sufferer, but little research has focused on all family members. We therefore sought to establish the impact of PA on QoL and reported anxiety of children with clinically confirmed PA, their parents and older siblings. Methods: Forty-six families, who had a child with PA, completed QoL (PedsQLTM or WHOQOL-BREF), anxiety (SCAS or STAI) and perceived stress (PSS) scales. PA children completed a PA specific QoL questionnaire (Pediatr Allergy Immunol 2003;14:378). Parents and sibling also completed QoL proxy questionnaires for the PA child (PedsQLTM, Pediatr Allergy Immunol 2003;14:378). Results: Mothers rated their own psychological (P < 0.01) and physical (P < 0.05) QoL significantly worse than fathers rated theirs, and had higher scores than fathers for anxiety (P < 0.05) and stress (P < 0.001). Children with PA had significantly poorer physical health-related QoL (P < 0.05), QoL within school (P < 0.01) and general QoL (P < 0.05) than their siblings did, and greater separation anxiety (P < 0.05). The majority of differences were between girls with PA and female siblings. Mothers felt that there was a greater impact on QoL for their PA child, compared with that reported by siblings, fathers or the PA children themselves (P < 0.01). Conclusions: Mothers report that they have significantly poorer QoL and suffer more anxiety and stress than fathers do; this inter-parental difference may be an important feature of family stress caused by PA. Siblings have a similar view of how QoL affects the PA child as the PA child does, while mothers may possibly overestimate this impact.

Une façon d’indiquer la «non-coïncidence entre les mots et les choses», on va dire…

Nous souhaitons nous pencher ici sur un emploi particulier de la périphrase en aller + infinitif qui n’a fait l’objet – à notre connaissance – que d’un article (Lansari 2010). Cet emploi « modalisant » que Lansari limite à la formule 'on va dire' mériterait d’être approfondi pour plusieurs raisons. D’une part, l’emploi n’est décrit que sur base de « vingt exemples tirés d’internet, de blogs ou de forums » (Lansari 2010: 120) alors que, de l’aveu de Lansari elle-même, l’emploi relève de l’oral. Il serait donc utile d’enrichir – quantitativement et qualitativement - le corpus et d’y intégrer des occurrences d’oral authentique. D’autre part, Lansari restreint l’emploi modalisant à la séquence 'on va dire' ; on pourrait s’interroger sur la capacité de séquences comme 'je vais dire' à remplir les mêmes fonctions discursives. Dans cet article, nous commencerons par un – forcément bref – état de la question. Après avoir présenté le corpus, nous testerons les hypothèses précédemment défendues à la lueur du corpus rassemblé: (a) Le corpus CFPP2000 issu du projet Discours sur la ville. Corpus de Français Parlé Parisien des années 2000 (disponible en ligne à http://cfpp2000.univ-paris3.fr/Corpus.html). CFPP2000 donne la parole à 41 informateurs en 28 interviews (2198 min) et a généré 96 occurrences de on va dire modalisant. (b) Le corpus CLAPI comprenant 45 heures d’interactions interrogeables en ligne à http://clapi.univ-lyon2.fr/analyse_requete_aide.php?menu=outils. On y a relevé 12 exemples de on va dire modalisant. (c) Un corpus personnel d’interviews (163min) réalisées pendant l’année académique 2009-10 auprès de cinq étudiants Erasmus français grâce au soutien d’une bourse de la Délégation Générale à la Langue Française et aux Langues de France (DGLFLF). Les entretiens avec une assistante de recherche, basés sur les thèmes suivants, étaient supposés générer l’emploi d’une variété de temps verbaux : - Récits de rêve (imparfait) - Récits biographiques (personnage historique vs autobiographie) (PC vs PS) - Narration de film vs d’épisode historique (PC/ PRES vs PS) - Présentation de projets d’avenir vs conjectures (Futur périphrastique ou simple) Le corpus contient dix-sept occurrences de on va dire générés par deux des cinq informateurs : 15 par A. et 2 par J. Notre réflexion se basera donc sur 125 occurrences orales de 'on va dire'.