The goal of this study is to assess the Cellie Coping Kit for Injury intervention feasibility and initial efficacy.~Aim 1: Intervention Feasibility Assess intervention feasibility (implementation, cost, fidelity).~Aim 2: Intervention Efficacy (Mechanisms of Action and Health Outcomes): Conduct initial efficacy evaluation of the Cellie Intervention on mechanisms of action (adherence and coping behaviors) and health outcomes (physical recovery, HRQOL, emotional health).~Hypotheses: At 6-week follow-up (T2), compared to a Treatment as Usual (TAU) control group, parents in the intervention group will report greater adherence to medical discharge instructions (H2.1) and encourage their child to use a higher number of adaptive coping strategies (cognitive, active, support seeking; H2.2); children in the intervention group will generate a greater number of adaptive coping strategies (H2.3).~Hypotheses: At a 12-week follow-up (T3), compared to TAU, children in the intervention group will report better HRQOL and emotional health (H2.4); parents in the intervention group will report better child HRQOL and child emotional health (H2.5). Objective injury recovery scores will be higher for the intervention group (H2.6).~Method: 80 children with injury and one parent per child will participate in a pilot RCT with a wait-list control design. Participants will complete baseline assessments of targeted study variables prior to randomization (40 to the intervention; 40 to usual care) and then repeat measures 6 (T2), 12 (T3), and 18 weeks (T4) later. Those in the immediate intervention condition will initiate the intervention following the T1 assessment. Those in the wait-list condition will initiate the intervention following the T3 assessment.
The purpose of this study is to assess the feasibility (fidelity, acceptability, implementation, cost) of the Cellie Coping Kit for Children with Injury as well as to determine the intervention's efficacy (mechanisms of action and health outcomes).