Telehealth Treatment of Behavior Problems in Young Children With Developmental Delay: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Early behavior problems in children with developmental delay (DD) are prevalent and impairing, but service barriers persist. Controlled studies examining telehealth approaches are limited, particularly for children with DD. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of a telehealth parenting intervention for behavior problems in young children with DD. Design, Setting, and Participants: A randomized clinical trial was conducted from March 17, 2016, to December 15, 2020, in which children with DD and externalizing behavior problems were recruited from early intervention and randomly assigned to a telehealth parenting intervention or control group and evaluated through a 12-month follow-up. Most children were from ethnic or racial minoritized backgrounds. Over one-half of children were in extreme poverty or low income-need ratio categories. Interventions: Internet-delivered parent-child interaction therapy (iPCIT), which leverages videoconferencing to provide live coaching of home-based caregiver-child interactions. Families received 20 weeks of iPCIT (provided in English or in Spanish) or referrals as usual (RAU). Main Outcomes and Measures: Observational and caregiver-report measures of child and caregiver behaviors and caregiving stress were examined at preintervention, midtreatment, and postintervention and at 6- and 12-month follow-ups. Results: The sample included a total of 150 children (mean [SD] age, 36.2 [1.0] months; 111 male children [74%]) and their caregivers with 75 each randomly assigned to iPCIT or RAU groups. Children receiving iPCIT relative to RAU displayed significantly lower levels of externalizing problems (postintervention Cohen d = 0.48; 6-month Cohen d = 0.49; 12-month Cohen d = 0.50) and significantly higher levels of compliance to caregiver direction after treatment. Of those children with data at postintervention, greater clinically significant change was observed at postintervention for children in the iPCIT group (50 [74%]) than for those in the RAU group (30 [42%]), which was maintained at the 6-month but not the 12-month follow-up. iPCIT did not outperform RAU in reducing caregiving stress, but caregivers receiving iPCIT, relative to RAU, showed steeper increases in proportion of observed positive parenting skills (postintervention odds ratio [OR], 1.10; 95% CI, 0.53-2.21; 6-month OR, 1.31; 95% CI, 0.61-2.55; 12-month OR, 1.64; 95% CI, 0.70-3.07) and sharper decreases in proportion of observed controlling/critical behaviors (postintervention OR, 1.40; 95% CI, 0.61-1.52; 6-month OR, 1.72; 95% CI, 0.58-1.46; 12-month OR, 2.23; 95% CI, 0.53-1.37). After treatment, iPCIT caregivers also self-reported steeper decreases in harsh and inconsistent discipline than did than RAU caregivers (postintervention Cohen d = 0.24; 6-month Cohen d = 0.26; 12-month Cohen d = 0.27). Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this randomized clinical trial provide evidence that a telehealth-delivered parenting intervention with real-time therapist coaching led to significant and maintained improvements for young children with DD and their caregivers. Findings underscore the promise of telehealth formats for expanding scope and reach of care for underserved families. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03260816.

Measuring Irritability in Early Childhood: A Psychometric Evaluation of the Affective Reactivity Index in a Clinical Sample of 3- to 8-Year-Old Children.

The parent-report Affective Reactivity Index (ARI-P) is the most studied brief scale specifically developed to assess irritability, but relatively little is known about its performance in early childhood (i.e., ≤8 years). Support in such populations is particularly important given developmental shifts in what constitutes normative irritability across childhood. We examined the performance of the ARI-P in a diverse, treatment-seeking sample of children ages 3 to 8 years (N = 115; mean age = 5.56 years; 58.4% from ethnic/racial minority backgrounds). In this sample, confirmatory factor analysis supported the single-factor structure of the ARI-P previously identified with older youth. ARI-P scores showed large associations with another irritability index, as well as small-to-large associations with aggression, anxiety, depression, and attention problems, supporting the convergent and concurrent validity of the ARI-P when used with children in this younger age range. Findings support the ARI-P as a promising parent-report tool for assessing irritability in early childhood, particularly in clinical samples.

Why do older people oppose physician-assisted dying? A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Physician-assisted dying at the end of life has become a significant issue of public discussion. While legally available in a number of countries and jurisdictions, it remains controversial and illegal in New Zealand. AIM: The study aimed to explore the reasons some healthy older New Zealanders oppose physician-assisted dying in order to inform current debate. DESIGN: Recorded interviews were transcribed and analysed by the authors after some edits had been made by respondents. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: In all, 11 older participants (over 65 years) who responded to advertisements placed in Grey Power magazines and a University of Auckland email list were interviewed for around 1 h and asked a number of open-ended questions. RESULTS: Four central themes opposing physician-assisted dying were identified from the interviews: one's personal experience with health care and dying and death, religious reasoning and beliefs, slippery slope worries and concern about potential abuses if physician-assisted dying were legalised. CONCLUSIONS: An important finding of the study suggests that how some older individuals think about physician-assisted dying is strongly influenced by their past experiences of dying and death. While some participants had witnessed good, well-managed dying and death experiences which confirmed for them the view that physician-assisted dying was unnecessary, those who had witnessed poor dying and death experiences opposed physician-assisted dying on the grounds that such practices could come to be abused by others.

Barriers to the safe transport of children to and from hospital.

AIM: The purpose of this study is to determine how children are transported to and from hospital, and to understand caregivers' car restraint knowledge base. METHOD: A convenience sample of 200 inpatients in five wards at Starship Children's Hospital. Parents or caregivers underwent a short interview, asking: the usual restraint used by their child; how the child was transported to hospital; their plans for transporting the child home; their knowledge of current New Zealand legislation and best practice recommendations regarding child car restraints. RESULTS: In their normal car travel, 95% children younger than 5 years were reported to be using a car seat all the time, versus 34% children aged 5 to 9 years. In their journey to hospital, 8% (7/91) of children younger than 5 years were not in a child car seat; 27% (3/11) of children younger than 5 years transported to hospital in a taxi, were not in car seats (one was held in the parent's lap). Responses about the planned trip home showed nine children (7%) were at immediate risk of being transported in an unsafe way, without a child restraint. Questions about awareness of correct child restraint use showed 68% of the families with children aged 5 to 9 were unaware that it was important to continue to use a child restraint for their child. CONCLUSION: There is an opportunity for child health professionals to provide support to families with children in hospital by collaborating with established child restraint rental agencies and making best practice child restraint advice and products more readily available. New Zealand law should be updated to require the use of child car restraints beyond a child's fifth birthday.