Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 6 de 6
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Bases de dados
País/Região como assunto
Tipo de documento
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Health Technol Assess ; 28(6): 1-94, 2024 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38329108

RESUMO

Background: Stepping Stones Triple P is an adapted intervention for parents of young children with developmental disabilities who display behaviours that challenge, aiming at teaching positive parenting techniques and promoting a positive parent-child relationship. Objective: To evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of level 4 Stepping Stones Triple P in reducing behaviours that challenge in children with moderate to severe intellectual disabilities. Design, setting, participants: A parallel two-arm pragmatic multisite single-blind randomised controlled trial recruited a total of 261 dyads (parent and child). The children were aged 30-59 months and had moderate to severe intellectual disabilities. Participants were randomised, using a 3 : 2 allocation ratio, into the intervention arm (Stepping Stones Triple P; n = 155) or treatment as usual arm (n = 106). Participants were recruited from four study sites in Blackpool, North and South London and Newcastle. Intervention: Level 4 Stepping Stones Triple P consists of six group sessions and three individual phone or face-to-face contacts over 9 weeks. These were changed to remote sessions after 16 March 2020 due to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Main outcome measure: The primary outcome measure was the parent-reported Child Behaviour Checklist, which assesses the severity of behaviours that challenge. Results: We found a small non-significant difference in the mean Child Behaviour Checklist scores (-4.23, 95% CI -9.98 to 1.52, p = 0.146) in the intervention arm compared to treatment as usual at 12 months. Per protocol and complier average causal effect sensitivity analyses, which took into consideration the number of sessions attended, showed the Child Behaviour Checklist mean score difference at 12 months was lower in the intervention arm by -10.77 (95% CI -19.12 to -2.42, p = 0.014) and -11.53 (95% CI -26.97 to 3.91, p = 0.143), respectively. The Child Behaviour Checklist mean score difference between participants who were recruited before and after the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic was estimated as -7.12 (95% CI -13.44 to -0.81) and 7.61 (95% CI -5.43 to 20.64), respectively (p = 0.046), suggesting that any effect pre-pandemic may have reversed during the pandemic. There were no differences in all secondary measures. Stepping Stones Triple P is probably value for money to deliver (-£1057.88; 95% CI -£3218.6 to -£46.67), but decisions to roll this out as an alternative to existing parenting interventions or treatment as usual may be dependent on policymaker willingness to invest in early interventions to reduce behaviours that challenge. Parents reported the intervention boosted their confidence and skills, and the group format enabled them to learn from others and benefit from peer support. There were 20 serious adverse events reported during the study, but none were associated with the intervention. Limitations: There were low attendance rates in the Stepping Stones Triple P arm, as well as the coronavirus disease 2019-related challenges with recruitment and delivery of the intervention. Conclusions: Level 4 Stepping Stones Triple P did not reduce early onset behaviours that challenge in very young children with moderate to severe intellectual disabilities. However, there was an effect on child behaviours for those who received a sufficient dose of the intervention. There is a high probability of Stepping Stones Triple P being at least cost neutral and therefore worth considering as an early therapeutic option given the long-term consequences of behaviours that challenge on people and their social networks. Future work: Further research should investigate the implementation of parenting groups for behaviours that challenge in this population, as well as the optimal mode of delivery to maximise engagement and subsequent outcomes. Study registration: This study is registered as NCT03086876 (https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03086876?term=Hassiotis±Angela&draw=1&rank=1). Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: HTA 15/162/02) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 6. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.


Research shows that in children without learning disabilities, parenting groups which support parents to develop skills to manage behaviours that challenge in their child can be helpful. The National Institute of Health and Care Excellence recommended that more research was needed to strengthen the evidence for such interventions for children with moderate to severe learning disability who are more likely to display behaviours that challenge in England. In this study, we tested in real-world conditions a programme called level 4 Stepping Stones Triple P, which has shown positive results in trials outside of the United Kingdom. Trained therapists delivered six groups and three individual sessions over 9 weeks to parents of children aged 30­59 months with moderate to severe learning disabilities. Two hundred and sixty-one parents were allocated to one of two arms by chance (randomisation): one received Stepping Stones Triple P and treatment as usual and the other treatment as usual only. Treatment as usual included support and advice by general practitioners or community child development teams. Our primary outcome was parent-reported child behaviour at 12 months after randomisation. We also collected data on other outcomes and carried out interviews with parents, service managers and therapists to find out their views about Stepping Stones Triple P. We did not find that Stepping Stones Triple P reduces behaviours that challenge in the child more than treatment as usual at 12 months. However, when we looked at people who received more than half of the sessions, there was a larger reduction in behaviours which suggests that Stepping Stones Triple P works for families if they attend the full programme. Stepping Stones Triple P seems to be good value for money, as we found that at 12 months (covering 10 months of costs), the Stepping Stones Triple P cost £1058 less than treatment as usual from a health and social care perspective. As such, Stepping Stones Triple P is fairly cheap to deliver and a suitable early intervention for behaviours that challenge especially because of positive feedback from parents. Throughout the trial, we included a Parent Advisory Group that oversaw study materials, interview topic guides and promotion of the study.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Deficiência Intelectual , Pré-Escolar , Humanos , Análise Custo-Benefício , Londres , Qualidade de Vida , Método Simples-Cego
3.
BMC Psychiatry ; 20(1): 35, 2020 01 30.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32000729

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Children with intellectual disabilities are likely to present with challenging behaviour. Parent mediated interventions have shown utility in influencing child behaviour, although there is a paucity of UK research into challenging behaviour interventions in this population. NICE guidelines favour Stepping Stones Triple P (SSTP) as a challenging behaviour intervention and this trial aims to evaluate its clinical and cost effectiveness in preschool children with moderate to severe intellectual disabilities. METHODS: This trial launched in 2017 at four sites across England, with the aim of recruiting 258 participants (aged 30-59 months). The Intervention Group receive nine weeks of SSTP parenting therapy (six group sessions and three individualised face to face or telephone sessions) in addition to Treatment as Usual, whilst the Treatment as Usual only group receive other available services in each location. Both study groups undergo the study measurements at baseline and at four and twelve months. Outcome measures include parent reports and structured observations of behaviour. Service use and health related quality of life data will also be collected to carry out a cost effectiveness and utility evaluation. DISCUSSION: Findings from this study will inform policy regarding interventions for challenging behaviour in young children with moderate to severe intellectual disabilities. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03086876. Registered 22nd March 2017, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03086876.


Assuntos
Educação não Profissionalizante , Deficiência Intelectual , Poder Familiar , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Análise Custo-Benefício , Inglaterra , Humanos , Deficiência Intelectual/terapia , Qualidade de Vida
4.
BMC Psychiatry ; 15: 316, 2015 Dec 21.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26691535

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Autism is associated with impairments that have life-time consequences for diagnosed individuals and a substantial impact on families. There is growing interest in early interventions for children with autism, yet despite the substantial economic burden, there is little evidence of the cost-effectiveness of such interventions with which to support resource allocation decisions. This study reports an economic evaluation of a parent-mediated, communication-focused therapy carried out within the Pre-School Autism Communication Trial (PACT). METHODS: 152 pre-school children with autism were randomly assigned to treatment as usual (TAU) or PACT + TAU. Primary outcome was severity of autism symptoms at 13-month follow-up. Economic data included health, education and social services, childcare, parental productivity losses and informal care. RESULTS: Clinically meaningful symptom improvement was evident for 53 % of PACT + TAU versus 41 % of TAU (odds ratio 1.91, p = 0.074). Service costs were significantly higher for PACT + TAU (mean difference £4,489, p < 0.001), but the difference in societal costs was smaller and non-significant (mean difference £1,385, p = 0.788) due to lower informal care rates for PACT + TAU. CONCLUSIONS: Improvements in outcome generated by PACT come at a cost. Although this cost is lower when burden on parents is included, the cost and effectiveness results presented do not support the cost-effectiveness of PACT + TAU compared to TAU alone. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN58133827.


Assuntos
Transtorno Autístico/economia , Transtorno Autístico/terapia , Comunicação , Psicoterapia/economia , Pré-Escolar , Análise Custo-Benefício , Intervenção Médica Precoce , Feminino , Recursos em Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Masculino , Pais , Psicoterapia/métodos , Instituições Acadêmicas/economia , Seguridade Social/economia
5.
Autism ; 18(7): 827-31, 2014 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24590469

RESUMO

In 2010, the Romanian Angel Appeal Foundation launched a 3-year national training and development programme to develop and deliver a model of diagnostic and therapeutic services aimed at promoting social inclusion for children and young people with autism spectrum disorders. The project adopted a number of strategies aimed at developing knowledge and skills among professionals and increasing awareness in political and public spheres: (a) a three-stage training programme designed to increase knowledge of autism spectrum disorders and promote best practice among professionals working in services providing for children with autism spectrum disorders and their families, on a nationwide basis; (b) two online courses for general practitioners and psychiatrists, with content relating to the identification, diagnosis and treatment of autism spectrum disorders; (c) a total of 40 counselling and assistance centres for people with autism spectrum disorders were launched in partnership with local authorities; (d) a national strategy for social and professional integration of people with autism spectrum disorders developed through consultation with political, statutory and voluntary sector partners; and (e) a nationwide media campaign to raise awareness of the needs of children and young people with autism spectrum disorders that reached over eight million people. The project provides a transferable model to achieve important improvements in the quantity and quality of services on a national level within a brief time frame.


Assuntos
Transtorno Autístico/diagnóstico , Transtorno Autístico/terapia , Competência Clínica/estatística & dados numéricos , Pessoal de Saúde/educação , Avaliação de Programas e Projetos de Saúde/métodos , Comportamento Social , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Instrução por Computador/métodos , Instrução por Computador/estatística & dados numéricos , Currículo , Feminino , Pessoal de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Necessidades e Demandas de Serviços de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Romênia
6.
J Autism Dev Disord ; 42(5): 797-804, 2012 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22089166

RESUMO

Autism spectrum disorders (ASD) are associated with a substantial economic burden, but there is little evidence of the costs in the early years; the period in which children are increasingly likely to be diagnosed. We describe the services used by 152 children aged 24-60 months with autism, report family out-of-pocket expenses and productivity losses, and explore the relationship between family characteristics and costs. Children received a wide range of hospital and community services including relatively high levels of contact with speech and language therapists and paediatricians. Total service costs varied greatly (mean £430 per month; range £53 to £1,116), with some families receiving little statutory support. Higher costs were associated with increasing age and symptom severity.


Assuntos
Transtorno Autístico/economia , Efeitos Psicossociais da Doença , Custos de Cuidados de Saúde , Fatores Etários , Pré-Escolar , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Reino Unido
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA