Effectiveness of Primary Care Triple P on child psychosocial problems in preventive child healthcare: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Psychosocial problems in children have adverse effects on the children, their families, and society, thus early intervention is important. Community pediatric services offer an ideal setting to detect problem behaviour in children and provide support to parents. The objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness of a Primary Care Triple P (PCTP) program compared with care as usual (UC) for parents of children with mild psychosocial problems after an initial, evidence-based screening in routine community pediatric care. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial in community pediatric services in the Netherlands, enrolling parents of children with mild psychosocial problems. The population was identified by screening using the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) with a cut-off point of 11 or higher (that is, a subclinical score). We compared PCTP with UC, and measured the effects immediately after treatment and after 6 and 12 months. PCTP comprised four individual counseling sessions with the parent of 20 to 30 minutes each. The primary outcome measures were the child psychosocial problems as measured by the SDQ and the Eyberg Child Behaviour Inventory (ECBI). RESULTS: In total, 81 families were recruited and randomized, and 67 provided post-intervention data. Both treatment groups improved after treatment, with the PCTP group improving only slightly more than the UC group on most measures. The maximum difference on the SDQ was 1.94 (95% CI = -0.30 to 4.19, P = 0.09) and 5.81 (95% CI = -3.37 to 14.99, P = 0.21) on the ECBI (n = 67). None of the differences between PCTP and UC was significant. In the subsidiary analyses, only one of the twenty outcomes (that is, SDQ conduct problems) was significant. CONCLUSIONS: PCTP did produce a reduction in psychosocial problems in children but had no statistically significant advantage over UC. In general, a few outcomes improved in both groups. Based on this admittedly underpowered study, we cannot conclude that PCTP is more effective than UC in preventive child healthcare.

Determinants of late and/or inadequate use of prenatal healthcare in high-income countries: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Prenatal healthcare is likely to prevent adverse outcomes, but an adequate review of utilization and its determinants is lacking. OBJECTIVE: To review systematically the evidence for the determinants of prenatal healthcare utilization in high-income countries. METHOD: Search of publications in EMBASE, CINAHL and PubMed (1992-2010). Studies that attempted to study determinants of prenatal healthcare utilization in high-income countries were included. Two reviewers independently assessed the eligibility and methodological quality of the studies. Only high-quality studies were included. Data on inadequate use (i.e. late initiation, low-use, inadequate use or non-use) were categorized as individual, contextual and health behaviour-related determinants. Due to the heterogeneity of the studies, a quantitative meta-analysis was not possible. RESULTS: Ultimately eight high-quality studies were included. Low maternal age, low educational level, non-marital status, ethnic minority, planned pattern of prenatal care, hospital type, unplanned place of delivery, uninsured status, high parity, no previous premature birth and late recognition of pregnancy were identified as individual determinants of inadequate use. Contextual determinants included living in distressed neighbourhoods. Living in neighbourhoods with higher rates of unemployment, single parent families, medium-average family incomes, low-educated residents, and women reporting Canadian Aboriginal status were associated with inadequate use or entering care after 6 months. Regarding health behaviour, inadequate use was more likely among women who smoked during pregnancy. CONCLUSION: Evidence for determinants of prenatal care utilization is limited. More studies are needed to ensure adequate prenatal care for pregnant women at risk.

Early risk factors for being a bully, victim, or bully/victim in late elementary and early secondary education. The longitudinal TRAILS study.

BACKGROUND: Data regarding the impact of early risk factors on later involvement in bullying are scarce. We investigated the impact of preschool behaviors, family characteristics (socio-economic status, family breakup) and parental mental health on bullying and victimization at age 11 (T1) and age 13.5 (T2). METHODS: longitudinal data from a subsample of the TRacking Adolescents' Individual Lives Survey (TRAILS) (T1: N = 982; T2: N = 977). TRAILS is a prospective study of adolescent mental health in a mixed urban and rural region of the Netherlands. At T1 parents reported on family characteristics, parental mental health and retrospectively on children's preschool behavior at age 4-5. Schoolmates reported involvement of adolescents in bullying or victimization at T1 and T2. RESULTS: Children with preschool anxiety were less likely to be bully/victim at T1. Children with preschool aggressiveness were more likely to be bully (T1), bully/victim (T1 and T2) and victim (T2) and children with good preschool motor functioning were more likely to be bully (T1) and less likely to be victim (T1 and T2). Children from low socioeconomic status families were more likely be to be bully, victim, or bully/victim and less likely to be uninvolved both at T1 and T2. Finally, children from intact two parent families were more likely to be uninvolved at T2. CONCLUSION: Preschool behavioral, emotional and motor problems, socioeconomic status, and family breakup are related to involvement in bullying at a later age. Prevention of bullying and its consequences can be enhanced by focusing on risk groups in early life.

Effectiveness of a parenting programme in a public health setting: a randomised controlled trial of the positive parenting programme (Triple P) level 3 versus care as usual provided by the preventive child healthcare (PCH).

BACKGROUND: Considering the high burden of disease of psychosocial problems in children and adolescents, early intervention regarding problem behaviour of young children is very important. The Preventive Child Healthcare (PCH) offers a good setting to detect such problem behaviour and to provide parenting support to the parents concerned. This paper aims to describe the design of an effectiveness study of a parenting programme for parents of children with mild psychosocial problems after an initial, evidence based screening in routine PCH. METHODS/DESIGN: The effects of the intervention will be studied in a randomised controlled trial. Prior to a routine PCH health examination, parents complete a screening questionnaire on psychosocial problems. Parents of children with increased but still subclinical levels of psychosocial problems will be assigned at random to the experimental group (Triple P, level 3) or to the control group (care as usual). Outcome measures, such as problem behaviour in the child and parenting behaviour, will be assessed before, directly after and 6 and 12 months after the intervention. DISCUSSION: Parenting support may be an effective intervention to reduce psychosocial problems in children but evidence-based parenting programmes that fit the needs of the PCH are not available as yet. Although the Triple P programme seems promising and suitable for a universal population approach, evidence on its effectiveness in routine PCH still lacks. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NTR1338.