RESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Educación no Profesional , Discapacidad Intelectual , Responsabilidad Parental , Niño , Preescolar , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Inglaterra , Humanos , Discapacidad Intelectual/terapia , Calidad de VidaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: There is evidence to suggest that the broad discrepancy in the ratio of males to females with diagnosed ADHD is due, at least in part, to lack of recognition and/or referral bias in females. Studies suggest that females with ADHD present with differences in their profile of symptoms, comorbidity and associated functioning compared with males. This consensus aims to provide a better understanding of females with ADHD in order to improve recognition and referral. Comprehensive assessment and appropriate treatment is hoped to enhance longer-term clinical outcomes and patient wellbeing for females with ADHD. METHODS: The United Kingdom ADHD Partnership hosted a meeting of experts to discuss symptom presentation, triggers for referral, assessment, treatment and multi-agency liaison for females with ADHD across the lifespan. RESULTS: A consensus was reached offering practical guidance to support medical and mental health practitioners working with females with ADHD. The potential challenges of working with this patient group were identified, as well as specific barriers that may hinder recognition. These included symptomatic differences, gender biases, comorbidities and the compensatory strategies that may mask or overshadow underlying symptoms of ADHD. Furthermore, we determined the broader needs of these patients and considered how multi-agency liaison may provide the support to meet them. CONCLUSIONS: This practical approach based upon expert consensus will inform effective identification, treatment and support of girls and women with ADHD. It is important to move away from the prevalent perspective that ADHD is a behavioural disorder and attend to the more subtle and/or internalised presentation that is common in females. It is essential to adopt a lifespan model of care to support the complex transitions experienced by females that occur in parallel to change in clinical presentation and social circumstances. Treatment with pharmacological and psychological interventions is expected to have a positive impact leading to increased productivity, decreased resource utilization and most importantly, improved long-term outcomes for girls and women.
Asunto(s)
Trastorno por Déficit de Atención con Hiperactividad , Atención , Trastorno por Déficit de Atención con Hiperactividad/diagnóstico , Trastorno por Déficit de Atención con Hiperactividad/terapia , Consenso , Femenino , Humanos , Longevidad , Masculino , Reino UnidoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) are characterised by impairments in communication and reciprocal social interaction. These impairments can impact on relationships with family members, augment stress and frustration, and contribute to behaviours that can be described as challenging. Family members of individuals with ASD can experience high rates of carer stress and burden, and poor parental efficacy. While there is evidence to suggest that individuals with ASD and family members derive benefit from psychological interventions designed to reduce stress and mental health morbidity, and enhance coping, most studies to date have targeted the needs of either individuals with ASD, or family members. We wanted to examine whether family (systemic) therapy, aimed at enhancing communication, relationships or coping, is effective for individuals with ASD and their wider family network. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and acceptability of family therapy as a treatment to enhance communication or coping for individuals with ASD and their family members. If possible, we will also seek to establish the economic costs associated with family therapy for this clinical population. SEARCH METHODS: On 16 January 2017 we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, 10 other databases and three trials registers. We also handsearched reference lists of existing systematic reviews and contacted study authors in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs investigating the effectiveness of family therapy for young people or adults with ASD or family members, or both, delivered via any modality and for an unspecified duration, compared with either standard care, a wait-list control, or an active intervention such as an alternative type of psychological therapy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently screened each title and abstract and all full-text reports retrieved. To enhance rigour, 25% of these were independently screened by a third author. MAIN RESULTS: The search yielded 4809 records. Of these, we retrieved 37 full-text reports for further scrutiny, which we subsequently excluded as they did not meet the review inclusion criteria, and identified one study awaiting classification. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Few studies have examined the effectiveness of family therapy for ASD, and none of these are RCTs. Further research studies employing methodologically robust trial designs are needed to establish whether family therapy interventions are clinically beneficial for enhancing communication, strengthening relationships, augmenting coping and reducing mental health morbidity for individuals with ASD and family members.
Asunto(s)
Adaptación Psicológica , Trastorno del Espectro Autista/terapia , Comunicación , Terapia Familiar , Adolescente , Adulto , Trastorno del Espectro Autista/psicología , Niño , HumanosRESUMEN
Paediatric consultations in school refusal cases need to explore the presenting medical symptoms and discuss with families any psychological function of the problems that have led to non-attendance. Understanding possible reinforcements of the child's avoidant behaviour, liaising with school and reassurance of the parents are often enough to manage the situation. However, more chronic and persistent refusal often require support from an extended team around the child, often requiring input from mental health professionals. Behavioural strategies are the recommended approach to improve school attendance and to tackle the underlying anxiety or depression, or both, that may be the root cause of their non-attendance.
Asunto(s)
Conducta Infantil/psicología , Padres/psicología , Trastornos Fóbicos/psicología , Instituciones Académicas , Estrés Psicológico/diagnóstico , Estrés Psicológico/terapia , Abandono Escolar/psicología , Ansiedad/diagnóstico , Ansiedad/terapia , Niño , Trastorno Depresivo/diagnóstico , Trastorno Depresivo/terapia , Femenino , Humanos , MasculinoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: There is limited evidence on the effectiveness of parenting interventions to improve disruptive behaviour in children with intellectual developmental disabilities. This clinical trial evaluated whether an adapted group parenting intervention for preschool children with intellectual developmental disabilities who display challenging behaviour is superior to treatment as usual in England. STUDY DESIGN: 261 children aged 30-59 months with moderate to severe intellectual developmental disabilities and challenging behaviour were randomised to either the intervention (Stepping Stones Triple P) and treatment as usual or treatment as usual alone. The primary outcome was the parent-rated Child Behaviour Checklist at 52 weeks after randomisation. A health economic evaluation was also completed. RESULTS: We found no significant difference between arms on the primary outcome (mean difference -4.23; 95% CI: -9.99 to 1.53; p = 0.147). However, a subgroup analysis suggests the intervention was effective for participants randomised before the COVID-19 pandemic (mean difference -7.12; 95% CI: -13.44 to -0.81; p = 0.046). Furthermore, a complier average causal effects analysis (mean difference -11.53; 95% CI: -26.97 to 3.91; p = 0.143) suggests the intervention requires participants to receive a sufficient intervention dose. The intervention generated statistically significant cost savings (-£1,057.88; 95% CI -£3,218.6 to -£46.67) but the mean point estimate in Quality Adjusted Life Years was similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: This study did not find an effect of the intervention on reducing challenging behaviour, but this may have been influenced by problems with engagement. The intervention could be considered by services as an early intervention if families are supported to attend, especially given its low cost.
Asunto(s)
Discapacidad Intelectual , Padres , Humanos , Preescolar , Masculino , Femenino , Discapacidad Intelectual/psicología , Padres/psicología , Padres/educación , Problema de Conducta/psicología , COVID-19/psicología , COVID-19/epidemiología , Responsabilidad Parental/psicología , Inglaterra , Discapacidades del Desarrollo/terapiaRESUMEN
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; nâ =â 155) or treatment as usual arm (nâ =â 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, pâ =â 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, pâ =â 0.014) and -11.53 (95% CI -26.97 to 3.91, pâ =â 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 (pâ =â 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.