Anxiety, depression, and suicidal ideation among early adolescents during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Anxiety and depression are among the most common and debilitating psychiatric disorders affecting youth, with both related to increased suicide risk. While rates of youth anxiety and depression were increasing before the COVID-19 pandemic, the pandemic further negatively impacted adolescent mental health. Unfortunately, few studies have examined prevalence of these concerns among early adolescents (ages 10-13) longitudinally during the pandemic. METHOD: The current study examined self-reported anxiety and depression symptoms, and suicidal ideation amongst a general pediatrics population of 11- to 13-year-olds (n = 623) from March through September 2020 (early-pandemic) and approximately 7 months later (September 2020 through May 2021; mid-pandemic). Paired samples proportions were used to examine changes in prevalence of moderate to severe anxiety, depression, and suicidal ideation from early- to mid-pandemic. RESULTS: Results highlight high initial rates and stability in anxiety and suicidal ideation, as well as a significant increase in depression (42.9% increase; p < .05) among the full sample during the COVID-19 pandemic. Prevalance of concerns were greatest for females and Hispanic youth during the early-pandemic, and generally highest for females and Medicaid insured youth at mid-pandemic. DISCUSSION: Results extend recent research and underscore the need for continued monitoring of mental health concerns across development for youth who grew up during the COVID-19 pandemic; highlighting the need for sustainable, effective, and accessible early detection, prevention, and intervention strategies. Improving these services is critical to support youth who experienced pandemic-related stressors, and to prepare for supporting youth during future disruptive and isolating events.

Strategies for recruiting adolescents in rural areas in firearm injury research.

BACKGROUND: Participant recruitment is a central aspect of human sciences research. Barriers to participant recruitment can be categorised into participant, recruiter and institutional factors. Firearm injury research poses unique barriers to recruitment. This is especially true for rural adolescents, who are at high risk for firearm-related injury and death, and whose voice is often absent in firearms research. In particular, recruitment strategies targeting adolescents should align with developmental changes occurring during this life stage. Identifying strategies to address recruitment barriers tailored to firearm-related research can help future researchers engage rural adolescents in injury prevention efforts. PURPOSE: The purpose of the current methodology paper is to outline barriers and provide strategies for recruiting rural adolescents in firearms research informed by the Youth Experiences in Rural Washington: Research on Firearm Safety project, a mixed-methods, community-based participatory research study of 13-18 year-olds residing in rural Washington. STRATEGIES: Recruitment barriers and related strategies were organised by participant-related and recruiter-related/institutional-related factors. While carrying out the study, key considerations or strategies which addressed multiple participant and recruiter/institutional factors, emerged with potential to enhance firearm-related research with rural adolescents more broadly. Key considerations included logistics (ie, scheduling flexibility, adequate and aligned incentives), use of a community-based participatory research approach and accounting for developmental stage. CONCLUSION: Reducing the burden of firearm injury and death for rural adolescents and developing effective interventions requires understanding and navigating recruitment barriers. Strategies used in the current project can guide future qualitative or mixed methods data collection informing firearm injury prevention.

The association of alcohol use and heavy drinking with subsequent handgun carrying among youth from rural areas.

PURPOSE: Alcohol use and handgun carrying are more prevalent among youth in rural than urban areas and their association may be stronger among rural adolescents. Alcohol use may be modifiable with implications for reducing handgun carrying and firearm-related harm. We examined the association between lagged alcohol use and subsequent handgun carrying in rural areas and examined variation in the association by developmental stages, hypothesizing that it would be stronger among adolescents than youth adults. METHODS: We used a longitudinal sample of 2,002 adolescents from ages 12 to 26 growing up in 12 rural communities in 7 states with surveys collected from 2004 to 2019. We estimated the association of lagged past-month alcohol use on handgun carrying in the subsequent 12 months using population-average generalized estimating equations with logistic regression on multiply imputed data. FINDINGS: During adolescence (ages 12-18), those who drank heavily had 1.43 times the odds (95% CI = [1.01, 2.03]) of subsequent handgun carrying compared to those who did not drink alcohol, and those who consumed alcohol but did not drink heavily had 1.30 times the odds of subsequent handgun carrying compared to those who did not drink (95% CI = [0.98, 1.71]). During young adulthood (ages 19-26), associations of alcohol use (OR = 1.28; 95% CI = [0.94, 1.63]) and heavy drinking (OR = 1.38; 95% CI = [1.08, 1.68]) were similar to adolescence. CONCLUSIONS: Alcohol use and subsequent handgun carrying were positively associated during adolescence and young adulthood among individuals who grew up in rural areas, similar to findings in urban areas. Reducing alcohol use may be an important strategy to prevent handgun carrying and firearm-related harm among young people in rural areas.

Family-Focused Universal Substance Use Prevention in Primary Care: Advancing a Pragmatic National Healthcare Agenda.

This article advances ideas presented at a National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine workshop in 2022 that highlighted clinical practice and policy recommendations for delivering universal, family-focused substance use preventive interventions in pediatric primary care. Pediatric primary care is a natural setting in which to offer families universal anticipatory guidance and links to systematic prevention programming; also, several studies have shown that offering effective parenting programs in primary care is feasible. The article describes a blueprint for designing a pragmatic national agenda for universal substance use prevention in primary care that builds on prior work. Blueprint practice schematics leverage efficacious family-focused prevention programs, identify key program implementation challenges and resources, and emphasize adopting a core element approach and utilizing digital interventions. Blueprint policy schematics specify avenues for improving cross-sector policy and resource alignment and collaboration; expanding, diversifying, and strengthening the prevention workforce; and enhancing financing for family-focused prevention approaches. The article then draws from these schematics to assemble a candidate universal prevention toolkit tailored for adolescent patients that contains four interlocking components: education in positive parenting practices, parent and youth education in substance use risks, a parent-youth structured interaction task, and parent and youth linkage to in-person and web-based prevention resources.

Effect of the Communities That Care Prevention System on Adolescent Handgun Carrying: A Cluster-Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: There is little information on upstream community-based interventions that reduce the prevalence of handgun carrying among adolescents, especially those growing up in rural areas. Objective: To test whether Communities That Care (CTC), a community-based prevention system focusing on risk and protective factors for behavioral problems early in life, reduces handgun carrying prevalence among adolescents growing up in rural areas. Design, Setting, and Participants: Community-randomized trial of 24 small towns in 7 states assigned randomly to the CTC or control group with outcomes assessed from 2003 to 2011. Participants were youths attending public schools in grade 5 who received consent from their parents to participate (77% of the eligible population) and were repeatedly surveyed through grade 12 with 92% retention. Analyses were conducted from June to November 2022. Interventions: A coalition of community stakeholders received training and technical assistance to install CTC, used local epidemiologic data to identify elevated risk factors and low protective factors for adolescent behavioral problems, and implemented tested preventive interventions for youth, their families, and schools. Main Outcomes and Measures: Handgun carrying (never vs at least once) operationalized in 2 ways: (1) prevalence of past-year handgun carrying, and (2) cumulative prevalence of handgun carrying from grade 6 through grade 12. Results: Overall, the 4407 study participants' mean (SD) age was 12 (.4) years in both CTC (2405 participants) and control (2002 participants) communities in grade 6; about one-half of participants in each group were female (1220 [50.7 %] in the CTC group and 962 [48.1%] in the control group). From grade 6 through grade 12, 15.5% of participants in CTC communities and 20.7% of those in control communities reported carrying a handgun at least once. Youths in CTC communities were significantly less likely to report handgun carrying at a given grade than those in control communities (odds ratio [OR], 0.73; 95% CI, 0.65-0.82). The most pronounced effects were observed in grade 7 (OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.42-0.99), grade 8 (OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.41-0.74), and grade 9 (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.39-0.91). Cumulatively from grade 6 through grade 12, youths in CTC communities were significantly less likely to report handgun carrying at least once than those in control communities (OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.70-0.84). Overall, CTC reduced the prevalence of past-year handgun carrying by 27% at a given grade and by 24% cumulatively through grade 12. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, CTC reduced the prevalence of adolescent handgun carrying in participating communities. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01088542.

Bullying and physical violence and their association with handgun carrying among youth growing up in rural areas.

OBJECTIVES: This study builds on prior research showing a strong relationship between handgun carrying and delinquent behaviors among urban youth by examining the association between handgun carrying trajectories and various types of violence in a rural sample. METHODS: This study uses data from a longitudinal cohort study of 2002 public school students in the United States from 12 rural communities across 7 states from ages 12-26 (2005-2019). We used logistic regressions to assess associations of various bullying and physical violence behaviors with latent trajectories of handgun carrying from adolescence through young adulthood. RESULTS: Compared to youth with very low probabilities of carrying a handgun in adolescence and young adulthood, trajectories with high probabilities of handgun carrying during adolescence or young adulthood were associated with greater odds of using bullying (odds ratios (ORs) ranging from 1.9 to 11.2) and higher odds of using physical violence during adolescence (ORs ranging from 1.5 to 15.9) and young adulthood (ORs ranging from 1.9 to 4.7). These trajectories with higher probabilities of handgun carrying were also associated with greater odds of experiencing physical violence like parental physical abuse and intimate partner violence, but not bullying. CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATION: Experiencing and using bullying and physical violence were associated with specific patterns of handgun carrying among youth growing up in rural areas. Handgun carrying could be an important focus of violence prevention programs among those youth.

School Handgun Carrying Among Youth Growing Up in Rural Communities.

PURPOSE: To characterize school handgun carrying and violence risk factors among rural youth. METHODS: Using a sample of rural youth (n = 1995), we quantified the proportion who carried a handgun to school, carried but not to school, and did not carry across grades 7-12 and endorsed risk factors for violence in individual, peer, school, and community domains. RESULTS: Overall, 3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2%-4%) of youth ever carried to school; 15% (95% CI: 14%-16%) carried but not to school; and 82% (95% CI: 80%-84%) never carried. Violence risk factors (e.g., attacking someone) were more commonly endorsed by youth who carried to school (84%; 95% CI: 73%-95%) than those who carried but not to school (51%; 95% CI: 44%-58%) and did not carry (23%; 95% CI: 20%-26%). DISCUSSION: Carrying a handgun to school in rural areas is not common; however, it is associated with risk factors for violence. Understanding violence risk factors among youth who carry handguns to school could inform violence prevention programs in rural areas.

Economic Evaluation Design within the HEAL Prevention Cooperative.

The rapid rise in opioid misuse, disorder, and opioid-involved deaths among older adolescents and young adults is an urgent public health problem. Prevention is a vital part of the nation's response to the opioid crisis, yet preventive interventions for those at risk for opioid misuse and opioid use disorder are scarce. In 2019, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) launched the Preventing Opioid Use Disorder in Older Adolescents and Young Adults cooperative as part of its broader Helping to End Addiction Long-term (HEAL) Initiative ( https://heal.nih.gov/ ). The HEAL Prevention Cooperative (HPC) includes ten research projects funded with the goal of developing effective prevention interventions across various settings (e.g., community, health care, juvenile justice, school) for older adolescent and young adults at risk for opioid misuse and opioid use disorder (OUD). An important component of the HPC is the inclusion of an economic evaluation by nine of these research projects that will provide information on the costs, cost-effectiveness, and sustainability of these interventions. The HPC economic evaluation is integrated into each research project's overall design with start-up costs and ongoing delivery costs collected prospectively using an activity-based costing approach. The primary objectives of the economic evaluation are to estimate the intervention implementation costs to providers, estimate the cost-effectiveness of each intervention for reducing opioid misuse initiation and escalation among youth, and use simulation modeling to estimate the budget impact of broader implementation of the interventions within the various settings over multiple years. The HPC offers an extraordinary opportunity to generate economic evidence for substance use prevention programming, providing policy makers and providers with critical information on the investments needed to start-up prevention interventions, as well as the cost-effectiveness of these interventions relative to alternatives. These data will help demonstrate the valuable role that prevention can play in combating the opioid crisis.

Substance-Specific Risk Factors among Young Adults: Potential Prevention Targets across Cannabis-Permissive Environments.

PURPOSE: This study examined levels of substance-specific risk factors such as perception of harm from substance use among young adults in a range of cannabis-permissive environments. The main objective was to inform future preventive interventions aimed at reducing cannabis use in the context of increasingly permissive environments. METHODS: Data came from the Community Youth Development Study (CYDS) collected in 2016 when participants were about 23 years old (n = 1,722 participants residing in 46 U.S. states). Young adults self-reported their perceptions about the harms related to cannabis, alcohol, and cigarette use; attitudes about and ease of access to cannabis and other substances; and perceived wrongfulness and social acceptability of cannabis, alcohol, and cigarette use and of selling of cannabis and other illegal drugs. RESULTS: Young adults in more permissive cannabis contexts reported higher levels of all cannabis-specific risk factors (e.g., greater access to and more favorable attitudes about cannabis use), except for perception of harm from regular cannabis use. However, permissiveness of the cannabis environment was not associated with heightened levels of risk factors for other substance use (such as alcohol, cigarettes, and opioids). CONCLUSIONS: Future preventive interventions for young adults living in more permissive cannabis contexts may need to focus on cannabis-specific risk factors in particular and go beyond considerations of harm from regular use. Future studies should replicate these findings with other samples.

Comparison of Estimated Incentives for Preventing Postpartum Depression in Value-Based Payment Models Using the Net Present Value of Care vs Total Cost of Care.

Importance: Strong financial incentives are critical to promoting widespread implementation of interventions that prevent postpartum depression. Value-based payment (VBP) approaches could be adapted to capture longer-term value and offer stronger incentives for postpartum depression prevention by sharing the expected future health care savings estimated by reduced postpartum depression incidence with clinicians. Objective: To evaluate whether sharing 5-year expected savings estimated by reduced postpartum depression incidence offers stronger incentives for prevention than traditional VBP under a variety of circumstances. Design, Setting, and Participants: This decision analytic model used a simulated cohort of 1000 Medicaid-enrolled pregnant individuals. Health care costs for individuals receiving postpartum depression preventive intervention or not, over 1 or 5 years post partum, in a variety of scenarios, including varying rates of Medicaid churn (ie, transitions to a new Medicaid managed care plan, commercial insurance plan, or loss of coverage) were estimated for the period 2020 to 2025. The model was developed between March 5 and July 30, 2021. Exposure: Sharing 100% of 1-year actual health care cost saving vs 50% of 5-year estimated health care cost savings associated with reduced postpartum depression incidence. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was the amount of clinician incentive shared in a VBP model from providing preventive interventions. The likelihood of the health care payer realizing a positive return on investment if it shared 50% of 5-year expected savings with a clinician up front was also measured. Results: The simulated cohort was designed to be reflective of the demographics characteristics of pregnant individuals receiving Medicaid; however, no specific demographic features were simulated. Providing preventive interventions for postpartum depression resulted in an estimated 5-year savings of $734.12 (95% credible interval [CrI], $217.21-$1235.67) per person. Without health insurance churn, sharing 50% of 5-year expected savings could offer more than double the financial incentives for clinicians to prevent postpartum depression compared with traditional VBP ($367.06 [95% CrI, $108.61-$617.83] vs $177.74 [95% CrI, $52.66-$296.60], respectively), with a high likelihood of positive return for the health care payer (91%). As health insurance churn increased, clinician incentives from sharing estimated savings decreased (73% reduction with 50% annual churn). Conclusions and Relevance: In this decision analytic model of VBP approaches to incentivizing postpartum depression prevention, VBP based on 5-year expected savings offered stronger incentives when churn was low. Policy should support health care payers and clinicians to share estimated savings and overcome health insurance churn issues to promote wide-scale implementation of interventions to prevent perinatal mental health conditions.

Trajectories of Handgun Carrying in Rural Communities From Early Adolescence to Young Adulthood.

Importance: Characterizing patterns of handgun carrying among adolescents and young adults can inform programs to reduce firearm-related harm. Longitudinal patterns of handgun carrying among rural adolescents have not been identified. Objectives: To assess specific points of intervention by characterizing patterns of handgun carrying by youths in rural communities from early adolescence to young adulthood and to quantify how age at initiation, duration, and frequency of carrying differ across identified patterns. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study uses the control group of the community-randomized trial of the Communities That Care prevention system, conducted among public school students in 12 rural communities across 7 states. Participants self-reported their handgun carrying at 10 data collection points from 12 to 26 years of age (2005-2019). Data were analyzed from January to July 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: Handgun carrying in the past 12 months. Latent class growth analysis was used to estimate handgun carrying trajectories. Results: In this longitudinal rural sample of 2002 students, 1040 (51.9%) were male; 532 (26.6%) were Hispanic, Latino, Latina, or Latinx; 1310 (65.4%) were White; and the highest level of educational attainment of either parent was a high school degree or less for 649 students (32.4%). The prevalence of handgun carrying in the last 12 months ranged from 5.3% (95 of 1795) to 7.4% (146 of 1969) in adolescence and increased during the mid-20s (range, 8.9% [154 of 1722] to 10.9% [185 of 1704] from 23 to 26 years of age). Among the participants who reported handgun carrying at least once between 12 and 26 years of age (n = 601 [30.0%]), 320 (53.2%) reported carrying a handgun in only 1 wave. Latent class growth analysis indicated 6 longitudinal trajectories: never or low probability of carrying (1590 [79.4%]), emerging adulthood carrying (166 [8.3%]), steadily increasing carrying (163 [8.1%]), adolescent carrying (53 [2.6%]), declining carrying (24 [1.2%]), and high probability and persistent carrying (6 [0.3%]). The earliest mean (SD) age at initiation of handgun carrying occurred in both the adolescent and declining carrying groups at the ages of 12.6 (0.9) and 12.5 (0.7) years, respectively. More than 20% of some groups (emerging adulthood [age 26 years: 49 of 154 (31.8%)], steadily increasing [age 26 years: 37 of 131 (28.2%)], declining [age 13 years: 7 of 23 (30.4%)], and high probability and persistent carrying [age 15 years: 3 of 6 (50.0%)]) reported carrying 40 times or more in the past year by the age of 26 years. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found distinct patterns of handgun carrying from adolescence to young adulthood in rural settings. Findings suggest that promoting handgun safety in rural areas should start early. Potential high-risk trajectories, including carrying at high frequencies, should be the focus of future work to explore the antecedents and consequences of handgun carrying in rural areas.

Young adult opioid misuse indicates a general tendency toward substance use and is strongly predicted by general substance use risk.

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether young adult opioid misuse reflects a general tendency toward substance use and is influenced by general substance use risk or whether it is a different phenomenon from other drug use. METHODS: At ages 23 (2016) and 26 (2019), a panel of young adults (n = 3794 to 3833) in the United States self-reported their past-month substance use (opioid misuse, heavy drinking, cigarettes, cannabis) and substance-specific risk factors (perceptions of harm; approval of use; and use of each substance by friends and romantic partners). Structural equation models examined non-opioid and opioid-specific associations between latent risk and substance use factors. RESULTS: Opioid misuse and opioid-specific risk factors shared significant variance with latent substance use and latent substance use risk, respectively, which were strongly associated. A statistically significant residual correlation between opioid-specific risk and opioid misuse remained. CONCLUSION: Young adult opioid misuse reflects a general tendency toward substance use and is strongly predicted by risk for substance use. Opioid-specific risk factors play only a small independent role. Existing evidence-based substance use interventions may be effective in preventing opioid misuse among young adults.

Valuing the cross-sector benefits from improving youth health to drive investment in place-based preventive interventions in the US: A simulation modeling study.

Healthcare payment reform has not produced incentives for investing in place-based, or population-level, upstream preventive interventions. This article uses economic modeling to estimate the long-term benefits to different sectors associated with improvements in population health indicators in childhood. This information can motivate policymakers to invest in prevention and provide guidance for cross-sector contracting to align incentives for implementing place-based preventive interventions. A benefit-cost model developed by the Washington State Institute for Public Policy was used to estimate total and sector-specific benefits expected from improvements to nine different population health indicators at ages 17 and 18. The magnitudes of improvement used in the model were comparable to those that could be achieved by high-quality implementation of evidence-based population-level preventive interventions. Benefits accruing throughout the lifecycle and over a ten-year time horizon were modelled. Intervention effect sizes of 0.10 and 0.20 demonstrated substantial long-term benefits for eight of the nine outcomes measured. At an effect size of 0.10, the median lifecycle benefit per participant across the ten indicators was $3080 (ranged: $93 to $14,220). The median over a 10-year time horizon was $242 (range: $14 to $1357). Benefits at effect sizes of 0.20 were approximately double. Policymakers may be able to build will for additional investment based on these cross-sector returns and communities may be able to capture these cross-sector benefits through contracting to better align incentives for implementing and sustaining place-based preventive interventions.

Simultaneous use of marijuana and alcohol: Potential prevention targets among young adults who use alcohol.

Simultaneous alcohol and marijuana use (SAM) such that their effects overlap has emerged as a behavior that is riskier than using either substance separately. It has been associated with high-risk binge drinking and driving while intoxicated during young adulthood, and it has been demonstrated to cause greater physical and mental impairment than use of alcohol or marijuana separately. To identify intervention and prevention targets specific to SAM, we examined the relationships between alcohol- and marijuana-specific beliefs and attitudes (risk factors) and self-reported SAM compared to non-simultaneous co-use (CAM) and alcohol use only in the past 30 days in a sample of young adults (n = 1,023, mean age = 23.17; SD = 0.43). Of those who reported drinking alcohol in the past 30 days, 20.7% reported SAM, 12.6% reported CAM, and 66.6% reported using only alcohol. Results from multinomial logistic regression analyses indicated that some marijuana-specific risk factors (e.g., belief that it is not at all wrong for someone their age to use marijuana) differentiated SAM or CAM from alcohol use only, but alcohol-specific risk factors generally did not. However, the perceptions that parents approved of their using marijuana or frequently drinking heavily were associated with a greater likelihood of SAM compared to CAM (OR ranged from 2.25 to 3.53). Findings point to the salience of individuals' attitudes and beliefs around marijuana use and their perception of parental approval of heavy drinking and marijuana use as potential targets for prevention programs targeting risk reduction among young adults.

Parent-focused prevention of adolescent health risk behavior: Study protocol for a multisite cluster-randomized trial implemented in pediatric primary care.

Evidence-based parenting interventions play a crucial role in the sustained reduction of adolescent behavioral health concerns. Guiding Good Choices (GGC) is a 5-session universal anticipatory guidance curriculum for parents of early adolescents that has been shown to reduce substance use, depression symptoms, and delinquent behavior. Although prior research has demonstrated the effectiveness of evidence-based parenting interventions at achieving sustained reductions in adolescent behavioral health concerns, public health impact has been limited by low rates of uptake in community and agency settings. Pediatric primary care is an ideal setting for implementing and scaling parent-focused prevention programs as these settings have a broad reach, and prevention programs implemented within them have the potential to achieve population-level impact. The current investigation, Guiding Good Choices for Health (GGC4H), tests the feasibility and effectiveness of implementing GGC in 3 geographically and socioeconomically diverse large integrated healthcare systems. This pragmatic, cluster randomized clinical trial will compare GGC parenting intervention to usual pediatric primary care practice, and will include approximately 3750 adolescents; n = 1875 GGC intervention and n = 1875 usual care. The study team hypothesizes that adolescents whose parents are randomized into the GGC intervention arm will show reductions in substance use initiation, the study's primary outcomes, and other secondary (e.g., depression symptoms, substance use prevalence) and exploratory outcomes (e.g., health services utilization, anxiety symptoms). The investigative team anticipates that the implementation of GGC within pediatric primary care clinics will successfully fill an unmet need for effective preventive parenting interventions. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.govNCT04040153.

Accounting for quality improvement during the conduct of embedded pragmatic clinical trials within healthcare systems: NIH Collaboratory case studies.

Embedded pragmatic clinical trials (ePCTs) and quality improvement (QI) activities often occur simultaneously within healthcare systems (HCSs). Embedded PCTs within HCSs are conducted to test interventions and provide evidence that may impact public health, health system operations, and quality of care. They are larger and more broadly generalizable than QI initiatives, and may generate what is considered high-quality evidence for potential use in care and clinical practice guidelines. QI initiatives often co-occur with ePCTs and address the same high-impact health questions, and this co-occurrence may dilute or confound the ability to detect change as a result of the ePCT intervention. During the design, pilot, and conduct phases of the large-scale NIH Collaboratory Demonstration ePCTs, many QI initiatives occurred at the same time within the HCSs. Although the challenges varied across the projects, some common, generalizable strategies and solutions emerged, and we share these as case studies. KEY LESSONS: Study teams often need to monitor, adapt, and respond to QI during design and the course of the trial. Routine collaboration between ePCT researchers and health systems stakeholders throughout the trial can help ensure research and QI are optimally aligned to support high-quality patient-centered care.

Long-term Impacts and Benefit-Cost Analysis of the Communities That Care Prevention System at Age 23, 12 Years After Baseline.

This study estimated sustained impacts and long-term benefits and costs of the Communities That Care (CTC) prevention system, implemented and evaluated in a longitudinal cluster-randomized trial involving 24 communities in seven states. Analyses utilized reports from a longitudinal panel of 4407 participants, followed since the study's baseline in grade 5, with most recent follow-up 12 years later at age 23. Impacts on lifetime abstinence from primary outcomes of substance use and antisocial behavior were estimated using generalized linear mixed Poisson regression analysis, adjusted for individual and community-level covariates. Possible cascading effects on 4-year college completion, major depressive disorder, and generalized anxiety disorder through age 23 were evaluated as secondary outcomes. CTC had a statistically significant global effect on primary outcomes and also on combined primary and secondary outcomes. Among primary outcomes, point estimates suggested absolute improvements in lifetime abstinence of 3.5 to 6.1% in the intervention arm and relative improvements of 13 to 55%; 95% confidence intervals revealed some uncertainty in estimates. Among secondary outcomes, 4-year college completion was 1.9% greater among young adults from intervention communities, a 20% relative improvement. Mental health outcomes were approximately the same across trial arms. Although CTC had small sustained effects through age 23, benefit-cost analyses indicated CTC was reliably cost beneficial, with a net present value of $7152 (95% credible interval: $1253 to $15,268) per participant from primary impacts and $17,919 ($306 to $39,186) when secondary impacts were also included. It remained cost beneficial even when impacts were adjusted downward due to the involvement of CTC's developer in the trial. Findings suggest that broader dissemination of CTC could improve public health and individual lives in the long term and generate positive net benefits to society.

Benefit-cost analysis of Promoting First Relationships®: Implications of victim benefits assumptions for return on investment.

BACKGROUND: Child abuse and neglect (CAN) cost United States society $136 billion to $428 billion annually. Preventive interventions that reduce CAN may improve people's lives and generate economic benefits to society, but their magnitude is likely to vary greatly with assumptions about victim costs avoided through intervention. OBJECTIVE: We examined the implications of different assumptions about avoided victim costs in a benefit-cost analysis of Promoting First Relationships® (PFR), a 10-session attachment and strengths-based home visiting intervention. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: Participants were 247 child protection-involved but intact families in Washington State randomized to receive PFR (n = 124) or resource and referral (n = 123). METHODS: We monetized intervention effects on out-of-home placements and implicit effects on CAN and calculated net present values under three scenarios: (1) benefits from avoided system costs, (2) additional benefits from avoided tangible victim costs, and (3) additional benefits from avoided tangible and intangible quality-of-life victim costs. For scenarios 2 and 3, we varied the CAN effect size and estimated the effect size at which PFR was reliably cost beneficial. RESULTS: PFR's societal net benefit ranged from $1 (scenario 1) to $5514 - $25,562 (scenario 2) and $7004 - $32,072 (scenario 3) (2014 USD). In scenarios 2 and 3, PFR was reliably cost beneficial at a CAN effect size of approximately -0.25. CONCLUSIONS: PFR is cost beneficial assuming tangible victim costs are avoided by PFR. Research into the long-term health and economic consequences of reducing CAN in at-risk populations would contribute to comprehensive, accurate benefits models.

Supporting Strategic Investment in Social Programs: a Cost Analysis of the Family Check-Up.

High-quality evidence about the costs of effective interventions for children can provide a foundation for fiscally responsible policy capable of achieving impact. This study estimated the costs to society of the Family Check-up, an evidence-based brief home-visiting intervention for high-risk families implemented in the Early Steps multisite efficacy trial. Intervention arm families in three sites were offered 4 consecutive years of intervention, when target children were ages 2 through 5. Data for estimating total, average, and marginal costs and family burden (means and standard deviations, 2015 USD, discounted at 3% per year) came from a detailed database that prospectively documented resource use at the family level and a supplemental interview with trial leaders. Secondary analyses evaluated differences in costs among higher and lower risk families using repeated measures analysis of variance. Results indicated annual average costs of $1066 per family (SD = $400), with time spent by families valued at an additional $84 (SD = $99) on average. Costs declined significantly from ages 2 through 5. Once training and oversight patterns were established, additional families could be served at half the cost, $501 (SD = $404). On the margin, higher risk families cost more, $583 (SD = $444) compared to $463 (SD = $380) for lower risk families, but prior analyses showed they also benefited more. Sensitivity analyses indicated potential for wage-related cost savings in real-world implementation compared to the university-based trial. This study illustrates the dynamics of Family Check-up resource use over time and across families differing in risk.

Comprehensive Cost Analysis of First Step Next for Preschoolers with Disruptive Behavior Disorder: Using Real-World Intervention Data to Estimate Costs at Scale.

While the long-term societal costs for youth with disruptive behavior disorders are well documented, there is a dearth of information about the comprehensive costs of implementing even the most well-regarded early intervention programs, and the costs of scaling effective interventions are even less well understood. This study estimated the costs of delivering and disseminating First Step Next (FSN), an established tier two school-based early intervention, in preschool and kindergarten settings, including the training and ongoing technical assistance that support sustained, high-quality implementation. Using the Ingredients Method, we estimated (a) the per student costs of implementation, (b) the incremental cost of offering FSN to an additional student, and (c) the cost to disseminate FSN to 40 preschool and kindergarten students, including a sensitivity analysis to examine potential areas of cost savings. The per child cost to implement the FSN intervention with 29 triads in two cohorts was $4330. The incremental cost per additional student was only $2970, highlighting efficiencies gained once intervention infrastructure had been established. The cost of disseminating the intervention to a single cohort of 40 students was $170,106, or $4253 per student. The range in sensitivity analysis was $3141-$7829 per student, with variability in personnel wages having the greatest impact on cost estimates. This research expands on existing literature by providing a more comprehensive understanding of the cost of effective disruptive behavior interventions based on real-world implementation data, using these data to estimate dissemination costs, and showing how dissemination costs are particularly sensitive to personnel wages.