An intervention for parents with severe personality difficulties whose children have mental health problems: a feasibility RCT.
CHILD BEHAVIOUR
CHILD EMOTIONAL PROBLEMS
PARENTING
PERSONALITY
Journal
Health technology assessment (Winchester, England)
ISSN: 2046-4924
Titre abrégé: Health Technol Assess
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9706284
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 2020
03 2020
Historique:
entrez:
17
3
2020
pubmed:
17
3
2020
medline:
11
9
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The children of parents with severe personality difficulties have greater risk of significant mental health problems. Existing care is poorly co-ordinated, with limited effectiveness. A specialised parenting intervention may improve child and parenting outcomes, reduce family morbidity and lower the service costs. To develop a specialised parenting intervention for parents affected by severe personality difficulties who have children with mental health problems and to conduct a feasibility trial. A pragmatic, mixed-methods design to develop and pilot a specialised parenting intervention, Helping Families Programme-Modified, and to conduct a randomised feasibility trial with process evaluation. Initial cost-effectiveness was assessed using UK NHS/Personal Social Services and societal perspectives, generating quality-adjusted life-years. Researchers collecting quantitative data were masked to participant allocation. Two NHS mental health trusts and concomitant children's social care services. Parents who met the following criteria: (1) the primary caregiver of the index child, (2) aged 18-65 years, (3) have severe personality difficulties, (4) proficient in English and (5) capable of providing informed consent. Index children who met the following criteria: (1) aged 3-11 years, (2) living with index parent and (3) have significant emotional/behavioural difficulties. Exclusion criteria were (1) having coexisting psychosis, (2) participating in another parenting intervention, (3) receiving inpatient care, (4) having insufficient language/cognitive abilities, (5) having child developmental disorder, (6) care proceedings and (7) index child not residing with index parent. The Helping Families Programme-Modified - a 16-session intervention using structured, goal-orientated strategies and collaborative therapeutic methods to improve parenting, and child and parent functioning. Usual care - standard care augmented by a single psychoeducational session. Trial feasibility - rates of recruitment, eligibility, allocation, retention, data completion and experience. Intervention acceptability - rates of acceptance, completion, alliance (Working Alliance Inventory-Short Revised) and experience. Outcomes - child (assessed via Concerns About My Child, Eyberg Child Behaviour Inventory, Child Behaviour Checklist-Internalising Scale), parenting (assessed via the Arnold-O'Leary Parenting Scale, Kansas Parental Satisfaction Scale), parent (assessed via the Symptom Checklist-27), and health economics (assessed via the Client Service Receipt Inventory, EuroQol-5 Dimensions). The findings broadly supported trial feasibility using non-diagnostic screening criteria. Parents were mainly referred from one site (75.0%). Site and participant factors delayed recruitment. An estimate of eligible parents was not obtained. Of the 86 parents referred, 60 (69.7%) completed screening and 48 of these (80.0%) were recruited. Participants experienced significant disadvantage and multiple morbidity. The Helping Families Programme-Modified uptake (87.5%) was higher than usual-care uptake (62.5%). Trial retention (66.7%, 95% confidence interval 51.6% to 79.6%) exceeded the a priori rate. Process findings highlighted the impact of random allocation and the negative effects on retention. The Helping Families Programme-Modified was acceptable, with duration of delivery longer than planned, whereas the usual-care condition was less acceptable. At initial follow-up, effects on child and parenting outcomes were detected across both arms, with a potential outcome advantage for the Helping Families Programme-Modified (effect size range 0.0-1.3). For parental quality-adjusted life-years, the Helping Families Programme-Modified dominated usual care, and child quality-adjusted life-years resulted in higher costs and more quality-adjusted life-years. At second follow-up, the Helping Families Programme-Modified was associated with higher costs and more quality-adjusted life-years than usual care. For child quality-adjusted life-years, when controlled for baseline EuroQol-5 Dimensions, three-level version, usual care dominated the Helping Families Programme-Modified. No serious adverse events were reported. The Helping Families Programme-Modified is an acceptable specialised parenting intervention. Trial methods using non-diagnostic criteria were largely supported. For future work, a definitive efficacy trial should consider site selection, recruitment methods, intervention efficiency and revised comparator condition. Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN14573230. This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Parents affected by personality difficulties experience strong, overwhelming emotions and struggle in their personal and social relationships. These difficulties can interfere with their ability to provide stable, safe and warm parenting, which increases the risk of their children developing mental health problems. This research developed the Helping Families Programme-Modified, a new parenting intervention designed to help parents with severe personality difficulties who have children with mental health problems. Parents received 16 home-based appointments to learn new parenting skills and improve their children’s difficulties. The research assessed how the Helping Families Programme-Modified worked in practice and the viability of evaluation methods. A short questionnaire assessing personality difficulties, rather than a lengthy diagnostic interview, was more effective and acceptable for identifying parents who may benefit from the Helping Families Programme-Modified. Parents taking part had high levels of personal, family and social problems. This slowed the rate at which parents agreed to take part in the evaluation and lengthened the intervention period. The research tested parent agreement to being randomly allocated to receive either the Helping Families Programme-Modified or usual care plus a specially designed parenting appointment. Although this random allocation was feasible, parents were disappointed when they did not receive the Helping Families Programme-Modified. They often felt overwhelmed by family difficulties and lacked other suitable services. These parents were less likely to take up the additional parenting appointment available or to provide subsequent research information, which affected the certainty of the research findings. Parents receiving the Helping Families Programme-Modified or usual care reported improvements, with a potentially greater impact on parents and children, and better acceptability, for the new intervention. Parents generally supported the tailored, home-based approach of the Helping Families Programme-Modified, and they valued its content, therapist skills and persistence. It was uncertain whether the new intervention increased or reduced service costs. These results will be used to plan the most suitable methods for a large-scale evaluation of the Helping Families Programme-Modified.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The children of parents with severe personality difficulties have greater risk of significant mental health problems. Existing care is poorly co-ordinated, with limited effectiveness. A specialised parenting intervention may improve child and parenting outcomes, reduce family morbidity and lower the service costs.
OBJECTIVES
To develop a specialised parenting intervention for parents affected by severe personality difficulties who have children with mental health problems and to conduct a feasibility trial.
DESIGN
A pragmatic, mixed-methods design to develop and pilot a specialised parenting intervention, Helping Families Programme-Modified, and to conduct a randomised feasibility trial with process evaluation. Initial cost-effectiveness was assessed using UK NHS/Personal Social Services and societal perspectives, generating quality-adjusted life-years. Researchers collecting quantitative data were masked to participant allocation.
SETTING
Two NHS mental health trusts and concomitant children's social care services.
PARTICIPANTS
Parents who met the following criteria: (1) the primary caregiver of the index child, (2) aged 18-65 years, (3) have severe personality difficulties, (4) proficient in English and (5) capable of providing informed consent. Index children who met the following criteria: (1) aged 3-11 years, (2) living with index parent and (3) have significant emotional/behavioural difficulties. Exclusion criteria were (1) having coexisting psychosis, (2) participating in another parenting intervention, (3) receiving inpatient care, (4) having insufficient language/cognitive abilities, (5) having child developmental disorder, (6) care proceedings and (7) index child not residing with index parent.
INTERVENTION
The Helping Families Programme-Modified - a 16-session intervention using structured, goal-orientated strategies and collaborative therapeutic methods to improve parenting, and child and parent functioning. Usual care - standard care augmented by a single psychoeducational session.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
Trial feasibility - rates of recruitment, eligibility, allocation, retention, data completion and experience. Intervention acceptability - rates of acceptance, completion, alliance (Working Alliance Inventory-Short Revised) and experience. Outcomes - child (assessed via Concerns About My Child, Eyberg Child Behaviour Inventory, Child Behaviour Checklist-Internalising Scale), parenting (assessed via the Arnold-O'Leary Parenting Scale, Kansas Parental Satisfaction Scale), parent (assessed via the Symptom Checklist-27), and health economics (assessed via the Client Service Receipt Inventory, EuroQol-5 Dimensions).
RESULTS
The findings broadly supported trial feasibility using non-diagnostic screening criteria. Parents were mainly referred from one site (75.0%). Site and participant factors delayed recruitment. An estimate of eligible parents was not obtained. Of the 86 parents referred, 60 (69.7%) completed screening and 48 of these (80.0%) were recruited. Participants experienced significant disadvantage and multiple morbidity. The Helping Families Programme-Modified uptake (87.5%) was higher than usual-care uptake (62.5%). Trial retention (66.7%, 95% confidence interval 51.6% to 79.6%) exceeded the a priori rate. Process findings highlighted the impact of random allocation and the negative effects on retention. The Helping Families Programme-Modified was acceptable, with duration of delivery longer than planned, whereas the usual-care condition was less acceptable. At initial follow-up, effects on child and parenting outcomes were detected across both arms, with a potential outcome advantage for the Helping Families Programme-Modified (effect size range 0.0-1.3). For parental quality-adjusted life-years, the Helping Families Programme-Modified dominated usual care, and child quality-adjusted life-years resulted in higher costs and more quality-adjusted life-years. At second follow-up, the Helping Families Programme-Modified was associated with higher costs and more quality-adjusted life-years than usual care. For child quality-adjusted life-years, when controlled for baseline EuroQol-5 Dimensions, three-level version, usual care dominated the Helping Families Programme-Modified. No serious adverse events were reported.
CONCLUSION
The Helping Families Programme-Modified is an acceptable specialised parenting intervention. Trial methods using non-diagnostic criteria were largely supported. For future work, a definitive efficacy trial should consider site selection, recruitment methods, intervention efficiency and revised comparator condition.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN14573230.
FUNDING
This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in
Parents affected by personality difficulties experience strong, overwhelming emotions and struggle in their personal and social relationships. These difficulties can interfere with their ability to provide stable, safe and warm parenting, which increases the risk of their children developing mental health problems. This research developed the Helping Families Programme-Modified, a new parenting intervention designed to help parents with severe personality difficulties who have children with mental health problems. Parents received 16 home-based appointments to learn new parenting skills and improve their children’s difficulties. The research assessed how the Helping Families Programme-Modified worked in practice and the viability of evaluation methods. A short questionnaire assessing personality difficulties, rather than a lengthy diagnostic interview, was more effective and acceptable for identifying parents who may benefit from the Helping Families Programme-Modified. Parents taking part had high levels of personal, family and social problems. This slowed the rate at which parents agreed to take part in the evaluation and lengthened the intervention period. The research tested parent agreement to being randomly allocated to receive either the Helping Families Programme-Modified or usual care plus a specially designed parenting appointment. Although this random allocation was feasible, parents were disappointed when they did not receive the Helping Families Programme-Modified. They often felt overwhelmed by family difficulties and lacked other suitable services. These parents were less likely to take up the additional parenting appointment available or to provide subsequent research information, which affected the certainty of the research findings. Parents receiving the Helping Families Programme-Modified or usual care reported improvements, with a potentially greater impact on parents and children, and better acceptability, for the new intervention. Parents generally supported the tailored, home-based approach of the Helping Families Programme-Modified, and they valued its content, therapist skills and persistence. It was uncertain whether the new intervention increased or reduced service costs. These results will be used to plan the most suitable methods for a large-scale evaluation of the Helping Families Programme-Modified.
Autres résumés
Type: plain-language-summary
(eng)
Parents affected by personality difficulties experience strong, overwhelming emotions and struggle in their personal and social relationships. These difficulties can interfere with their ability to provide stable, safe and warm parenting, which increases the risk of their children developing mental health problems. This research developed the Helping Families Programme-Modified, a new parenting intervention designed to help parents with severe personality difficulties who have children with mental health problems. Parents received 16 home-based appointments to learn new parenting skills and improve their children’s difficulties. The research assessed how the Helping Families Programme-Modified worked in practice and the viability of evaluation methods. A short questionnaire assessing personality difficulties, rather than a lengthy diagnostic interview, was more effective and acceptable for identifying parents who may benefit from the Helping Families Programme-Modified. Parents taking part had high levels of personal, family and social problems. This slowed the rate at which parents agreed to take part in the evaluation and lengthened the intervention period. The research tested parent agreement to being randomly allocated to receive either the Helping Families Programme-Modified or usual care plus a specially designed parenting appointment. Although this random allocation was feasible, parents were disappointed when they did not receive the Helping Families Programme-Modified. They often felt overwhelmed by family difficulties and lacked other suitable services. These parents were less likely to take up the additional parenting appointment available or to provide subsequent research information, which affected the certainty of the research findings. Parents receiving the Helping Families Programme-Modified or usual care reported improvements, with a potentially greater impact on parents and children, and better acceptability, for the new intervention. Parents generally supported the tailored, home-based approach of the Helping Families Programme-Modified, and they valued its content, therapist skills and persistence. It was uncertain whether the new intervention increased or reduced service costs. These results will be used to plan the most suitable methods for a large-scale evaluation of the Helping Families Programme-Modified.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32174297
doi: 10.3310/hta24140
pmc: PMC7103915
doi:
Banques de données
ISRCTN
['ISRCTN14573230']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1-188Subventions
Organisme : Department of Health
ID : 12/194/01
Pays : United Kingdom
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Crispin Day is the lead developer of two parenting programmes used in this report: Helping Families Programme (HFP) and Empowering Parents Empowering Communities. Mike J Crawford has previously received research grant funding from the National Institute for Health Research. Lucy Harris is a co-developer of the Helping Families Programme. Mary McMurran was an author of the Psychoeducation plus Problems Solving (PEPS) intervention for adults with personality disorder. PEPS helped to inform the modified HFP. Paul Moran reports personal fees from a talk given at the fourth Bergen International Conference on Forensic Psychiatry, 2016, outside the submitted work. He led the development of the Standardised Assessment of Personality – Abbreviated Scale (SAPAS), the personality disorder screen used in this study.
Références
Dev Psychopathol. 2005 Spring;17(2):329-47
pubmed: 16761548
Behav Ther. 2012 Jun;43(2):236-50
pubmed: 22440062
Lancet Psychiatry. 2016 Jul;3(7):636-45
pubmed: 27342692
Trials. 2013 Oct 25;14:353
pubmed: 24160371
Personal Ment Health. 2017 Nov;11(4):229-255
pubmed: 28771978
J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2000 Jul;41(5):645-55
pubmed: 10946756
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2008 Jul;42(7):572-7
pubmed: 18612860
Infant Ment Health J. 2014 Jan-Feb;35(1):21-32
pubmed: 25424403
Psychol Bull. 2014 May;140(3):722-50
pubmed: 24295555
Clin Psychol Psychother. 2011 Jan-Feb;18(1):75-9
pubmed: 20309842
BMJ Open. 2020 Feb 6;10(2):e033637
pubmed: 32034024
Psychopathology. 2014;47(1):10-6
pubmed: 23713057
Child Adolesc Ment Health. 2014 Sep;19(3):185-191
pubmed: 32878371
Int Rev Psychiatry. 2003 Feb-May;15(1-2):65-73
pubmed: 12745312
J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2005 Aug;46(8):837-49
pubmed: 16033632
Clin Psychol Rev. 2007 Dec;27(8):923-43
pubmed: 17376574
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1995 Dec;52(12):1048-60
pubmed: 7492257
Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2011 May;123(5):327-38
pubmed: 21166785
J Fam Psychol. 2011 Dec;25(6):907-918
pubmed: 21928886
Am J Psychiatry. 2009 Dec;166(12):1355-64
pubmed: 19833787
Stat Med. 1995 Sep 15;14(17):1933-40
pubmed: 8532986
J Psychosom Res. 2012 Aug;73(2):104-7
pubmed: 22789412
Child Adolesc Ment Health. 2017 Sep;22(3):167-169
pubmed: 32680379
BMJ. 2008 Sep 29;337:a1655
pubmed: 18824488
Br J Psychiatry. 2010 Sep;197(3):193-9
pubmed: 20807963
Personal Ment Health. 2018 Feb;12(1):49-58
pubmed: 28944592
Res Nurs Health. 2008 Apr;31(2):180-91
pubmed: 18183564
Health Technol Assess. 2014 Feb;18(8):1-250
pubmed: 24502767
J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2006 Aug;45(8):965-972
pubmed: 16865039
Br J Psychiatry. 2006 May;188:423-31
pubmed: 16648528
Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2006 Apr;256(3):174-86
pubmed: 16311898
Trials. 2011 Aug 24;12:198
pubmed: 21864370
Int J Ment Health Nurs. 2002 Sep;11(3):186-91
pubmed: 12510596
Clin Psychol Rev. 2013 Feb;33(1):133-45
pubmed: 23178234
Psychiatry Res. 2013 Mar 30;206(1):103-10
pubmed: 23261184
Prev Sci. 2002 Sep;3(3):153-72
pubmed: 12387552
Psychiatry Res. 1998 Jun 15;79(2):163-73
pubmed: 9705054
Clin Psychol Rev. 2016 Jul;47:85-105
pubmed: 27261413
J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 1999 Jul;40(5):791-9
pubmed: 10433412
Psychother Psychosom. 2008;77(6):365-71
pubmed: 18701833
BMJ. 2016 Oct 24;355:i5239
pubmed: 27777223
Clin Psychol Rev. 2006 Jan;26(1):86-104
pubmed: 16280191
Personal Disord. 2012 Jan;3(1):76-91
pubmed: 22299065
J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 1997 Jul;36(7):918-24
pubmed: 9204669
J Pers Disord. 2009 Jun;23(3):281-93
pubmed: 19538082
Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2017 Dec;8:67-74
pubmed: 29214229
Compr Psychiatry. 2007 May-Jun;48(3):225-30
pubmed: 17445515
Psychol Psychother. 2006 Sep;79(Pt 3):385-94
pubmed: 16945198
J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2008 May;36(4):567-89
pubmed: 18205039
Arch Dis Child. 2014 Aug;99(8):731-7
pubmed: 24759649
BMJ. 2014 Mar 07;348:g1687
pubmed: 24609605
J Clin Psychiatry. 2006 Jan;67(1):126-36
pubmed: 16426099
Dev Psychopathol. 2009 Summer;21(3):993-1011
pubmed: 19583894
Am J Psychiatry. 2009 Dec;166(12):1365-74
pubmed: 19755574
Br J Psychiatry. 2003 Sep;183:239-47
pubmed: 12948998
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2007 Jul;41(7):598-605
pubmed: 17558622
Br J Psychiatry. 2005 Aug;187:106-8
pubmed: 16055820
Br J Psychiatry. 2000 Aug;177:138-43
pubmed: 11026953
J Pers Disord. 2006 Jun;20(3):205-17
pubmed: 16776551
Br J Psychiatry. 2003 Sep;183:228-32
pubmed: 12948996
Lancet. 2015 Feb 21;385(9969):735-43
pubmed: 25706219
Child Adolesc Ment Health. 2011 Sep;16(3):167-171
pubmed: 32847236
Psychiatry. 2006 Winter;69(4):336-50
pubmed: 17326728
Br J Psychiatry. 1988 Jul;153:44-9
pubmed: 3224249
Clin Psychol Rev. 2011 Feb;31(1):79-88
pubmed: 21130938
Int J Qual Health Care. 2007 Dec;19(6):349-57
pubmed: 17872937
Clin Child Fam Psychol Rev. 2013 Jun;16(2):173-86
pubmed: 23595362
BMC Public Health. 2011 Oct 14;11:803
pubmed: 21999434
Issues Ment Health Nurs. 2010 Jul;31(7):450-5
pubmed: 20521914
Evid Based Ment Health. 2015 Aug;18(3):67-75
pubmed: 26205740
Br J Psychiatry. 2008 Dec;193(6):477-84
pubmed: 19043151
BMC Psychiatry. 2018 May 25;18(1):152
pubmed: 29801441
Am J Psychiatry. 2007 Jun;164(6):922-8
pubmed: 17541052
J Consult Clin Psychol. 2005 Oct;73(5):852-60
pubmed: 16287385
J Pers Disord. 2008 Oct;22(5):451-65
pubmed: 18834294
J Adolesc. 2016 Oct;52:60-71
pubmed: 27497999
Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2015 Sep 7;1:32
pubmed: 27965810
Dev Psychopathol. 2009 Summer;21(3):889-912
pubmed: 19583889
Ethics Behav. 2008;18(2-3):234-246
pubmed: 22235163
Dev Psychopathol. 2014 May;26(2):539-51
pubmed: 24622209
Clin Child Fam Psychol Rev. 2013 Mar;16(1):18-34
pubmed: 23420407
J Pers Disord. 2005 Feb;19(1):68-83
pubmed: 15899721
Child Dev Perspect. 2009 Apr;3(1):66
pubmed: 20161670
J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2009 Dec;50(12):1441-50
pubmed: 19754503
Psychiatr Clin North Am. 2002 Jun;25(2):397-426, vii-viii
pubmed: 12136507
J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2006 Jan;47(1):99-111
pubmed: 16405646
Dev Psychopathol. 2000 Autumn;12(4):737-62
pubmed: 11202042
Am J Psychiatry. 2012 Jun;169(6):650-61
pubmed: 22581157
Can J Psychiatry. 1996 Jun;41(5):285-90
pubmed: 8793148
Br J Psychiatry. 2007 Apr;190:307-13
pubmed: 17401036
Clin Psychol Rev. 2015 Aug;40:57-65
pubmed: 26067572
Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2010 Apr;45(4):453-60
pubmed: 19543844
BMJ. 2012 Mar 13;344:e1107
pubmed: 22416059
Qual Life Res. 2010 Aug;19(6):875-86
pubmed: 20405245
Psychol Methods. 2014 Jun;19(2):188-210
pubmed: 24079928
Contemp Clin Trials. 2010 Jan;31(1):22-6
pubmed: 19758579
J Subst Abuse Treat. 2007 Jun;32(4):381-90
pubmed: 17481461
Clin Psychol Rev. 2010 Apr;30(3):277-87
pubmed: 20047783
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2014 Mar;40:6-19
pubmed: 24456942
J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2011 Apr;52(4):409-28
pubmed: 20626527
Compr Psychiatry. 1995 Mar-Apr;36(2):157-63
pubmed: 7758301