Barriers to Clinician Implementation of Parent-Child Interaction Therapy (PCIT) in New Zealand and Australia: What Role for Time-Out?
PCIT
Parent-Child Interaction Therapy
barriers
determinants
facilitators
implementation
parent training
time out
time-out
Journal
International journal of environmental research and public health
ISSN: 1660-4601
Titre abrégé: Int J Environ Res Public Health
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101238455
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 12 2021
12 12 2021
Historique:
received:
19
11
2021
revised:
01
12
2021
accepted:
08
12
2021
entrez:
24
12
2021
pubmed:
25
12
2021
medline:
1
1
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Parent-Child Interaction Therapy (PCIT) is an effective parent training approach for a commonly occurring and disabling condition, namely conduct problems in young children. Yet, despite ongoing efforts to train clinicians in PCIT, the intervention is not widely available in New Zealand and Australia. We undertook a cross-sectional online survey of clinicians in New Zealand and Australia who had completed at least the 40-h initial PCIT training, to understand the barriers they encountered in their implementation efforts, and the extent to which attitudes toward time-out influenced implementation. The overall response rate was 47.5% (NZ: 60%; Australia: 31.4%). Responses suggested that participants generally viewed PCIT as both acceptable and effective. Australian participants reported seeing significantly more clients for PCIT per week than those in NZ (Medians 0 and 2, respectively; χ While we had hypothesised that time-out represented an intra-intervention component that detracted from implementation success, results suggested that clinician concern over the use of time-out was present but not prominent. Rather, the lack of access to suitable equipment (i.e., one-way mirror and ear-piece) and difficulties associated with clients attending clinic-based sessions were barriers most commonly reported by clinicians. We suggest that future research might consider whether and how PCIT might be "re-implemented" by already-trained clinicians, moving beyond simply training more clinicians in the approach.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Parent-Child Interaction Therapy (PCIT) is an effective parent training approach for a commonly occurring and disabling condition, namely conduct problems in young children. Yet, despite ongoing efforts to train clinicians in PCIT, the intervention is not widely available in New Zealand and Australia.
METHODS
We undertook a cross-sectional online survey of clinicians in New Zealand and Australia who had completed at least the 40-h initial PCIT training, to understand the barriers they encountered in their implementation efforts, and the extent to which attitudes toward time-out influenced implementation. The overall response rate was 47.5% (NZ: 60%; Australia: 31.4%).
RESULTS
Responses suggested that participants generally viewed PCIT as both acceptable and effective. Australian participants reported seeing significantly more clients for PCIT per week than those in NZ (Medians 0 and 2, respectively; χ
CONCLUSION
While we had hypothesised that time-out represented an intra-intervention component that detracted from implementation success, results suggested that clinician concern over the use of time-out was present but not prominent. Rather, the lack of access to suitable equipment (i.e., one-way mirror and ear-piece) and difficulties associated with clients attending clinic-based sessions were barriers most commonly reported by clinicians. We suggest that future research might consider whether and how PCIT might be "re-implemented" by already-trained clinicians, moving beyond simply training more clinicians in the approach.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34948725
pii: ijerph182413116
doi: 10.3390/ijerph182413116
pmc: PMC8700887
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Références
JAMA Psychiatry. 2016 Feb;73(2):99-100
pubmed: 26720304
Med J Aust. 2004 Mar 15;180(S6):S57-60
pubmed: 15012583
Implement Sci. 2015 Apr 21;10:53
pubmed: 25895742
J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2013 Sep;54(9):921-3
pubmed: 23957373
J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2021 Apr;62(4):372-381
pubmed: 32433792
Implement Sci. 2021 Aug 19;16(1):82
pubmed: 34412666
Child Youth Serv Rev. 2015 Aug 1;55:84-92
pubmed: 26504259
Implement Sci. 2011 Apr 23;6:42
pubmed: 21513547
Psychol Res Behav Manag. 2017 Jul 20;10:239-256
pubmed: 28790873
Implement Sci. 2021 Jan 7;16(1):3
pubmed: 33413511
Behav Ther. 2019 Mar;50(2):340-352
pubmed: 30824250
Int J Behav Med. 2020 Feb;27(1):3-20
pubmed: 32060805
J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2005 Aug;46(8):837-49
pubmed: 16033632
Am Psychol. 2019 Oct;74(7):794-808
pubmed: 30802080
Adm Policy Ment Health. 2020 Sep;47(5):735-751
pubmed: 32253634
Pediatrics. 2017 Sep;140(3):
pubmed: 28860132
Clin Psychol (New York). 2020 Sep;27(3):
pubmed: 34092941
Implement Sci. 2017 Jun 21;12(1):77
pubmed: 28637486
Implement Sci. 2013 Mar 23;8:35
pubmed: 23522377