Search

Objective: Parent-only cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) interventions have promise for youth with anxiety disorders. Fear-Less Triple P (FLTP) is one such intervention that has been found comparable to child-focused CBT. Although traditionally administered in six sessions, a one-day workshop format of FLTP was developed to improve accessibility. The current study compared the effectiveness of the six-session and one-day workshop formats. Method: Seventy-three youth (mean age, 8.4 years; 74% male) were randomized to traditional FLTP (6-week group) or the one-day workshop format. Anxiety diagnostic status, self- and parent-reported anxiety symptoms scores, independent evaluator-rated improvement, treatment satisfaction, and measures of family functioning were included to assess treatment outcome. Data were collected prior to treatment, and 1-week, 6-months, and 12-months following treatment. Results: Both conditions resulted in significant improvement in child anxiety symptom scores per parent report (on both questionnaire and diagnostic interview measures). Furthermore, significant decreases in sibling anxiety were observed in both treatment conditions. There were no statistically significant differences between conditions on any outcome measure. Conclusions: Results of this study add to the growing evidence that brief, low-intensity, parent-only interventions can effectively target child psychopathology. These brief interventions are ideal for families for whom the resources and time required to commit to a standard multi-week intervention are prohibitive. Registration of Clinical Trials: This trial was registered with the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN 12615001284550). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Clinical pathways (CPs) are intended to standardise and improve care but do not always produce positive outcomes, possibly because they were not adapted to suit the specific context in which they were enacted. This qualitative study aimed to explore staff perspectives of implementation of a CP for routine screening, assessment, referral and management of anxiety and depression (the ADAPT CP) for patients with cancer, focussing on perceived feasibility of the CP and negotiated adaptations made during the implementation phase.Methods: The ADAPT CP was implemented in 12 urban and regional oncology services in Australia. Services were randomised to receive core versus enhanced implementation strategies. Core sites received support until implementation commencement and could access progress reports. Enhanced sites received proactive, ongoing support during the 12-month implementation. Purposively selected staff were interviewed prior to implementation (n = 88) and 6 months later, half-way through the implementation period (n = 89). Monthly meetings with lead multi-disciplinary teams at the eight enhanced sites were recorded. Data were thematically analysed.Results: Six overarching themes were identified: ADAPT is of high value; timing for introducing the CP and screening is difficult; online screening is challenging; a burden too much; no-one to refer patients to; and micro-logistics are key. While early screening was deemed desirable, diverse barriers meant this was complex, with adaptations made to time and screening location. Online screening prompted by email, seen as time-saving and efficient, also proved unsuccessful in some services, with adaptations made to in-clinic or phone screening, or repeated email reminders. Staff negative attitudes to ADAPT, time constraints, and perceived poor fit of ADAPT to work roles and flows, all impacted implementation, with key tasks often devolving to a few key individuals. Nevertheless, services remained committed to the ADAPT CP, and worked hard to create, review and adapt strategies to address challenges to optimise success.Conclusions: This study demonstrates the interactive nature of health service change, with staff actively engaging with, forming views on, and problem-solving adaptations of the ADAPT CP to overcome barriers. Obtaining staff feedback is critical to ensure health service change is sustainable, meaningful and achieves its promise of improving patient outcomes.Trial Registration: The study was registered prospectively with the ANZCTR on 22/3/2017. Trial ID ACTRN12617000411347. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]