Implementing and evaluating the German adaptation of the "Strengthening Families Program 10 - 14"- a randomized-controlled multicentre study

Mobile health-delivered narrative intervention to increase cervical cancer screening among Malawian women living with HIV: A pilot randomized controlled trial

Objective

This study aimed to develop and evaluate a mobile health (mHealth)-delivered, theory-guided, culturally tailored storytelling narrative (STN) intervention to increase cervical cancer screening among Malawian women living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV).

Methods

This study involved two phases: Phase 1: development of a theory-guided and culturally adapted STN intervention and Phase 2: a pilot randomized controlled trial was conducted. Participants were randomly assigned to one of three arms: Arm 1: tablet-based video (mHealth) with STN (n = 60); Arm 2: mHealth with a video of nonnarrative educational materials (n = 59); and Arm 3: control group with only reading nonnarrative educational materials in person (n = 60). Cervical cancer screening was measured using visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) uptakes by self-report and health passport record review at 2 and 6 months after intervention.

Results

Both arms 1 and 2 had nearly twice the rate of VIA uptakes than those in Arm 3 (51.0% and 50.0%, respectively, vs. 35.0%, P = 0.01) at 2 months follow-up, but there were no differences among groups from 2- to 6-month follow-ups. All groups demonstrated significant improvement of knowledge about risk factors, intention, and VIA uptakes.

Conclusions

The findings demonstrate the preliminary effectiveness of the intervention on cervical cancer screening behavior and the feasibility of the study regarding recruitment, retention, treatment fidelity, and acceptability of the single 30-min session. The feasibility and the preliminary results of the effectiveness of the proposed study indicate scaling up the STN intervention to a larger population of women to increase cervical cancer screening uptake to prevent deaths due to cervical cancer in Malawi.

Family group decision-making for children at risk of abuse or neglect: A systematic review

Background

Capturing the scale of child maltreatment is difficult, but few would argue that it is anything less than a global problem which can affect victims' health and well-being throughout their life. Systems of detection, investigation and intervention for maltreated children are the subject of continued review and debate.

Objectives

To assess the effectiveness of the formal use of family group decision-making (FGDM) in terms of child safety, permanence (of child's living situation), child and family well-being, and client satisfaction with the decision-making process.

Search Methods

Both published and unpublished manuscripts were considered eligible for this review. Library staff from Scholarly Information (Brownless Biomedical Library) University of Melbourne, conducted 14 systematic bibliographic searches. Reviewers also checked the reference lists of all relevant articles obtained, and reference lists from previously published reviews. Researchers also hand-searched 10 relevant journals.

Selection Criteria

Study samples of children and young people, aged 0-18 years, who have been the subject of a child maltreatment investigation, were eligible for this review. Studies had to have used random assignment to create treatment and control groups; or, parallel cohorts in which groups were assessed at the same point in time. Any form of FGDM, used in the course of a child maltreatment investigation or service, was considered an eligible intervention if it involved: a concerted effort to convene family, extended family, and community members; and professionals; and involved a planned meeting with the intention of working collaboratively to develop a plan for the safety well-being of children; with a focus on family-centred decision-making.

Data Collection and Analysis

Two review authors independently extracted the necessary data from each study report, using the software application Covidence. Covidence highlighted discrepancies between data extracted by separate reviewers, further analysis was conducted until a consensus was reached on what data were to be included in the review. Two authors also independently conducted analyses of study bias.

Main Results

Eighteen eligible study reports were found, providing findings from 15 studies, involving 18 study samples. Four were randomised controlled trials (RCTs; N = 941) the remainder employed quasi-experimental designs with parallel cohorts. Three of the quasi-experimental studies used prospective evaluations of nonrandomly assigned comparison groups (N = 4,368); the rest analysed pre-existing survey data, child protection case files or court data (N = 91,786). The total number of children studied was 97,095. The longest postintervention follow-up period was 3 years. Only four studies were conducted outside the United States; two in Canada and one in Sweden and one in the Netherlands. The review authors judged there to be a moderate or high risk of bias, in most of the bias categories considered. Only one study referenced a study protocol. Eleven of the fifteen studies were found to have a high likelihood of selection bias (73%). Baseline imbalance bias was deemed to be unlikely in just two studies, and highly likely in nine (60%). Confounding variables were judged to be highly likely in four studies (27%), and contamination bias was judged highly likely in five studies (33%). Researcher allegiance was rated as a high risk in three studies (20%) where the authors argued for the benefits of FGDM within the article, but without supporting references to an appropriate evidence base. Bias from differential diagnostic activity, and funding source bias, were less evident across the evidence reviewed. This review combines findings for eight FGDM outcome measures. Findings from RCTs were available for four outcomes, but none of these, combined in meta-analysis or otherwise, were statistically significant. Combining findings from the quasi-experimental studies provided one statistically significant finding, for the reunification of families, favouring FGDM. Ten effect sizes, from nine quasi-experimental studies, were synthesised to examine effects on the reunification of children with their family or the effect on maintaining in-home care; in short, the effect FGDM has on keeping families together. There was a high level of heterogeneity between the studies (I ² = 92%). The overall effect, based on the combination of these studies was positive, small, but statistically significant: odds ratio (OR), 1.69 (confidence interval [CI], 1.03, 2.78). Holinshead's (2017) RCT also measured the maintenance on in-home care and reported a similar result: OR, 1.54 (CI, -0.19, 0.66) not statistically significant. The overall effect for continued maltreatment from meta-analysis of five quasi-experimental studies, favoured the FGDM group, but was not statistically significant: OR, 0.73 (CI, 0.48, 1.11). The overall combined effect for continued maltreatment, reported in RCTs, favoured the control group. But it was not statistically significant: OR, 1.29 (CI, 0.85, 1.98). Five effect sizes, from nonrandomised studies, were synthesised to examine the effect of FGDM on the number of kinship placements. The overall positive effect based on the combination of these studies was negligible: OR, 1.31 (CI, 0.94, 1.82). Meta-analysis was not possible with other outcomes. FGDM's role in expediting case processing and case closures was investigated in six studies, three of which reported findings favouring FGDM, and three which favoured the comparison group. Children's placement stability was reported in two studies: an RCT's findings favoured the control, while a quasi-experimental study's findings favoured FGDM. Three studies reported findings for service user satisfaction: one had only 30 participants, one reported a statistically significant positive effect for FGDM, the other found no difference between FGDM and a control. Engagement with support services was reported in two studies; neither reported statistically significant findings.

Authors' Conclusions

The current evidence base, in this field, is insufficient to draw conclusions about the effectiveness of FGDM. These models of child protection decision-making may help bring about better outcomes for children at risk, or they may increase the risk of further maltreatment. Further research of rigour, designed to avoid the potential biases of previous evaluations, is needed.

Interventions to Prevent Illicit and Nonmedical Drug Use in Children, Adolescents, and Young Adults: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

IMPORTANCE

Illicit and nonmedical (use in ways other than instructed) drug use is common in adolescents and young adults and increases the risk of harmful outcomes such as injuries, violence, and poorer academic performance.

OBJECTIVE

To review the benefits and harms of interventions to prevent illicit and nonmedical drug use in children, adolescents, and young adults to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, PubMED, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (January 1, 2013, to January 31, 2019 [children and adolescents]; January 1, 1992, to January 31, 2019 [young adults <25 years]); surveillance through March 20, 2020.

STUDY SELECTION

Clinical trials of behavioral counseling interventions to prevent initiation of illicit and nonmedical drug use among young people.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Critical appraisal was completed independently by 2 investigators. Data were extracted by 1 reviewer and checked by a second. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to estimate the effect sizes associated with the interventions.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Number of times illicit drugs were used; any illicit drug or any cannabis use.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine trials (N = 18 353) met inclusion criteria. Health, social, or legal outcomes such as mental health symptoms, family functioning, consequences of drug use, and arrests were reported in 19 trials and most showed no group differences. The effects on illicit drug use in 26 trials among nonpregnant youth (n = 17 811) were highly variable; the pooled result did not show a clinically important or statistically significant association with illicit drug use (standardized mean difference, -0.08 [95% CI, -0.16 to 0.001]; 24 effects [from 23 studies]; n = 12 801; I2 = 57.0%). The percentage of participants using illicit drugs ranged from 2.3% to 38.6% in the control groups and 2.4% to 33.7% in the intervention groups at 3 to 32 months' follow-up. The median absolute risk difference between groups was -2.8%, favoring the intervention group (range, -11.5% to 14.8%). The remaining 3 trials provided a perinatal home-visiting intervention to pregnant Native American youth. One trial (n=322) found a reduction in illicit drug use at 38 months (eg, cannabis use in the previous month, 10.7% in the intervention group and 15.6% in the control group) but not at earlier follow-up assessments. Across all 29 trials, only 1 trial reported on harms and found no statistically significant group differences.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The evidence for behavioral counseling interventions to prevent initiation of illicit and nonmedical drug use among adolescents and young adults was inconsistent and imprecise, with some interventions associated with reduction in use and others associated with no benefit or increased use. Health, social, and legal outcomes were sparsely reported, and few showed improvements.

Does a mindfulness-augmented version of the German Strengthening Families Program reduce substance use in adolescents? Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Mindfulness training (MT) for parents of adolescents has been shown to improve mental health and stress-related outcomes in individuals and their families. Studies of MT among young people are mainly delivered in educational or clinical settings, and there is a need for controlled studies on both parent-directed and adolescent-directed approaches. It is unclear whether MT has preventive effects for substance use outcomes. The primary objective of this trial is to evaluate the effectiveness of family-based MT targeting both adolescents and their parents to prevent adolescent substance use and enhance neurobehavioral self-regulation skills that play a major role in addiction development and mental health.

METHODS/DESIGN

The trial design is a superiority, two-arm, randomized controlled trial in which families will participate either in the full curriculum of the evidence-based Strengthening Families Program 10-14 (SFP 10-14, German adaptation) or in a mindfulness-enhanced version of this program (SFP-Mind). Both seven-session interventions are highly structured and will each be delivered over a period of approximately 7 weeks. The experimental intervention SFP-Mind is a modified version of the SFP 10-14 in which some elements were eliminated or changed to enable the inclusion of additional parent-directed and adolescent-directed mindfulness components. The primary outcome is adolescent self-reported alcohol use based on an alcohol initiation index at 18-month follow-up. Dispositional mindfulness, impulsivity, and emotion regulation will be included as secondary outcomes and potential mechanisms of action. The study will recruit and randomize 216 adolescents, aged 10-14 years, and their parents who will be followed up for 18 months.

DISCUSSION

This trial aims to evaluate the effectiveness of SFP-Mind for family-based prevention of substance use and promoting mental health in adolescence.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

German Register of Clinical Studies, DRKS00015678. Registered on 25 February 2019.

Los contenidos de la formación parental y sus implicaciones en el comportamiento de los adolescentes: elementos desde una revisión

Resumen Los padres buscan apoyo para enfrentar los desafíos que sus hijos tienen en la adolescencia. El objetivo de este trabajo es analizar los tópicos abordados en la formación de padres con hijos adolescentes y su relación con las tendencias comportamentales de estos. Para ello, se llevó a cabo una revisión cualitativa de intervenciones y programas centrados en fortalecer el proceso de crianza, estableciéndose una concentración en los aspectos regulatorios, comunicativos y emocionales de la relación padre-hijo. Por medio de un análisis cuantitativo, también se pudo establecer que los tópicos abordados tienen efectos significativos sobre los adolescentes, como la reducción en problemas de comportamiento, manejo adecuado de la sexualidad y disminución en la tendencia al consumo de sustancias. Teniendo en cuenta la información registrada, es posible plantear que la formación parental puede abordarse en diferentes formatos de acuerdo con los objetivos y condiciones disponibles, lo que puede representar beneficios importantes para el desarrollo saludable de los adolescentes.

[Prevention of substance use disorders]

Prevention of substance use disorders Abstract. Introduction: Adolescence is a vulnerable period for the development of Substance Use Disorders and preventive intervention is a public health priority. In this article, we summarize the available evidence for behavioral preventive action for Substance Use Disorders and related dysregulated behaviors during adolescence in various settings. Results: Current meta-analytic evidence is available mainly for the school and family settings and increasingly also for internet-based prevention. The literature is dominated by US-studies that focus on universal school-based approaches for legal substances in middle adolescence. Only few German studies are published. Taken together the results indicate that developmentally sensitive substance use prevention is effective across different settings with consistent small-to-middle sized effects. Differential effectiveness analyses for schoolbased prevention suggest that younger adolescents benefit most from universal prevention, while for older adolescents targeted approaches are more effective. Conclusions: Across the relevant settings, effective preventive measures are available. However, the results could be improved. There is a need for translational research on effective and more individualized approaches to prevention and differential effects of intervention modules. Moreover, there is a need for research on the implementation of evidence-based programs and especially in Germany, coordinated approaches on community levels are lacking.

A systematic review of adaptations of evidence-based public health interventions globally

BACKGROUND

Adaptations of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) often occur. However, little is known about the reasons for adaptation, the adaptation process, and outcomes of adapted EBIs. To address this gap, we conducted a systematic review to answer the following questions: (1) What are the reasons for and common types of adaptations being made to EBIs in community settings as reported in the published literature? (2) What steps are described in making adaptations to EBIs? and (3) What outcomes are assessed in evaluations of adapted EBIs?

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of English language publications that described adaptations of public health EBIs. We searched Ovid PubMed, PsycINFO, PsycNET, and CINAHL and citations of included studies for adapted public health EBIs. We abstracted characteristics of the original and adapted populations and settings, reasons for adaptation, types of modifications, use of an adaptation framework, adaptation steps, and evaluation outcomes.

RESULTS

Forty-two distinct EBIs were found focusing on HIV/AIDS, mental health, substance abuse, and chronic illnesses. More than half (62%) reported on adaptations in the USA. Frequent reasons for adaptation included the need for cultural appropriateness (64.3%), focusing on a new target population (59.5%), and implementing in a new setting (57.1%). Common adaptations were content (100%), context (95.2%), cultural modifications (73.8%), and delivery (61.9%). Most study authors conducted a community assessment, prepared new materials, implemented the adapted intervention, evaluated or planned to evaluate the intervention, determined needed changes, trained staff members, and consulted experts/stakeholders. Most studies that reported an evaluation (k = 36) included behavioral outcomes (71.4%), acceptability (66.7%), fidelity (52.4%), and feasibility (52.4%). Fewer measured adoption (47.6%) and changes in practice (21.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings advance our understanding of the patterns and effects of modifications of EBIs that are reported in published studies and suggest areas of further research to understand and guide the adaptation process. Furthermore, findings can inform better reporting of adapted EBIs and inform capacity building efforts to assist health professionals in adapting EBIs.

Protecting Adolescents in Low- And Middle-Income Countries from Interpersonal Violence (PRO YOUTH TRIAL): Study Protocol for a Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial of the Strengthening Families Programme 10-14 ("Familias Fuertes") in Panama

BACKGROUND

Interpersonal violence can significantly reduce adolescents' opportunities for becoming happy and healthy adults. Central America is the most violent region in the world and it is estimated that adolescents are involved in 82% of all homicides in this region. Family skills training programmes have been designed to prevent interpersonal violence in adolescents. Several studies in high-income countries suggest they are effective. However, there are no published trials assessing effectiveness of these programmes in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). The aim of this study is to test the effectiveness of the Strengthening Families Programme 10-14 (SFP 10-14 or "Familias Fuertes") in Panama, a LMIC in Central America. An embedded process evaluation will examine the extent to which the intervention is delivered as intended, variation across trial sites, influences on implementation and intervention-context interactions. Cost-effectiveness will also be assessed.

METHODS

This is a cluster randomised controlled trial. The 28 townships with the highest homicide rates in Panama will be randomly allocated to implementation of SFP 10-14 alongside services-as-usual or to services-as-usual only. Approximately 30 families will be recruited in each township, a total sample of 840 families. Families will be assessed at baseline, approximately eight weeks after baseline (i.e. post intervention), six months and 12 months after. The primary outcome measure will be the parent reported externalising subscale of the Child Behaviour Checklist at T3 (i.e., which is approximately 12 months after baseline). For the process evaluation, recruitment, attendance, fidelity and receipt will be measured. Qualitative interviews with facilitators, trainers, parents and adolescents will explore barriers/facilitators to implementation and intervention receipt. For the cost-effectiveness analysis, service use information will be gathered from parents and adolescents with a three-month recall period. Costs and consequences associated with implementation of the intervention will be identified.

DISCUSSION

This trial will be the first to evaluate SFP 10-14 in a LMIC. Results have the potential to guide public policies for the prevention of interpersonal violence in Central America and beyond.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN Registry, 14023111 . Registered on 13 July 2017.

What's New in Addiction Prevention in Young People: A Literature Review of the Last Years of Research

Rationale: Addiction prevention is a major public health problem, particularly concerning young people. Despite the consensus that primary prevention is essential, the evaluation of its impact is questioned.

Objective: The objective of this paper is to assess the latest knowledge of addiction prevention programs for young people.

Method: Review a collection of research articles using a keyword-based search on three databases: Pubmed, Eric, and PsycInfo. The research was carried out using three groups of keywords and the eligibility study was completed using two criteria: articles published between 2010 and 2017, and articles in refereed journals.

Results: Of a total of 13,720 articles in the three databases, 32 studies were included in the review and listed in a grid with five themes: authors, type of population, total population, addictive behavior, and results. Four categories were created based on the objective of the studies: the evaluation of prevention strategies, the study of risk factors for consumption, the prevalence study and other subjects studied. The analysis of the corpus was used to establish a list of risk factors to be taken into consideration in future interventions and research. A list of key elements for performing effective interventions and future research is also proposed.

Conclusion: The understanding of the prevention strategies implementation process is discussed as a central element for future research, which will combine stakeholders and researchers. The complexity of the situations and the multifactorial aspects of addiction prevention in young people require a multidisciplinary approach involving the various stakeholders and researchers.

Systematic review of universal school-based 'resilience' interventions targeting adolescent tobacco, alcohol or illicit substance use: A meta-analysis

Universal school-based interventions that address adolescent 'resilience' may represent a means of reducing adolescent substance use, however previous systematic reviews have not examined the effectiveness of such an intervention approach. A systematic review was undertaken to 1) assess whether universal school-based 'resilience' interventions are effective in reducing the prevalence of tobacco, alcohol or illicit substance use by adolescents, and 2) describe such effectiveness per intervention characteristic subgroups. Eligible studies were peer-reviewed reports (1994-2015) of randomised controlled trials including participants aged 5-18years that reported adolescent tobacco, alcohol or illicit substance use, and implemented a universal school-based 'resilience' intervention (i.e. those addressing both individual (e.g. self-esteem) and environmental (e.g. school connectedness) protective factors of resilience). Trial effects for binary outcomes were synthesised via meta-analyses and effect sizes reported as odds ratios. Subgroup (by intervention type, prevention approach, setting, intervention duration, follow-up length) and sensitivity analyses (excluding studies at high risk of bias) were conducted. Nineteen eligible studies were identified from 16,619 records (tobacco: n=15, alcohol: n=17, illicit: n=11). An overall intervention effect was found for binary measures of illicit substance use (n=10; OR: 0.78, 95%CI: 0.6-0.93, p=0.007,Tau²=0.0, I²=0%), but not tobacco or alcohol use. A similar result was found when studies assessed as high risk of bias were excluded. Overall intervention effects were evident for illicit substance use within multiple intervention characteristic subgroups, but not tobacco and alcohol. Such results support the implementation of universal school-based interventions that address 'resilience' protective factors to reduce adolescent illicit substance use, however suggest alternate approaches are required for tobacco and alcohol use. PROSPERO registration: CRD42014004906.

Family-based programmes for preventing smoking by children and adolescents

BACKGROUND

There is evidence that family and friends influence children's decisions to smoke.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of interventions to help families stop children starting smoking.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched 14 electronic bibliographic databases, including the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group specialized register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL unpublished material, and key articles' reference lists. We performed free-text internet searches and targeted searches of appropriate websites, and hand-searched key journals not available electronically. We consulted authors and experts in the field. The most recent search was 3 April 2014. There were no date or language limitations.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions with children (aged 5-12) or adolescents (aged 13-18) and families to deter tobacco use. The primary outcome was the effect of the intervention on the smoking status of children who reported no use of tobacco at baseline. Included trials had to report outcomes measured at least six months from the start of the intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We reviewed all potentially relevant citations and retrieved the full text to determine whether the study was an RCT and matched our inclusion criteria. Two authors independently extracted study data for each RCT and assessed them for risk of bias. We pooled risk ratios using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-seven RCTs were included. The interventions were very heterogeneous in the components of the family intervention, the other risk behaviours targeted alongside tobacco, the age of children at baseline and the length of follow-up. Two interventions were tested by two RCTs, one was tested by three RCTs and the remaining 20 distinct interventions were tested only by one RCT. Twenty-three interventions were tested in the USA, two in Europe, one in Australia and one in India.The control conditions fell into two main groups: no intervention or usual care; or school-based interventions provided to all participants. These two groups of studies were considered separately.Most studies had a judgement of 'unclear' for at least one risk of bias criteria, so the quality of evidence was downgraded to moderate. Although there was heterogeneity between studies there was little evidence of statistical heterogeneity in the results. We were unable to extract data from all studies in a format that allowed inclusion in a meta-analysis.There was moderate quality evidence family-based interventions had a positive impact on preventing smoking when compared to a no intervention control. Nine studies (4810 participants) reporting smoking uptake amongst baseline non-smokers could be pooled, but eight studies with about 5000 participants could not be pooled because of insufficient data. The pooled estimate detected a significant reduction in smoking behaviour in the intervention arms (risk ratio [RR] 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.68 to 0.84). Most of these studies used intensive interventions. Estimates for the medium and low intensity subgroups were similar but confidence intervals were wide. Two studies in which some of the 4487 participants already had smoking experience at baseline did not detect evidence of effect (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.17).Eight RCTs compared a combined family plus school intervention to a school intervention only. Of the three studies with data, two RCTS with outcomes for 2301 baseline never smokers detected evidence of an effect (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.96) and one study with data for 1096 participants not restricted to never users at baseline also detected a benefit (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.94). The other five studies with about 18,500 participants did not report data in a format allowing meta-analysis. One RCT also compared a family intervention to a school 'good behaviour' intervention and did not detect a difference between the two types of programme (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.38, n = 388).No studies identified any adverse effects of intervention.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate quality evidence to suggest that family-based interventions can have a positive effect on preventing children and adolescents from starting to smoke. There were more studies of high intensity programmes compared to a control group receiving no intervention, than there were for other compairsons. The evidence is therefore strongest for high intensity programmes used independently of school interventions. Programmes typically addressed family functioning, and were introduced when children were between 11 and 14 years old. Based on this moderate quality evidence a family intervention might reduce uptake or experimentation with smoking by between 16 and 32%. However, these findings should be interpreted cautiously because effect estimates could not include data from all studies. Our interpretation is that the common feature of the effective high intensity interventions was encouraging authoritative parenting (which is usually defined as showing strong interest in and care for the adolescent, often with rule setting). This is different from authoritarian parenting (do as I say) or neglectful or unsupervised parenting.