Children and evidence-based practice.

Services Effectiveness Research Program, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Box 3454 DUMC, Durham, NC 27710, USA.
Psychiatric Clinics of North America (Impact Factor: 2.13). 01/2004; 26(4):955-70. DOI: 10.1016/S0193-953X(03)00071-6
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Issues and challenges related to reducing the gap between child mental health research and practice are not minor. As the field continues to mature, energized by the challenges to develop treatment in more innovative ways and to disseminate EBP, the potential for improving child mental health is strong.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This paper examines two factors related to successfully implementing a brief alcohol screening throughout all community-based mental health organizations. The first issue is related to an organization's internal structures, such as culture and climate that can impede evidenced-based practice implementation. There is literature suggesting that organizational culture and climate affect decisions about whether evidence-based practices are adopted and implemented within health care agencies. Following this literature review on organizational barriers, the history and successes of adopting an alcohol screening and brief intervention are reviewed. Studying, identifying, and understanding the organizational factors associated with the successful dissemination and implementation of best practices throughout community-based mental health organizations would contribute to increasing the likelihood that an alcohol screening and brief intervention are implemented throughout mental health organizations.
    06/2012; 8(1):16-28.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study examined Zambian counselors, children, and caregivers' perceptions of an evidence-based treatment (EBT) for trauma (Trauma-Focused Cognitive Behavioral Therapy [TF-CBT]) utilized in Zambia to address mental health problems in children. Semistructured interviews were conducted with local counselors trained in TF-CBT (N = 19; 90% of those trained; 12 female) and children/caregivers who had received TF-CBT in a small feasibility study (N = 18; 86% of the children and N = 16; 76% of the caregivers) who completed TF-CBT (total completed; N = 21). Each client was asked six open-ended questions, and domain analysis was used to explore the data. Counselors were positive about the program, liked the structure and flexibility, reported positive changes in their clients, and discussed the cultural adaptation around activities and language. Counselors stated the training was too short, and the supervision was necessary. Challenges included client engagement and attendance, availability of location, funding, and a lack of community understanding of "therapy." Children and caregivers stated multiple positive changes they attributed to TF-CBT, such as better family communication, reduction of problem behaviors, and ability to speak about the trauma. They recommended continuing the program. This study brings a critical examination of providers' and clients' perspectives of the implementation of an EBT for children in a low-resource setting. Clinical implications include changing implementation methods based on responses. Research implications include future study directions such as an effectiveness trial of TF-CBT and an examination of implementation factors.
    Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology 01/2014; 43(6). DOI:10.1080/15374416.2013.859079 · 1.92 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Context: The Treatment for Adolescents With Depression Study evaluates the effectiveness of fluoxetine hydrochloride therapy, cognitive behavior therapy (CBT), and their combination in adolescents with major depressive disorder. Objective: To report effectiveness outcomes across 36 weeks of randomized treatment. Design and Setting: Randomized, controlled trial conducted in 13 academic and community sites in the United States. Cognitive behavior and combination therapies were not masked, whereas administration of placebo and fluoxetine was double-blind through 12 weeks, after which treatments were unblinded. Patients assigned to placebo were treated openly after week 12, and the placebo group is not included in these analyses by design. Participants: Three hundred twenty-seven patients aged 12 to 17 years with a primary DSM-IV diagnosis of major depressive disorder. Interventions: All treatments were administered per protocol. Main Outcome Measures: The primary dependent measures rated blind to treatment status by an independent evaluator were the Children's Depression Rating Scale– Revised total score and the response rate, defined as a Clinical Global Impressions–Improvement score of much or very much improved. Results: Intention-to-treat analyses on the Children's Depression Rating Scale–Revised identified a significant time treatment interaction (P .001). Rates of response were 73% for combination therapy, 62% for fluoxetine therapy, and 48% for CBT at week 12; 85% for combination therapy, 69% for fluoxetine therapy, and 65% for CBT at week 18; and 86% for combination therapy, 81% for fluoxetine therapy, and 81% for CBT at week 36. Suicidal ideation decreased with treatment, but less so with fluoxetine therapy than with combination therapy or CBT. Suicidal events were more common in patients receiving fluoxetine therapy (14.7%) than combination therapy (8.4%) or CBT (6.3%). Conclusions: In adolescents with moderate to severe depression, treatment with fluoxetine alone or in combination with CBT accelerates the response. Adding CBT to medication enhances the safety of medication. Taking benefits and harms into account, combined treatment appears superior to either monotherapy as a treatment for major depression in adolescents.