pdf [5.3MB] - Department of Families, Housing, Community Services

Source: Mihalopoulos et al (2007).Mihalopoulos et al (2007) investigated whether investment in Triple-P is a worthwhile use ofgovernment health funds, and identified and measured benefits from Triple-P (Table 3-13).A sensitivity analysis surrounds the data, with the model conducted using differentprevalence rates, which was deemed to be the most important uncertainty estimate in theanalysis.TABLE 3-13: THRESHOLD ANALYSIS OF TRIPLE P (COHORT)Source: Mihalopoulos et al (2007).Results found that conduct-disordered children cost up to ten times more than children withno conduct problems. Approximately 3% of children 6-17 years old have a conduct disorder.Sanders (2008) concluded that based on these costs, the Triple-P system would pay for itselfif it averted less than 1.5% of cases of child conduct disorder.Sanders and Prinz (2008) discussed the ethical and professional issues associated with theimplementation of a public health approach to the implementation of parenting interventions,as well as the Every Family Initiative in Australia, which employs Triple-P. The paperanalysed the implications for the roll-out of large scale parenting programs and argued that apopulation approach is needed as opposed to a clinical high-risk approach, because studieshave shown that a disturbingly large proportion of children are exposed to potentiallymodifiable parenting practices that compromise children’s development. The paper outlinesthat one of the problems is that policy makers are looking for a quick fix on short timelinesand that Triple-P cannot necessarily do this, although it is likely to be cost effective.Triple-P has been an extensively studied child and family behavioural intervention programthat has shown significant reductions in parent-reported levels of dysfunctional parenting aswell as parent-reported levels of child behavioural problems (Zubrick et al; 2005). Criticismsurrounding this program has been centered on its apparent limited take-up, with anidentified need for a more public health approach.Expansion of this program into higher needs groups will alter the programs overall costeffectiveness, although as stated by Sanders (2008) under current conditions the programwill pay for itself if less than 1.5% of child conduct disorder cases are averted.3.5 EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATIONProgram services and target groups74