Evidence-Based Practice in Foster Parent Training and Support ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

EBP in Foster Parent Training and SupportLeung, C., Sanders, M. R., Leung, S., Mak,R., & Lau, J. (2003). An outcomeevaluation of the implementation of theTriple P-Positive Parenting Program inHong Kong. Family Process, 42, 531-544.Population: Families of children (aged 3-7) with developmental problemsMartin, A. J., & Sanders, M. R. (2003).Balancing work and family: A controlledevaluation of the Triple-P PositiveParenting Program as a work-siteintervention. Child and Adolescent MentalHealth, 8, 161-169.Population: Families of children (aged 3-9) with behavioral problemsRoberts, C., Mazzucchelli, T., Studman, L.,& Sanders, M. (2006). Behavioral familyintervention for children withdevelopmental disabilities and behavioralproblems. Journal of Clinical Child andAdolescent Psychology, 35, 180-193.also associated with less observed negative child behavior. These effects weremaintained at the one-year follow-up.Method: 69 parents and their children (aged 3-7) who were attending maternal andchild health centers or child assessment centers for child developmental problemsparticipated in an RCT to determine the efficacy of the PPP. Families were randomlyassigned to PPP or a wait-list control group.Findings: Post-intervention scores indicated lower levels of child behavior problems,lower dysfunctional parenting styles and a higher sense of competence for the PPPgroup in comparison with controls.Limitations: This study relied on a small sample and self-report data only.Method: This study utilized an RCT to determine the efficacy of the PPP as a work-siteintervention. 42 families who were staff at the University of Queensland participated inthe study. To be included, families were required to have a child (aged 3-9) withbehavioral problems in the clinical range on the difficulties scales on the Strengths andDifficulties Questionnaire. Participants were randomly assigned to either a groupversion of the PPP program or a waitlist control.Findings: At the end of the intervention, parents reported lower levels of disruptivechild behavior and dysfunctional parenting practices and higher levels of self-efficacy inmanaging home and work responsibilities. These improvements were maintained at the4-month follow-up.Method: This study utilized an RCT to assess the efficacy of the PPP for children withdevelopmental disabilities and behavioral problems. Participant children (aged 2-7,n=47) had levels of intellectual or adaptive functions below age norms, due to geneticcauses, cerebral palsy, accident, disease, or unknown causes. Families were receivingservices including speech and occupational therapy, physiotherapy and pre-educationalskills. Families were randomly assigned to the intervention group or a wait list.Intervention participants received instruction in the Stepping Stones PPP program,which was adapted for use with parents of children with developmental disabilities.Center for Advanced Studies in Child Welfare (CASCW)University of Minnesota School of Social WorkContact: Kristine N. Piescher, Ph.D. kpiesche@umn.edu 75
EBP in Foster Parent Training and SupportPopulation: Families of children (aged 2-7) with developmental disabilities andbehavioral problemsSanders, M. R., Markie-Dadds, C., Tully, L.A., & Bor, W. (2000). The Triple P-PositiveParent Program: A comparison ofenhanced, standard and, behavioral familyintervention for parents of children withearly onset conduct problems. Journal ofConsulting and Clinical Psychology, 68,624-640.Population: Families exhibiting risk factorsTurner, K. M. T., Richards, M., & Sanders,M. R. (2007). Randomized clinical trial of agroup parent education programme forAustralian indigenous families. Journal ofPaediatrics and Child Health, 43, 429-437.Findings: The intervention was associated with fewer child behavior problems reportedby mothers and independent observers, improved maternal and paternal parentingstyle, and decreased maternal stress. These effects were maintained at the 6-monthfollow-up.Limitations: Attrition limited this study: 29 of the 47 original families participated atpost-intervention and only 15 intervention children remained at 6 months.Method: This study utilized an RCT to evaluate the efficacy of the Positive ParentingProgram (PPP) to improve the disruptive behavior of children. 305 Australian families,who exhibited at least one risk factor (i.e., maternal depression, relationship conflict,single parent household, low family income, or low occupational prestige for the majorincome earner), were randomly assigned to a standard PPP, enhanced PPP, selfdirectedPPP, or wait list group.Standard PPP employs the same materials as the self-directed program, but addsactive skills training and support from a trained practitioner. Enhanced PPP includesinterventions tailored to the needs of each family, including instruction on coping skillsand strategies for partner or social support.Findings: At post-test, the two practitioner-assisted interventions were associated withlower levels of parent-reported disruptive child behavior, lower levels of dysfunctionalparenting, and sense of competence. Children in the Enhanced PPP condition showedmore reliable improvement, although by the end of the 1 year follow-up all PPPconditions had achieved similar levels of improvement in disruptive behavior. Thepractitioner-assisted programs were also associated with greater improvement inparent-reported disruptive behavior. However, 1-year outcomes were compared topretest levels only, not to the wait-list controls.Method: 51 families that requested help for child behavioral or development issues atcommunity health sites in Australia participated in an RCT to determine the efficacy ofthe PPP. Families were recruited if they had a preadolescent child (aged 1-13), theprimary caregiver had concerns about the child’s behavior and their own parentingskills. Children were excluded if they had developmental delays, major disabilities, wereautistic, or were currently on medication or receiving other treatment for behaviorproblems. Participants were randomly assigned to the intervention group or a wait list.The intervention was a culturally sensitive adaptation of the PPP group program.Center for Advanced Studies in Child Welfare (CASCW)University of Minnesota School of Social WorkContact: Kristine N. Piescher, Ph.D. kpiesche@umn.edu 76
Page 3:
EBP in Foster Parent Training and S
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38: EBP in Foster Parent Training and S
Page 87: EBP in Foster Parent Training and S
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Evidence-Based Practice in Foster P
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185:
show all

Evidence-Based Practice in Foster Parent Training and Support ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?