A comparison of the clinical effectiveness and cost of specialised individually-delivered parent training for preschool attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and a generic, group-based programme: a multi-centre, randomised controlled trial of the New Forest Parenting Programme versus Incredible Years

Objective: To compare the efficacy and cost of specialised individually-delivered parent training (PT) for preschool children with attention-deficit/ hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) against generic group-based PT and treatment as usual (TAU). Design: Multi-centre, three-arm parallel group randomised controlled trial. Research Setting: National Health Service Trusts. Participants: Preschool children (33-54 months) fulfilling ADHD research diagnostic criteria. Interventions: New Forest Parenting Programme (NFPP) – 12 week individual, home-delivered ADHD PT programme; Incredible Years (IY) – 12 week group-based, PT programme initially designed for children with behaviour problems. Main outcome measures: Primary outcome - Parent ratings of child’s ADHD symptoms (Swanson, Nolan & Pelham Questionnaire - SNAP-IV). Secondary outcomes - teacher ratings (SNAP-IV) and direct observations of ADHD symptoms and parent/teacher ratings of conduct problems. NFPP, IY and TAU outcomes were measured at baseline (T1) and post-treatment (T2). NFPP and IY outcomes only were measured 6 months post treatment (T3). Researchers, but not therapists or parents, were blind to treatment allocation. Analysis employed mixed effect regression models (multiple imputation). Intervention and other costs were estimated using standardized approaches. Results: NFPP and IY did not differ on parent-rated SNAP-IV, ADHD combined symptoms (mean difference -0.009 95%CI [-0.191, 0.173], p=0.921) or any other measure. Small, non-significant, benefits of NFPP over TAU were seen for parent-rated SNAP-IV, ADHD combined symptoms (-0.189 95%CI [-0.380, 0.003], p=0.053). NFPP significantly reduced parent-rated conduct-problems compared to TAU across scales (p-values.05). The cost per family of providing NFPP in the trial was significantly lower than IY (£1,591 versus £2,103). Conclusions: Although, there were no differences between NFPP and IY with regards clinical effectiveness, individually-delivered NFPP cost less. However, this difference may be reduced when implemented in routine clinical practice. Clinical decisions should take into account parental preferences between delivery approaches. Funding: National Institute of Health Research. Trial Registration: Trial name: COPPI Trial; ISRCTN39288126

Distilling Common History and Practice Elements to Inform Dissemination: Hanf-Model BPT Programs as an Example

There is a shift in evidence-based practice toward an understanding of the treatment elements that characterize empirically-supported interventions in general and the core components of specific approaches in particular. The evidence-base for Behavioral Parent Training (BPT), the standard of care for early-onset disruptive behavior disorders (Oppositional Defiant Disorder and Conduct Disorder), which frequently co-occur with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, is well-established; yet, an ahistorical, program-specific lens tells little regarding how leaders, including Constance Hanf at the University of Oregon, shaped the common practice elements of contemporary evidence-based BPT. Accordingly, this review summarizes the formative work of Hanf, as well as the core elements, evolution, and extensions of her work, represented in Community Parent Education (COPE; Cunningham, Bremner, & Boyle, 1995; Cunningham, Bremner, Secord, & Harrison, 2009), Defiant Children (DC; Barkley 1987; Barkley, 2013), Helping the Noncompliant Child (HNC; Forehand & McMahon, 1981; McMahon & Forehand, 2003), Parent-Child Interaction Therapy (PCIT; Eyberg, & Robinson, 1982; Eyberg, 1988; Eyberg & Funderburk, 2011), and the Incredible Years (IY; Webster-Stratton, 1981; 1982; 2008). Our goal is not to provide an exhaustive review of the evidence-base for the Hanf-Model programs; rather, our intention is to provide a template of sorts from which agencies and clinicians can make informed choices about how and why they are using one program versus another, as well as how to make inform flexible use one program or combination of practice elements across programs, to best meet the needs of child clients and their families. Clinical implications and directions for future work are discussed