What five decades of research tells us about the effects of youth psychological therapy: A multilevel meta-analysis and implications for science and practice

Across 5 decades, hundreds of randomized trials have tested psychological therapies for youth internalizing (anxiety, depression) and externalizing (misconduct, attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder) disorders and problems. Since the last broad-based youth metaanalysis in 1995, the number of trials has almost tripled and data-analytic methods have been refined. We applied these methods to the expanded study pool (447 studies; 30,431 youths), synthesizing 50 years of findings and identifying implications for research and practice. We assessed overall effect size (ES) and moderator effects using multilevel modeling to address ES dependency that is common, but typically not modeled, in meta-analyses. Mean posttreatment ES was 0.46; the probability that a youth in the treatment condition would fare better than a youth in the control condition was 63%. Effects varied according to multiple moderators, including the problem targeted in treatment: Mean ES at posttreatment was strongest for anxiety (0.61), weakest for depression (0.29), and nonsignificant for multiprob lem treatment (0.15). ESs differed across control conditions, with "usual care" emerging as a potent comparison condition, and across informants, highlighting the need to obtain and integrate multiple perspectives on outcome. Effects of therapy type varied by informant; only youth-focused behavioral therapies (including cognitive-behavioral therapy) showed similar and robust effects across youth, parent, and teacher reports. Effects did not differ for Caucasian versus minority samples, but more diverse samples are needed. The findings underscore the benefits of psychological treatments as well as the need for improved therapies and more representative, informative, and rigorous intervention science

International nosocomial infection control consortium (INICC) report, data summary of 36 countries, for 2004-2009

The results of a surveillance study conducted by the International Nosocomial Infection Control Consortium (INICC) from January 2004 through December 2009 in 422 intensive care units (ICUs) of 36 countries in Latin America, Asia, Africa, and Europe are reported. During the 6-year study period, using Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN; formerly the National Nosocomial Infection Surveillance system [NNIS]) definitions for device-associated health care-associated infections, we gathered prospective data from 313,008 patients hospitalized in the consortium's ICUs for an aggregate of 2,194,897 ICU bed-days. Despite the fact that the use of devices in the developing countries' ICUs was remarkably similar to that reported in US ICUs in the CDC's NHSN, rates of device-associated nosocomial infection were significantly higher in the ICUs of the INICC hospitals; the pooled rate of central line-associated bloodstream infection in the INICC ICUs of 6.8 per 1,000 central line-days was more than 3-fold higher than the 2.0 per 1,000 central line-days reported in comparable US ICUs. The overall rate of ventilator-associated pneumonia also was far higher (15.8 vs 3.3 per 1,000 ventilator-days), as was the rate of catheter-associated urinary tract infection (6.3 vs. 3.3 per 1,000 catheter-days). Notably, the frequencies of resistance of Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates to imipenem (47.2% vs 23.0%), Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates to ceftazidime (76.3% vs 27.1%), Escherichia coli isolates to ceftazidime (66.7% vs 8.1%), Staphylococcus aureus isolates to methicillin (84.4% vs 56.8%), were also higher in the consortium's ICUs, and the crude unadjusted excess mortalities of device-related infections ranged from 7.3% (for catheter-associated urinary tract infection) to 15.2% (for ventilator-associated pneumonia). Copyright © 2012 by the Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved