Anna B Flynn1, Kate E Fothergill2, Holly C Wilcox3, Elizabeth Coleclough2, Russell Horwitz4, Anne Ruble4, Matthew D Burkey4, Lawrence S Wissow5. 1. Department of Mental Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Md. Electronic address: aflynn3@jhu.edu. 2. Department of Health Behavior and Society, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Md. 3. Department of Mental Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Md; Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Md. 4. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Md. 5. Department of Health Behavior and Society, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Md; Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Md.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To systematically assess the evidence base for prevention and treatment of child traumatic stress in primary care settings. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus, Academic Search Complete, CINAHL, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, the National Registry of Evidence-based Programs and Practices, the National Child Traumatic Stress Network website, Google search. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, PARTICIPANTS, AND INTERVENTIONS: Studies were eligible for inclusion if they described the results of intervention studies in a primary care setting addressing child traumatic stress. Study participants could include primary care providers, pediatric patients, and their parents or other caregivers. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: Each study was assessed for inclusion, and each included study was assessed for risk of bias by 2 reviewers. RESULTS: We found 12 articles describing 10 different studies that met the inclusion criteria. The intervention approaches taken in the studies were diverse and included the implementation of screening programs or tools, training clinicians to recognize and discuss psychosocial issues with patients and their families, and providing primary care professionals with community resource lists. Nine out of 10 studies included in the review reported favorable results. LIMITATIONS: Studies included in the review had relatively short follow-up periods, and the diversity of studies identified precluded the possibility of conducting a meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS: Findings suggest that interventions in pediatric primary care settings are feasible and can favorably affect clinical practices and families' outcomes.
OBJECTIVES: To systematically assess the evidence base for prevention and treatment of childtraumatic stress in primary care settings. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus, Academic Search Complete, CINAHL, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, the National Registry of Evidence-based Programs and Practices, the National ChildTraumatic Stress Network website, Google search. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, PARTICIPANTS, AND INTERVENTIONS: Studies were eligible for inclusion if they described the results of intervention studies in a primary care setting addressing childtraumatic stress. Study participants could include primary care providers, pediatric patients, and their parents or other caregivers. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: Each study was assessed for inclusion, and each included study was assessed for risk of bias by 2 reviewers. RESULTS: We found 12 articles describing 10 different studies that met the inclusion criteria. The intervention approaches taken in the studies were diverse and included the implementation of screening programs or tools, training clinicians to recognize and discuss psychosocial issues with patients and their families, and providing primary care professionals with community resource lists. Nine out of 10 studies included in the review reported favorable results. LIMITATIONS: Studies included in the review had relatively short follow-up periods, and the diversity of studies identified precluded the possibility of conducting a meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS: Findings suggest that interventions in pediatric primary care settings are feasible and can favorably affect clinical practices and families' outcomes.
Authors: Shanta R Dube; Robert F Anda; Charles L Whitfield; David W Brown; Vincent J Felitti; Maxia Dong; Wayne H Giles Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Kimberly C Arthur; Barbara A Lucenko; Irina V Sharkova; Jingping Xing; Rita Mangione-Smith Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2018-01 Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Shakira F Suglia; Karestan C Koenen; Renée Boynton-Jarrett; Paul S Chan; Cari J Clark; Andrea Danese; Myles S Faith; Benjamin I Goldstein; Laura L Hayman; Carmen R Isasi; Charlotte A Pratt; Natalie Slopen; Jennifer A Sumner; Aslan Turer; Christy B Turer; Justin P Zachariah Journal: Circulation Date: 2017-12-18 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Masha Y Ivanova; Allison Hall; Stanley Weinberger; Sara L Buckingham; William E Copeland; Phoenix Crockett; Justin Dainer-Best; Casey D'Alberto; Lauren Dewey; DeShan Foret; Maria Galano; Lisa Goodrich; Lindsay Holly; Nalini Lane; Maureen Leahey; Mathew Lerner; Jasmine Marsh; Ellen McGinnis; Melissa Paiva-Salisbury; Judith S Shaw; Pamela Swift; Rebekah Tinker; James J Hudziak Journal: Child Psychiatry Hum Dev Date: 2022-03-04
Authors: Anna Lähdepuro; Katri Savolainen; Marius Lahti-Pulkkinen; Johan G Eriksson; Jari Lahti; Soile Tuovinen; Eero Kajantie; Anu-Katriina Pesonen; Kati Heinonen; Katri Räikkönen Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2019-03-13 Impact factor: 4.379