Victoria A Miller1, Karol Silva2, Elizabeth Friedrich3, Reyneris Robles3, Carol A Ford4. 1. Division of Adolescent Medicine, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA; Division of Adolescent Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA; Center for Parent and Teen Communication, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA. Electronic address: millerv@email.chop.edu. 2. Division of Adolescent Medicine, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA. 3. Division of Adolescent Medicine, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA; Center for Parent and Teen Communication, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA. 4. Division of Adolescent Medicine, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA; Division of Adolescent Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA; Center for Parent and Teen Communication, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of a primary care-based, parent-directed intervention on changes in parent-teen communication, parental beliefs about adolescents, parent and adolescent well-being, adolescent distress, and adolescent positive affect from baseline to 2-month follow-up. STUDY DESIGN: In this randomized controlled trial, 120 adolescents (13-15 years of age) scheduled for well visits and their parents were randomized to the strength intervention or control group. The intervention included a booklet highlighting 3 key messages about adolescence, instructions to have a discussion with their teen about each other's strengths, and clinician endorsement. Outcomes were assessed before the well visit and 2 months later. RESULTS:Adolescents were 61% female and 65% black. Parents were primarily female (97%); 72% had a 4-year degree or higher. The intervention had a positive impact on adolescent-reported open communication among adolescents with baseline low open communication scores (B = 3.55; P = .005; 95% CI, 1.07-6.03). Adolescents in the intervention group reported a decrease in distress (-1.54 vs 3.78; P = .05; partial eta squared [η2] = 0.038) and increase in positive affect (1.30 vs -3.64; P = .05; η2 = 0.04) compared with control group adolescents. The intervention did not affect parent-reported communication, parental beliefs, or adolescent well-being. Control parents demonstrated a marginal increase in well-being, whereas intervention parents did not (0.82 vs -0.18; P = .07; η2 = 0.029). CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the potential impact of primary care-based, universal, low-intensity interventions targeting parents of adolescents on parent-teen communication and important adolescent health outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03496155.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of a primary care-based, parent-directed intervention on changes in parent-teen communication, parental beliefs about adolescents, parent and adolescent well-being, adolescent distress, and adolescent positive affect from baseline to 2-month follow-up. STUDY DESIGN: In this randomized controlled trial, 120 adolescents (13-15 years of age) scheduled for well visits and their parents were randomized to the strength intervention or control group. The intervention included a booklet highlighting 3 key messages about adolescence, instructions to have a discussion with their teen about each other's strengths, and clinician endorsement. Outcomes were assessed before the well visit and 2 months later. RESULTS: Adolescents were 61% female and 65% black. Parents were primarily female (97%); 72% had a 4-year degree or higher. The intervention had a positive impact on adolescent-reported open communication among adolescents with baseline low open communication scores (B = 3.55; P = .005; 95% CI, 1.07-6.03). Adolescents in the intervention group reported a decrease in distress (-1.54 vs 3.78; P = .05; partial eta squared [η2] = 0.038) and increase in positive affect (1.30 vs -3.64; P = .05; η2 = 0.04) compared with control group adolescents. The intervention did not affect parent-reported communication, parental beliefs, or adolescent well-being. Control parents demonstrated a marginal increase in well-being, whereas intervention parents did not (0.82 vs -0.18; P = .07; η2 = 0.029). CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the potential impact of primary care-based, universal, low-intensity interventions targeting parents of adolescents on parent-teen communication and important adolescent health outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03496155.
Authors: Joep van Agteren; Matthew Iasiello; Laura Lo; Jonathan Bartholomaeus; Zoe Kopsaftis; Marissa Carey; Michael Kyrios Journal: Nat Hum Behav Date: 2021-04-19