Chris Wang1, Yuliang Hu1, Paul A Nakonezny2,3, Valeria Melo4, Chelsea Ale5, Arjun P Athreya6, Julia Shekunov1, Rachel Lynch7, Paul E Croarkin1, Magdalena Romanowicz1. 1. Department of Psychiatry and Psychology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA. 2. Department of Psychiatry and University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, Texas, USA. 3. Department of Population and Data Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, Texas, USA. 4. Mayo Clinic Alix School of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota, USA. 5. Department of Psychiatry and Psychology, Mayo Clinic, La Crosse, Wisconsin, USA. 6. Department of Molecular Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA. 7. Department of Pediatrics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Abstract
Objective: Parent-child interaction therapy (PCIT) is an evidence-based approach for children aged 2-7 years with disruptive behavior problems. This study examined the effectiveness of PCIT with and without concurrent pharmacotherapy. Methods: A convenience sample was collected from a retrospective chart review of preschool-aged children treated with PCIT at the Mayo Clinic Young Child Clinic between 2016 and 2020. Quantitative and qualitative data were abstracted from all patients. The sample was divided into two groups based on psychotropic medications status (medicated and unmedicated) at the initiation of PCIT. Effectiveness of treatment was assessed with the change in Eyberg Child Behavior Inventory (ECBI) score. The change over time in ECBI score was compared between the two PCIT groups with and without concurrent pharmacotherapy using a linear mixed model. Results: Of the 62 youth, 38.71% were females. Mean age was 4.71 ± 1.17 years. The mean baseline ECBI score was 148.74 ± 30.86, indicating clinically significant disruptive behaviors. The mean number of PCIT sessions was 6.59 ± 3.82. There was no statistically significant difference in ECBI scores between the two groups at pre-PCIT (medication group: 149.68, standard error [SE] = 11.61 vs. unmedicated group: 147.92, SE = 10.93, p = 0.8904) and at post-PCIT (medication group: 116.27 [SE = 11.89] vs. unmedicated group: 128.86 [SE = 11.57], p = 0.3464). There was a statistically significant improvement in ECBI scores for both groups after completing therapy (medication group = -33.41 [-22.32%], SE = 6.27, p < 0.0001; d = 1.144; unmedicated group = -19.06 [-12.88%], SE = 5.78, p = 0.0022; d = 1.078). Conclusions: PCIT reduced disruptive behaviors in this sample of young children regardless of concurrent pharmacotherapy. Future prospective studies should consider one particular pharmacological agent and long-term outcomes of treatment. PCIT and certain pharmacological treatments could have complex and important bidirectional priming effects for both treatments.
Objective: Parent-child interaction therapy (PCIT) is an evidence-based approach for children aged 2-7 years with disruptive behavior problems. This study examined the effectiveness of PCIT with and without concurrent pharmacotherapy. Methods: A convenience sample was collected from a retrospective chart review of preschool-aged children treated with PCIT at the Mayo Clinic Young Child Clinic between 2016 and 2020. Quantitative and qualitative data were abstracted from all patients. The sample was divided into two groups based on psychotropic medications status (medicated and unmedicated) at the initiation of PCIT. Effectiveness of treatment was assessed with the change in Eyberg Child Behavior Inventory (ECBI) score. The change over time in ECBI score was compared between the two PCIT groups with and without concurrent pharmacotherapy using a linear mixed model. Results: Of the 62 youth, 38.71% were females. Mean age was 4.71 ± 1.17 years. The mean baseline ECBI score was 148.74 ± 30.86, indicating clinically significant disruptive behaviors. The mean number of PCIT sessions was 6.59 ± 3.82. There was no statistically significant difference in ECBI scores between the two groups at pre-PCIT (medication group: 149.68, standard error [SE] = 11.61 vs. unmedicated group: 147.92, SE = 10.93, p = 0.8904) and at post-PCIT (medication group: 116.27 [SE = 11.89] vs. unmedicated group: 128.86 [SE = 11.57], p = 0.3464). There was a statistically significant improvement in ECBI scores for both groups after completing therapy (medication group = -33.41 [-22.32%], SE = 6.27, p < 0.0001; d = 1.144; unmedicated group = -19.06 [-12.88%], SE = 5.78, p = 0.0022; d = 1.078). Conclusions: PCIT reduced disruptive behaviors in this sample of young children regardless of concurrent pharmacotherapy. Future prospective studies should consider one particular pharmacological agent and long-term outcomes of treatment. PCIT and certain pharmacological treatments could have complex and important bidirectional priming effects for both treatments.
Authors: Lianne van der Veen-Mulders; Barbara J van den Hoofdakker; Maaike H Nauta; Paul Emmelkamp; Pieter J Hoekstra Journal: J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol Date: 2017-11-13 Impact factor: 2.576
Authors: Timothy E Wilens; Joseph Biederman; Sarah Brown; Sarah Tanguay; Michael C Monuteaux; Christie Blake; Thomas J Spencer Journal: J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry Date: 2002-03 Impact factor: 8.829
Authors: Jonathan S Comer; Jami M Furr; Elizabeth M Miguel; Christine E Cooper-Vince; Aubrey L Carpenter; R Meredith Elkins; Caroline E Kerns; Danielle Cornacchio; Tommy Chou; Stefany Coxe; Mariah DeSerisy; Amanda L Sanchez; Alejandra Golik; Julio Martin; Kathleen M Myers; Rhea Chase Journal: J Consult Clin Psychol Date: 2017-06-26
Authors: Reem M Ghandour; Laura J Sherman; Catherine J Vladutiu; Mir M Ali; Sean E Lynch; Rebecca H Bitsko; Stephen J Blumberg Journal: J Pediatr Date: 2018-10-12 Impact factor: 4.406
Authors: Ryan S Sultan; Christoph U Correll; Michael Schoenbaum; Marrisa King; John T Walkup; Mark Olfson Journal: J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol Date: 2018-01-29 Impact factor: 2.576
Authors: William E Pelham; Gregory A Fabiano; James G Waxmonsky; Andrew R Greiner; Elizabeth M Gnagy; William E Pelham; Stefany Coxe; Jessica Verley; Ira Bhatia; Katie Hart; Kathryn Karch; Evelien Konijnendijk; Katy Tresco; Inbal Nahum-Shani; Susan A Murphy Journal: J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol Date: 2016-02-16