Search

Background: Residential treatment is among the most intensive and expensive settings for children with behavioral health challenges; yet, the extent to which evidence-based practices are used in these settings is unknown. Aim: The purpose of this study was to describe the extent which family therapy, case management, telehealth, peer support, and family psychoeducation are provided in residential treatment using data from the National Mental Health Services Survey (N-MHSS). Organizational factors—region, ownership, payment, licensing/accreditation, and facility size—were examined in relation to evidence-based practices to understand disparities in care. Methods: This was a secondary analysis of publicly available data from the 2018 N-MHSS. A subpopulation was created consisting of residential facilities that served children (N = 576). Descriptive statistics were used to describe the sample, and Cohen's h was calculated to determine patterns of evidence-based practice utilization. Results: Evidence-based practices from most to least prevalent were family therapy (76%), family psychoeducation (74%), case management (71.1%), telehealth (17.2%), and peer support (8.7%). The provision of evidence-based practices was not evenly distributed. There were primarily small to moderate differences by organizational factors, including region (i.e., Northeast, Midwest), ownership status (i.e., for-profit), payment type (i.e., self-pay, private insurance), licensing/accreditation (Department of Family and Children Services), and facility capacity (>251 clients served per year). Conclusion: Findings demonstrate a need for research-practice partnerships to determine the barriers that prevent effective evidence-based practices from being implemented in the residential treatment setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To summarize a preconference workshop that focused on how to be successful in obtaining funding by making one's scholarship innovative and significant. Method: In 2021, at the annual American Psychiatric Nurses Association (APNA) Conference, a panel of nurse scholars reflected on and discussed how to make grant proposals innovative and significant. Two moderators posed questions to five panelists at different stages in their research trajectories about four key research concepts: idea conception, framing for the funding agency, significance, and innovation. Results: Conceptualizing an innovative, scholarly idea starts with a passion for the topic, a team of experts and scholarly community, and time to think and delve into the literature. For funding opportunities, start small, read the funding announcements thoroughly and carefully, and make sure it is the right fit. Strategies to illustrate significance include avoiding generalizations, maintaining objectivity, being clear about impact, and using strength-based language. Contemplate the many facets of innovation as well as balance innovation and feasibility. Conclusions: Inclusion of challenges in composing significance and innovation sections of grant proposals offers knowledge for psychiatric nurse researchers to add to their toolkits as they seek funding and conduct research and scholarship. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study presents a tiered conceptualization of family partnership developed by the Family-Run Executive Director Leadership Association (FREDLA) with examples of strategies from the literature. This sub-study was part of an overarching systematic review project that aimed to review the literature on family partnership in relation to youth outcomes. The tiers of family partnership include family involvement (i.e. family's inclusion in their child's care); family engagement (i.e. collaboration between TRC and families); family-driven (i.e. families as full partners). This review included thirty studies (n = 23 family involvement, n = 7 family engagement, n = 0 family-driven). The most common family involvement methods were family therapy and family visits to the program, primarily, delivered face-to-face. The most common family engagement method was activities, therapies, and skill building occurring at the home with family present. Methods of measuring family partnership primarily included the use of administrative data. Implications for research and practice include the provision of research that evaluates the effects of family partnership on outcomes important in the TRC setting and the development of research-practice and family-research collaborations to increase the uptake of effective family partnering methods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Research supports holistic expansion of the construct of resourcefulness by adding spiritual practices to the existing personal and social dimensions. This study describes the development and testing of items to measure spiritual resourcefulness. Methods/Design: Study phases were: (1) focus group development of item stems and responses; (2) expert testing; (3) scale construction; (4) field testing in 234 family caregivers; and (5) psychometric analysis to identify items for inclusion in a final scale. Findings: A focus group developed 40 item stems with potential responses reflecting three conceptual components of spiritual practices (rational, ritualistic, and relational). Content experts selected the best response for each item. A six-point Likert scale consistent with the Resourcefulness Scale© was constructed. Data from field testing were factor analyzed. The best solution revealed two factors containing 12 items. Ritualistic and relational items loaded together (44.7% variance explained). Rational items loaded separately (19.5% variance explained). Higher-order factor analysis indicated the two subscales reflected a single construct (71.93% variance explained; r =.44, p <.001). Conclusion: Availability of a psychometrically sound measure of spiritual resourcefulness is critical to expand resourcefulness training interventions to be more holistic. Clinical interventions can be enriched by including strategies to enhance personal, social, and spiritual resourcefulness skills. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Although adolescents make treatment gains in psychiatric residential treatment (RT), they experience significant difficulty adapting to the community and often do not sustain treatment gains long term. Their parents are often not provided with the necessary support or behaviour management skillset to bridge the gap between RT and home. Parent training, a gold standard behaviour management strategy, may be beneficial for parents of these youth and web-based parent training programmes may engage this difficult-to-reach population. This study focuses on a hybrid parent training programme that combines Parenting Wisely (PW), a web-based parent training with facilitated discussion groups (Parenting Wisely for Residential Treatment (PW RT )). This study aims to: (1) establish the feasibility and acceptability of PW RT , (2) evaluate whether PW RT engages target mechanisms (parental self-efficacy, parenting behaviours, social support, family function) and (3) determine the effects of PW RT on adolescent outcomes (internalising and externalising behaviours, placement restrictiveness)., Methods and Analysis: In this randomised control trial, parents (n=60) will be randomly assigned to PW RT or treatment as usual. Each week for 6 weeks, parents in the PW RT condition will complete two PW modules (20 min each) and attend one discussion group via Zoom (90 min). Adolescents (n=60) will not receive intervention; however, we will evaluate the feasibility of adolescent data collection for future studies. Data from parents and adolescents will be collected at baseline, post intervention (6 weeks post baseline) and 6 months post baseline to allow for a robust understanding of the longer-term effects of PW RT on treatment gain maintenance., Ethics and Dissemination: The study has been approved by The Ohio State University Institutional Review Board (protocol number 2022B0315). The outcomes of the study will be shared through presentations at both local and national conferences, publications in peer-reviewed journals and disseminated to the families and organisations that helped to facilitate the project., Trial Registration Number: NCT05764369 (V.1, December 2022)., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)