Beardslee William R, Gladstone Tracy R G, Wright Ellen J, Cooper Andrew B
Judge Baker Children's Center, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, USA.
Pediatrics. 2003 Aug;112(2):e119-31. doi: 10.1542/peds.112.2.e119.
Depression in parents is a prevalent and impairing illness that is encountered frequently in medical practice. Children of depressed parents are at risk for psychopathology and other difficulties. A series of recent national reports have recommended the development of prevention efforts targeting children of depressed parents. Yet, to date, few controlled prevention studies of depression in children and adolescents have been conducted. In this study, we report the evaluation of 2 preventive intervention strategies that target children living in homes with depressed parents. Both are public health approaches that were designed to be used by a wide range of practitioners from a variety of disciplines, including pediatricians, internists, school counselors, nurses, and mental health practitioners. We adopted a developmental perspective and intervened with families when children were entering the age of highest risk for depression onset (ie, adolescence). We chose a family-based approach to prevention and sought to reduce risk factors and enhance protective factors for early adolescents by increasing positive interactions between parents and children, and by increasing understanding of the illness for everyone in the family. Our prevention approaches were designed to provide information about mood disorders to parents, to equip parents with the skills they need to communicate information to their children, and to open a dialogue with their children about the effects of parental depression. We hypothesized that participation in these prevention programs would result in parental change in child-related behaviors and attitudes about depression and its impact on the family. In addition, we hypothesized that this parental change would produce change in children's self-understanding, and in children's depressive symptomatology.
We conducted a large-scale efficacy trial of 2 manual-based preventive intervention programs that were designed to be used widely in public health settings. These interventions target the relatively healthy children (ages 8-15) of parents with mood disorder. Ninety-three families (88.5% of our initial sample), including 121 children, participated in this study through the fourth assessment point. These families were assigned randomly to either a lecture or a clinician-facilitated intervention. Both interventions were specified in manuals. The lecture condition consisted of 2 separate meetings delivered in a group format without children present. The clinician-facilitated condition consisted of 6 to 11 sessions, including separate meetings with parents and children, and a family meeting in which the parents led a discussion of the illness and of positive steps that can be taken to promote healthy functioning in the children. In addition, telephone contacts or refresher meetings were conducted at 6- to 9-month intervals. In both conditions, psychoeducational material about mood disorders, risk, and resilience was presented and efforts were made to decrease feelings of guilt and blame in children. Parents were helped to build resilience in their children through encouraging their friendships, their success outside of the home, and their understanding of parental illness and of themselves. In addition, in the clinician-facilitated condition, efforts were made to link the psychoeducational material presented to the family's own unique illness experience. To address directly how their lives had changed, all family members in both conditions were assessed for psychopathology and for overall functioning at intake, and for psychopathology, functioning, and response to intervention immediately postintervention, approximately 1 year postintervention, and again approximately 2.5 years postintervention.
We examined the outcomes of child understanding and internalizing symptomatology, and a number of predictor variables, using repeated measures analyses with generalized estimating equations. We found that parents in both conditions reported significant change in child-related behaviors and and attitudes, and that the amount of change reported increased over time from time 3 to time 4 (chi2(1) = 18.1). Moreover, relative to parents in the lecture program (mean number of changes = 6.3), parents in the clinician-facilitated program reported more change in child-related behaviors and attitudes (mean number of changes = 9.8). Children in both conditions reported increased understanding of parental illness attributable to participation in our intervention programs. There was a positive association between the amount of change children reported in their understanding of parental illness and the number of changes couples reported in child-related behaviors/attitudes (chi2(1) = 37.3; ie, parents who had changed the most in response to intervention had children who also changed the most). Finally, internalizing scores for all children decreased with increased time since intervention (chi2(1) = 7.3). In addition, females had higher internalizing scores than males (chi2(1) = 5.3). There was no significant effect of group on children's change in internalizing symptomatology (chi2(1) = 0.2).
We enrolled families with relatively healthy children, administered carefully designed preventive interventions that are manual-based and relatively brief, and found that these programs do have long-standing positive effects in how families problem solve around parental illness. Our results show significant benefits from both interventions. Moreover, changes in parents' perceptions translated directly into changes in children's own understanding of parental illness. Parental behavior and attitude changes and their connection to child changes in understanding identify an important mediating variable: family change. By increasing children's understanding of parental mood disorder, our interventions were found to promote resilience-related qualities in these children at risk. This presentation represents the first and only longitudinal primary prevention study of relatively healthy children at risk for psychopathology attributable to parental mood disorder and demonstrates a significant reduction in risk factors and increase in protective factors in these families over a long time interval--2(1/2) years. Our results provide support for a family-based approach to preventive intervention.
父母抑郁是一种常见且具有损害性的疾病,在医疗实践中经常遇到。抑郁父母的子女有出现精神病理学问题及其他困难的风险。最近一系列国家报告建议针对抑郁父母的子女开展预防工作。然而,迄今为止,针对儿童和青少年抑郁的对照预防研究很少。在本研究中,我们报告了对两种针对与抑郁父母同住的儿童的预防性干预策略的评估。这两种都是公共卫生方法,旨在供包括儿科医生、内科医生、学校辅导员、护士和心理健康从业者在内的各学科的广泛从业者使用。我们采用了发展的视角,在儿童进入抑郁发病风险最高的年龄(即青春期)时对家庭进行干预。我们选择了一种基于家庭的预防方法,试图通过增加父母与孩子之间的积极互动,以及增加家庭中每个人对该疾病的了解,来降低风险因素并增强青少年早期的保护因素。我们的预防方法旨在向父母提供有关情绪障碍的信息,使父母具备向孩子传达信息所需的技能,并就父母抑郁的影响与孩子展开对话。我们假设参与这些预防计划将导致父母在与孩子相关的行为以及对抑郁及其对家庭影响的态度上发生改变。此外,我们假设这种父母的改变会使孩子的自我认知以及孩子的抑郁症状发生改变。
我们对两种基于手册的预防性干预计划进行了大规模疗效试验,这些计划旨在在公共卫生环境中广泛使用。这些干预针对患有情绪障碍的父母的相对健康的孩子(8 - 15岁)。93个家庭(占我们初始样本的88.5%),包括121名儿童,通过第四次评估点参与了本研究。这些家庭被随机分配到讲座组或临床医生指导的干预组。两种干预都在手册中有详细说明。讲座组包括2次以小组形式进行的单独会议,孩子不参与。临床医生指导组包括6至11次会议,包括分别与父母和孩子的会议,以及一次家庭会议,在该会议中父母主导关于疾病以及可以采取哪些积极措施来促进孩子健康功能的讨论。此外,每隔6至9个月进行电话联系或复习会议。在两种情况下,都提供了关于情绪障碍、风险和恢复力的心理教育材料,并努力减少孩子的内疚和自责感。通过鼓励孩子建立友谊、在家庭之外取得成功以及理解父母的疾病和自己,帮助父母培养孩子的恢复力。此外,在临床医生指导组中,努力将所提供的心理教育材料与家庭自身独特的疾病经历联系起来。为了直接了解他们的生活发生了怎样的变化,对两种情况下的所有家庭成员在入组时进行了精神病理学和整体功能评估,并在干预后立即、大约干预1年后以及大约干预2.5年后再次进行精神病理学、功能和对干预反应的评估。
我们使用广义估计方程的重复测量分析,检查了儿童理解和内化症状的结果以及一些预测变量。我们发现,两种情况下的父母都报告在与孩子相关的行为和态度上有显著变化,并且从第3次到第4次报告的变化量随时间增加(χ²(1)=18.1)。此外,相对于讲座组的父母(平均变化次数 = 6.3)来说,临床医生指导组的父母报告在与孩子相关的行为和态度上有更多变化(平均变化次数 = 9.8)。两种情况下的孩子都报告由于参与我们的干预计划,对父母疾病的理解有所增加。孩子报告的对父母疾病理解的变化量与夫妻报告的与孩子相关行为/态度变化次数之间存在正相关(χ²(1)=37.3;即,对干预反应变化最大的父母,其孩子的变化也最大)。最后,所有孩子的内化得分随着干预后时间的增加而降低(χ²(1)=7.3)。此外,女孩的内化得分高于男孩(χ²(1)=5.3)。组对孩子内化症状变化没有显著影响(χ²(1)=0.2)。
我们招募了有相对健康孩子的家庭,实施了精心设计的基于手册且相对简短的预防性干预,发现这些计划在家庭围绕父母疾病解决问题的方式上确实有长期的积极影响。我们的结果显示两种干预都有显著益处。此外,父母认知的变化直接转化为孩子对父母疾病自身理解的变化。父母行为和态度的变化以及它们与孩子理解变化的联系确定了一个重要的中介变量:家庭变化。通过增加孩子对父母情绪障碍的理解,我们的干预被发现能促进这些有风险孩子的恢复力相关特质。本报告是对因父母情绪障碍有精神病理学风险的相对健康儿童的首个也是唯一的纵向一级预防研究,表明在长达2.5年的时间间隔内,这些家庭的风险因素显著降低,保护因素增加。我们的结果为基于家庭的预防干预方法提供了支持。