Barlow Jane, Bergman Hanna, Kornør Hege, Wei Yinghui, Bennett Cathy
Division of Mental Health and Wellbeing, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Gibbett Hill Road, Coventry, UK, CV4 7LF.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Aug 1;2016(8):CD003680. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003680.pub3.
Emotional and behavioural problems in children are common. Research suggests that parenting has an important role to play in helping children to become well-adjusted, and that the first few months and years are especially important. Parenting programmes may have a role to play in improving the emotional and behavioural adjustment of infants and toddlers, and this review examined their effectiveness with parents and carers of young children.
In July 2015 we searched CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library), Ovid MEDLINE, Embase (Ovid), and 10 other databases. We also searched two trial registers and handsearched reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews.
Two reviewers independently assessed the records retrieved by the search. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs of group-based parenting programmes that had used at least one standardised instrument to measure emotional and behavioural adjustment in children.
One reviewer extracted data and a second reviewer checked the extracted data. We presented the results for each outcome in each study as standardised mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Where appropriate, we combined the results in a meta-analysis using a random-effects model. We used the GRADE (Grades of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach to assess the overall quality of the body of evidence for each outcome.
We identified 22 RCTs and two quasi-RCTs evaluating the effectiveness of group-based parenting programmes in improving the emotional and behavioural adjustment of children aged up to three years and 11 months (maximum mean age three years 11 months).The total number of participants in the studies were 3161 parents and their young children. Eight studies were conducted in the USA, five in the UK, four in Canada, five in Australia, one in Mexico, and one in Peru. All of the included studies were of behavioural, cognitive-behavioural or videotape modelling parenting programmes.We judged 50% (or more) of the included studies to be at low risk for selection bias, detection bias (observer-reported outcomes), attrition bias, selective reporting bias, and other bias. As it is not possible to blind participants and personnel to the type of intervention in these trials, we judged all studies to have high risk of performance bias. Also, there was a high risk of detection bias in the 20 studies that included parent-reported outcomes.The results provide evidence that group-based parenting programmes reduce overall emotional and behavioural problems (SMD -0.81, 95% CI -1.37 to -0.25; 5 studies, 280 participants, low quality evidence) based on total parent-reported data assessed at postintervention. This result was not, however, maintained when two quasi-RCTs were removed as part of a sensitivity analysis (SMD -0.67, 95% CI -1.43 to 0.09; 3 studies, 221 participants). The results of data from subscales show evidence of reduced total externalising problems (SMD -0.23, 95% CI -0.46 to -0.01; 8 studies, 989 participants, moderate quality evidence). Single study results show very low quality evidence of reductions in externalising problems hyperactivity-inattention subscale (SMD -1.34; 95% CI -2.37 to -0.31; 19 participants), low quality evidence of no effect on total internalising problems (SMD 0.34; 95% CI -0.12 to 0.81; 73 participants), and very low quality evidence of an increase in social skills (SMD 3.59; 95% CI 2.42 to 4.76; 32 participants), based on parent-reported data assessed at postintervention. Results for secondary outcomes, which were also measured using subscales, show an impact on parent-child interaction in terms of reduced negative behaviour (SMD -0.22, 95% CI -0.39 to -0.06; 7 studies, 941 participants, moderate quality evidence), and improved positive behaviour (SMD 0.48, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.79; 4 studies, 173 participants, moderate quality evidence) as rated by independent observers postintervention. No further meta-analyses were possible. Results of subgroup analyses show no evidence for treatment duration (seven weeks or less versus more than eight weeks) and inconclusive evidence for prevention versus treatment interventions.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this review, which relate to the broad group of universal and at-risk (targeted) children and parents, provide tentative support for the use of group-based parenting programmes to improve the overall emotional and behavioural adjustment of children with a maximum mean age of three years and 11 months, in the short-term. There is, however, a need for more research regarding the role that these programmes might play in the primary prevention of both emotional and behavioural problems, and their long-term effectiveness.
儿童的情绪和行为问题很常见。研究表明,养育方式在帮助儿童适应良好方面起着重要作用,最初的几个月和几年尤为重要。育儿项目可能有助于改善婴幼儿的情绪和行为调适,本综述探讨了其对幼儿父母及照料者的效果。
2015年7月,我们检索了Cochrane系统评价数据库、Ovid MEDLINE、Embase(Ovid)以及其他10个数据库。我们还检索了两个试验注册库,并手工检索了纳入研究及相关系统评价的参考文献列表。
两名综述作者独立评估检索得到的记录。我们纳入了基于小组的育儿项目的随机对照试验(RCT)和半随机对照试验,这些项目至少使用一种标准化工具来测量儿童的情绪和行为调适。
一名综述作者提取数据,另一名作者检查提取的数据。我们将每项研究中各结局的结果表示为标准化均数差(SMD)及95%置信区间(CI)。在适当情况下,我们采用随机效应模型对结果进行Meta分析。我们使用GRADE(推荐分级、评估、制定与评价)方法评估每个结局证据体的整体质量。
我们纳入了22项RCT和2项半随机对照试验,评估基于小组的育儿项目对最大平均年龄为三岁零十一个月的儿童情绪和行为调适的改善效果。研究中的参与者总数为3161名家长及其幼儿。8项研究在美国开展,5项在英国,4项在加拿大,5项在澳大利亚,1项在墨西哥,1项在秘鲁。所有纳入研究均为行为、认知行为或录像示范育儿项目。我们判定50%(或更多)的纳入研究在选择偏倚、检测偏倚(观察者报告结局)、失访偏倚、选择性报告偏倚和其他偏倚方面风险较低。由于在这些试验中不可能对参与者和工作人员隐瞒干预类型,我们判定所有研究在实施偏倚方面风险较高。此外,在纳入家长报告结局的20项研究中,检测偏倚风险较高。结果表明,基于干预后家长报告的总数据,基于小组的育儿项目可减少总体情绪和行为问题(SMD -0.81,95%CI -1.37至-0.25;5项研究,280名参与者,低质量证据)。然而,作为敏感性分析的一部分剔除2项半随机对照试验后,该结果未得到维持(SMD -0.67,95%CI -1.43至0.09;3项研究,221名参与者)。分量表数据结果显示外在问题总分有减少的证据(SMD -0.23,95%CI -0.46至-0.01;8项研究,989名参与者,中等质量证据)。单项研究结果显示,外在问题多动-注意力不集中分量表减少的证据质量极低(SMD -1.34;95%CI -2.37至-0.31;19名参与者),对内化问题总分无影响的证据质量低(SMD 0.34;95%CI -0.12至0.81;73名参与者),社交技能增加的证据质量极低(SMD 3.59;95%CI 2.42至4.76;32名参与者),均基于干预后家长报告的数据。次要结局(也使用分量表测量)结果显示,干预后独立观察者评定,在减少负面行为方面对亲子互动有影响(SMD -0.22,95%CI -0.39至-0.06;7项研究,941名参与者,中等质量证据),在改善积极行为方面有影响(SMD 0.48,95%CI 0.17至0.79;4项研究,173名参与者,中等质量证据)。无法进行进一步的Meta分析。亚组分析结果显示,没有证据表明治疗持续时间(七周或更短与八周以上)有差异,预防与治疗干预的证据尚无定论。
本综述的结果涉及广泛的普通儿童和高危(目标)儿童及家长群体,为使用基于小组的育儿项目在短期内改善最大平均年龄为三岁零十一个月儿童的整体情绪和行为调适提供了初步支持。然而,对于这些项目在情绪和行为问题的一级预防中可能发挥的作用及其长期效果,仍需要更多研究。