a Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Health , Florida International University.
b Department of Psychology, Florida International University.
J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol. 2018 Mar-Apr;47(2):248-265. doi: 10.1080/15374416.2018.1426005.
Spikes in symptom severity are noted for adolescents with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) at the transitions to middle and high school that are attributed to developmental maladjustment. This study evaluated the effectiveness of high-intensity (HI; 412 hr, $4,373 per participant) versus low-intensity (LI; 24 hr, $97 per participant) skills-based summer intervention delivered to adolescents with ADHD by local school district staff. Participants were 325 ethnically diverse rising sixth and ninth graders with ADHD randomized to HI versus LI (n = 218) or recruited into an untreated comparison group (n = 107). Group × Time 1-year outcome trajectories were compared using linear mixed models. Both interventions possessed high fidelity and were viewed by families as enjoyable and beneficial. Youth attendance was higher for HI (80%) versus LI (45%). Parent training attendance was uniform across groups (~50%). Parent and student attendance did not impact trajectories. Primary benefits of HI over LI were to note taking (d = .50), parent contingency management (d = .43), and parent-rated ADHD symptoms (d = .40-.46; ninth grade only). Secondary analyses suggested that HI may produce additional benefits compared to no treatment for home organization skills (HI vs. untreated d = .54), parent-teen conflict (HI vs. untreated d = .39), and grade point average (HI vs. untreated d = .47, ninth grade only). Summer HI treatment was superior to LI in engagement and uptake of certain skills. However, the extent to which these medium benefits on a limited number of outcomes justify high costs compared to LI remains an open question. Delivering treatment during the summer instead of school year may limit generalizability.
青少年注意缺陷多动障碍(ADHD)在进入中学和高中时症状严重程度会出现高峰,这被归因于发育失调。本研究评估了由当地学区工作人员向 ADHD 青少年提供的高强度(HI;412 小时,每位参与者 4373 美元)与低强度(LI;24 小时,每位参与者 97 美元)基于技能的暑期干预的有效性。参与者为 325 名具有种族多样性的即将升入六年级和九年级的 ADHD 青少年,他们被随机分配到 HI 组与 LI 组(n=218)或未接受治疗的对照组(n=107)。使用线性混合模型比较了组×1 年的结果轨迹。两种干预措施都具有高度的保真度,并且被家庭视为有趣和有益的。HI(80%)的出勤率高于 LI(45%)。各组的家长培训出勤率都差不多(~50%)。家长和学生的出勤率对轨迹没有影响。HI 相对于 LI 的主要优势在于记笔记(d=0.50)、家长条件管理(d=0.43)和家长评定的 ADHD 症状(d=0.40-0.46;仅在九年级)。进一步的分析表明,与未治疗相比,HI 可能会为家庭组织技能(HI 与未治疗 d=0.54)、父母与青少年的冲突(HI 与未治疗 d=0.39)和平均绩点(HI 与未治疗 d=0.47,仅在九年级)提供额外的益处。与 LI 相比,HI 暑期治疗在参与度和某些技能的接受度方面更优。然而,与 LI 相比,这些在有限数量的结果上的中等益处是否证明其高成本是合理的,这仍然是一个悬而未决的问题。在暑假期间而不是学年期间提供治疗可能会限制其推广性。