Zimmer-Gembeck Melanie J, Rudolph Julia, Edwards Elia-Jade, Swan Kellie, Campbell Shawna M, Hawes Tanya, Webb Haley J
Griffith University, School of Applied Psychology and Menzies Health Institute of Queensland.
Griffith University, School of Applied Psychology.
Behav Ther. 2022 Mar;53(2):208-223. doi: 10.1016/j.beth.2021.07.003. Epub 2021 Aug 5.
The Circle of Security-Parenting Intervention (COS-P; Cooper et al., 2009) is a psychoeducational program for caregivers of young children that has been widely disseminated. The program is founded in attachment theory and relies on computer-delivered content and parent reflection and discussion to teach concepts of safety and security to promote better caregiver-child relationships and child wellbeing. The present study is a randomized controlled trial of COS-P, individually delivered to 85 Australian caregivers (51 COS-P, 34 waitlist control) who reported parenting distress and child disruptive behaviors. Caregivers completed a baseline assessment and repeated the assessment after completion of COS-P or 8 weeks on the waitlist. Caregivers completed surveys to report child symptoms, and parenting stress, anxious and avoidant attachment, reflective functioning, parenting practices, and depressive symptoms. No differences in COS-P vs. waitlist participants were found at baseline. Analyses of complete data (35 COS-P, 25-26 waitlist) revealed a greater decline in caregivers' attachment anxiety and negative parenting relative to waitlist, but only attachment anxiety in intent-to-treat analyses. Other improvements were found, but these extended to both the COS-P and waitlist conditions and did not differ between conditions. Overall, effects of COS-P were small and rarely significant, suggesting the need to consider alternative programs that have evidence of effectiveness when providing services to at-risk families.
安全圈育儿干预项目(COS-P;库珀等人,2009年)是一项面向幼儿照料者的心理教育项目,已得到广泛传播。该项目基于依恋理论,依靠计算机提供的内容以及家长的反思和讨论来传授安全和保障的概念,以促进更好的照料者与孩子的关系以及孩子的幸福。本研究是对COS-P的一项随机对照试验,该项目单独提供给85名澳大利亚照料者(51名接受COS-P,34名列入候补名单作为对照),这些照料者报告了育儿困扰和孩子的破坏性行为。照料者完成了基线评估,并在完成COS-P或在候补名单上等待8周后再次进行评估。照料者完成了调查,以报告孩子的症状、育儿压力、焦虑和回避型依恋、反思功能、育儿方式以及抑郁症状。在基线时,未发现接受COS-P的参与者与候补名单参与者之间存在差异。对完整数据(35名接受COS-P,25 - 26名候补名单参与者)的分析显示,与候补名单相比,照料者的依恋焦虑和消极育儿方式有更大程度的下降,但在意向性分析中仅依恋焦虑有下降。还发现了其他改善情况,但这些改善在COS-P组和候补名单组中都有,且两组之间没有差异。总体而言,COS-P的效果很小,很少具有显著性,这表明在为高危家庭提供服务时,需要考虑有有效性证据的替代项目。