WHAT'S KNOWN ON THIS SUBJECT: Integrated or collaborative care intervention models have revealed gains in provider care processes and outcomes in adult, child, and adolescent populations with mental health disorders. However optimistic, conclusions are not definitive due to methodologic limitations and a dearth of studies. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS:This randomized trial provides further evidence for the efficacy of an on-site intervention (Doctor Office Collaborative Care) coordinated by care managers for children' s behavior problems. The findings provide support for integrated behavioral health care using novel provider and caregiver outcomes.abstract OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of collaborative care for behavior problems, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and anxiety in pediatric primary care (Doctor Office Collaborative Care; DOCC). METHODS:Children and their caregivers participated from 8 pediatric practices that were cluster randomized to DOCC (n = 160) or enhanced usual care (EUC; n = 161). In DOCC, a care manager delivered a personalized, evidence-based intervention. EUC patients received psychoeducation and a facilitated specialty care referral. Care processes measures were collected after the 6-month intervention period. Family outcome measures included the Vanderbilt ADHD Diagnostic Parent Rating Scale, Parenting Stress Index-Short Form, Individualized Goal Attainment Ratings, and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement Scale. Most measures were collected at baseline, and 6-, 12-, and 18-month assessments. Provider outcome measures examined perceived treatment change, efficacy, and obstacles, and practice climate.RESULTS: DOCC (versus EUC) was associated with higher rates of treatment initiation (99.4% vs 54.2%; P , .001) and completion (76.6% vs 11.6%, P , .001), improvement in behavior problems, hyperactivity, and internalizing problems (P , .05 to .01), and parental stress (P , .05-.001), remission in behavior and internalizing problems (P , .01, .05), goal improvement (P , .05 to .001), treatment response (P , .05), and consumer satisfaction (P , .05). DOCC pediatricians reported greater perceived practice change, efficacy, and skill use to treat ADHD (P , .05 to .01).CONCLUSIONS: Implementing a collaborative care intervention for behavior problems in community pediatric practices is feasible and broadly effective, supporting the utility of integrated behavioral health care services. Pediatrics 2014;133:e981-e992

This study examines the treatment outcomes of 144, 6–11 year-old, clinically referred boys and girls diagnosed with Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD) or Conduct Disorder (CD) who were randomly assigned to a modular-based treatment protocol that was applied by research study clinicians either in the community (COMM) or a clinic office (CLINIC). To examine normative comparisons, a matched sample of 69 healthy control children was included. Multiple informants completed diagnostic interviews and self-reports at six assessment timepoints (pretreatment to 3-year follow-up) to evaluate changes in the child’s behavioral and emotional problems, psychopathic features, functional impairment, diagnostic status, and service involvement. Using HLM and logistic regression models, COMM and CLINIC showed significant and comparable improvements on all outcomes. By 3-year follow-up, 36% of COMM and 47% of CLINIC patients no longer met criteria for either ODD or CD, and 48% and 57% of the children in these two respective conditions had levels of parent-rated externalizing behavior problems in the normal range. We discuss the nature and implications of these novel findings regarding the role of treatment context or setting for the treatment and long-term outcome of behavior disorders.

The Partnerships for Families project is a randomized clinical trial designed to evaluate the implementation of Alternatives for Families: A Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy (AF-CBT), an evidence-based treatment for family conflict, coercion, and aggression, including child physical abuse. To evaluate the effectiveness of a training program in this model, 182 community practitioners from 10 agencies were randomized to receive AF-CBT training (n = 90) using a learning community model (workshops, consultation visits) or Training as Usual (TAU; n = 92) which provided trainings per agency routine. Practitioners completed self-report measures at four time points (0, 6, 12, and 18 months following baseline). Of those assigned to AF-CBT, 89% participated in at least one training activity and 68% met a "training completion" definition. A total of 80 (44%) practitioners were still active clinicians in the study by 18-month assessment in that they had not met our staff turnover or study withdrawal criteria. Using an intent-to-train design, hierarchical linear modeling analyses revealed significantly greater initial improvements for those in the AF-CBT training condition (vs. TAU condition) in CBT-related knowledge and use of AF-CBT teaching processes, abuse-specific skills, and general psychological skills. In addition, practitioners in both groups reported significantly more negative perceptions of organizational climate through the intervention phase. These significant, albeit modest, findings are discussed in the context of treatment training, research, and work force issues as they relate to the diverse backgrounds, settings, and populations served by community practitioners.

The Partnerships for Families project is a randomized clinical trial to evaluate the effectiveness of Alternatives for Families: A Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (AF-CBT), an evidence-based treatment (EBT) for families who are at risk of or have histories of child physical abuse. Across 10 agencies whose programs were supported by referrals from the mental health or child welfare system, individual providers were randomized to receive AF-CBT training ( n = 90) in a 6-month learning community or treatment as usual (TAU; n = 92) which provided trainings per agency routine. We recruited families served by providers in the AF-CBT ( n = 122) and TAU ( n = 73) conditions and collected multiple outcomes at up to four time points (0, 6, 12, and 18 months). Using univariate tests and growth curve models, the analyses revealed that AF-CBT (vs. TAU) showed improvements in both service systems (e.g., abuse risk, family dysfunction) or one service system (e.g., threats of force, child to parent minor assault), with some outcomes showing no improvement (e.g., parental anger). These findings are discussed in relation to AF-CBT, service system, provider, and family characteristics, and training/dissemination methods that affect the delivery of an EBT for this population in community settings.

Cerebral autosomal dominant arteriopathy with subcortical infarcts and leukoencephalopathy (CADASIL) is the commonest inherited stroke disorder. We report a novel presentation of multiple internal border zone infarcts in a patient with COVID-19 and CADASIL. The clinical significance of this case is to highlight the risk of COVID-19 exacerbating CADASIL. Possible pathophysiological mechanisms are discussed, which may be extrapolated to patients with cerebral small vessel disease and non-CADASIL strokes.

This study examines the impact of a brief booster treatment administered three years after the delivery of an acute treatment in a group (N = 118) of clinically referred boys and girls (ages 6 to 11) originally diagnosed with Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD) or Conduct Disorder (CD). At the conclusion of the acute treatment and three-year follow-up period (i.e., study month 42), the sample was re-randomized into Booster treatment or Enhanced Usual Care and then assessed at four later timepoints (i.e., post-booster, and 6-, 12- and 24-month booster follow-up). Booster treatment was directed towards addressing individualized problems and some unique developmental issues of adolescence based on the same original protocol content and treatment setting, whereas the no-booster condition involved providing clinical recommendations based on the assessment and an outside referral for services. HLM analyses identified no significant group differences and few time effects across child, parent, and teacher reports on a broad range of child functioning and impairment outcomes. Analyses examining the role of putative moderators or mediators (e.g., severity of externalizing behavior, dose of treatment) were likewise non-significant. We discuss the nature and implications of these novel findings regarding the role and timing of booster treatment to address the continuity of DBD over time.

This study evaluates the impact of a 6-month care management intervention for 206 children diagnosed with comorbid attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) from a sample of 321 five- to 12-year-old children recruited for treatment of behavior problems in 8 pediatric primary care offices. Practices were cluster-randomized to Doctor Office Collaboration Care (DOCC) or Enhanced Usual Care (EUC). Chart reviews documented higher rates of service delivery, prescription of medication for ADHD, and titration in DOCC (vs EUC). Based on complex conditional models, DOCC showed greater acute improvement in individualized ADHD treatment goals and follow-up improvements in quality of life and ADHD and oppositional defiant disorder goals. Medication use had a significant effect on acute and follow-up ADHD symptom reduction and quality of life. Medication continuity was associated with some long-term gains. A collaborative care intervention for behavior problems that incorporated treatment guidelines for ADHD in primary care was more effective than psychoeducation and facilitated referral to community treatment.

Medication refusers remain poorly understood but certain correlates, such as parental self-efficacy, parental emotional support for their youth, and medication acceptability, warrant further evaluation.