Communication, Parent-Child Relations
Conditions
Keywords
telehealth, parent-child relationships, adolescent, Quality communication, Housing stability, Child welfare, Emotional regulation
Brief summary
The purpose of this research is to adapt and evaluate the efficacy of an existing family based intervention to be delivered via telehealth to child welfare-involved (CWI) youth and their caregiver of origin.
Detailed description
The goal of this study is to adapt and evaluate the efficacy of an existing empirically supported, family-based affect management intervention to be delivered via telehealth. There are two versions of this intervention: 1) a dyadic version to be delivered to CWI youth and their caregiver of origin, and 2) a caregiver-only version to be delivered to any caregiver (including kinship caregivers) of a CWI youth. The study involves iteratively adapting the intervention with feedback from youth and caregiver participants and stakeholder partners, as well as evaluating the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary effectiveness of the intervention.
Interventions
BEHAVIORALFamily-based Telehealth Intervention
The Family Telehealth intervention focuses on improving parent-child relationships and communication. For the dyadic version, the intervention involves eleven hours of intervention material; it includes motivational interviews, individual and joint sessions co-led by two separate clinicians. The sessions will be delivered on a weekly basis. For the caregiver-only version, the intervention involves six hours of intervention material; it includes a motivational interview and individual sessions led by a single clinician. The sessions will be delivered on a weekly basis.
Sponsors
University of California, San Francisco
Visa Foundation
Study design
Allocation
NA
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Intervention model description
This study is designed to iteratively adapt a family-based intervention with feedback from youth and caregiver participants and stakeholder partners, as well as to evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary effectiveness of the intervention.
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
12 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
Eligible youth: * Will be between the ages of 12 and 18 years * Will have ongoing child welfare involvement * Will be proficient in English * Will have no cognitive impairment which would preclude provision of informed assent Eligible caregivers for dyadic version: * Will be the caregiver of origin for the enrolled youth * Will be proficient in English or Spanish * Will be cognitively capable of providing informed consent for themselves and their youth Eligible caregivers for caregiver-only version: * Will be the caregiver of a youth, between the ages of 12 and 18 years, with ongoing child welfare involvement * Will be proficient in English or Spanish * Will have no cognitive impairment which would preclude provision of informed consent
Exclusion criteria
* Caregivers whose rights were terminated due to substantiated abuse or neglect.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale | Immediately after the intervention. | To measure caregiver and youth affect management skills. Scores range from 36 to 180, with higher scores indicating greater problems with emotion regulation. |
| Parent-adolescent General Communication Scale (PPAC) | Immediately after the intervention. | To measure caregiver-youth communication. The PPAC measures both positive and negative communication. Scores for positive communication ranging from 7 to 35, with higher scores indicating more positive communication. Scores for negative communication range from 13 to 65, with higher scores indicating more negative communication. |
| Parent-adolescent General Communication Scale | Three months post-intervention. | To measure caregiver-youth communication. The PPAC measures both positive and negative communication. Scores for positive communication ranging from 7 to 35, with higher scores indicating more positive communication. Scores for negative communication range from 13 to 65, with higher scores indicating more negative communication. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Telehealth Satisfaction Questionnaire | Immediately after the intervention. | To measure attitudes about the delivery of the intervention via telehealth. |
| Family telehealth feedback form | Two weeks post-baseline. | To measure attitudes about the content and delivery of the intervention. |
Countries
United States
Contacts
PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORMarina Tolou-Shams, PhD
University of California, San Francisco
Outcome results
None listed