Home > Promising Practices > Clinician-Based Cognitive Psychoeducational Intervention for Families (Family Talk)

Clinician-Based Cognitive Psychoeducational Intervention for Families (Family Talk)

An Evidence-Based Practice

Description

The Clinician-Based Cognitive Psychoeducational Intervention is intended for families with parents with significant mood disorder. The intervention consists of 6-11 sessions that include separate meetings with parents and children, family meetings, and telephone contacts or refresher meetings at 6- to 9-month intervals. Sessions are conducted by trained psychologists, social workers, and nurses. The core elements of the intervention are (1) an assessment of all family members, (2) teaching information about affective disorders and risks and resilience in children, (3) linking information to the family's life experience, (4) decreasing feelings of guilt and blame in children, and (5) helping children to develop relationships within and outside the family to facilitate their independent functioning in school and in activities outside of the home. In family meetings, parents talk about their own sessions, their treatment, and how they are working to build resilience and protect their children.

Goal / Mission

The goal of this program is to provide information about mood disorders to parents, equip parents with skills they need to communicate this information to their children, and open dialogue in families about the effects of parental depression.

Impact

Parents in the program scored better in their reports of child-related behavior and attitude changes of parental illness than parents who received a group-format presentation. Children in the program scored higher on measures of improved understanding of parental mood disorder than children who received a group-format lecture.

Results / Accomplishments

Outcomes of the program include the following:

The parents in the clinician-facilitated intervention group (experimental group) averaged 2.7 more in mean scores in child-related behavior and attitude changes of parental illness than did the parents in the comparison group (who received a group-format presentation), M = 7.0, SD = 3.0 vs. M = 4.3, SD = 2.7, effect size = 0.87; X2(1) = 52.8, p < 0.0001. The number of reported changes increased across the four follow-up assessment points up to 4.5 years after the intervention, X2(3) = 88.6, p < 0.0001.

Children in the clinician-facilitated intervention group (experimental group) scored an average 0.7 points higher on improved understanding of parental mood disorder than did children in the comparison condition (who received a group-format lecture), M = 3.0, SD = 2.1 vs. M = 2.3, SD = 2.1; effect size = 0.33; X2(1) = 5.0; p < 0.05.

About this Promising Practice

Organization(s)
FAMpod
Primary Contact
FAMpod
info@fampod.org
http://fampod.org/
Topics
Health / Mental Health & Mental Disorders
Community / Social Environment
Organization(s)
FAMpod
Source
SAMHSA's National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs and Practices (NREPP)
For more details
http://fampod.org/mod/resource/view.php?id=24
Target Audience
Children, Families

Related Promising Practices

  1. Mental Health and Mental Illness: Interventions to Reduce Depression Among Older Adults Home-Based Depression Care Management
  2. Mental Health and Mental Illness: Interventions to Reduce Depression Among Older Adults Clinic-Based Depression Care Management
  3. Mental Health: Targeted School-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Programs to Reduce Depression and Anxiety Symptoms
  4. Mental Health: Universal School-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Programs to Reduce Depression and Anxiety Symptoms
  5. Blues Program (Cognitive Behavioral Group Depression Intervention)

More

Related Content for: Clinician-Based Cognitive Psychoeducational Intervention for Families (Family Talk)

An Evidence-Based Practice meets the following HCI criteria:

  1. The program description includes at a minimum: the sponsoring organization, program goals, program implementation steps, and outcomes that have demonstrated program success in achieving the program goal in one or more localities.
  2. The results from an evaluation of the program include quantitative measures showing improvement in the outcome(s) of interest after the implementation of the program (i.e. increase in smoking cessation, not just the delivery of a smoking cessation program). The outcome measure(s) is/are compared at relevant time periods before and after the intervention or program implementation. Alternatively, the evaluation study compares the outcome(s) between an intervention group and an appropriate control group.
  3. The study is of peer-review quality and presents numbers in a scientific manner; measurements of precision and reliability are included (e.g. confidence intervals, standard errors), results from statistical tests show a significant difference or change in the outcome measure(s), and relevant point estimates and p-values are presented. Note: if the results from an evaluation of a program are presented in a scientific manner and the outcome measure is improved compared to the baseline measurement or the control group but the difference is not statistically significant, the practice is classified as effective and not evidence-based.