Kapil Sayal, Laura Wyatt, Christopher Partlett, Colleen Ewart, Anupam Bhardwaj, Bernadka Dubicka, Tamsin Marshall, Julia Gledhill, Alexandra Lang, Kirsty Sprange, Louise Thomson, Sebastian Moody, Grace Holt, Helen Bould, Clare Upton, Matthew Keane, Edward Cox, Marilyn James, Alan Montgomery
{"title":"儿童和青少年情绪障碍标准化诊断评估的临床和成本效益:STADIA多中心随机对照试验","authors":"Kapil Sayal, Laura Wyatt, Christopher Partlett, Colleen Ewart, Anupam Bhardwaj, Bernadka Dubicka, Tamsin Marshall, Julia Gledhill, Alexandra Lang, Kirsty Sprange, Louise Thomson, Sebastian Moody, Grace Holt, Helen Bould, Clare Upton, Matthew Keane, Edward Cox, Marilyn James, Alan Montgomery","doi":"10.1111/jcpp.14090","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BackgroundStandardised Diagnostic Assessment tools, such as the Development and Well‐Being Assessment (DAWBA), may aid detection and diagnosis of emotional disorders but there is limited real‐world evidence of their clinical or cost effectiveness.MethodsWe conducted a multicentre, two‐arm parallel group randomised controlled trial in eight large National Health Service Trusts in England providing multidisciplinary specialist Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS). Participants (5–17 year‐olds with emotional difficulties referred to CAMHS) were randomly assigned (1:1), following referral receipt, to either receive the DAWBA and assessment‐as‐usual (intervention group) or assessment‐as‐usual (control group). Data were self‐reported by participants (parents and/or young person, depending on age) at baseline, 6‐ and 12‐month post‐randomisation and collected from clinical records up to 18 months post‐randomisation. The primary outcome was a clinician‐made diagnosis decision about the presence of an emotional disorder within 12 months of randomisation. Trial registration: ISRCTN15748675.ResultsIn total, 1,225 children and young people (58% female sex) were randomised (615 intervention; 610 control). Adherence to the intervention (full/partial completion) was 80% (494/615). At 12 months, 68 (11%) participants in the intervention group received an emotional disorder diagnosis versus 72 (12%) in the control group (adjusted risk ratio (RR) 0.94 [95% CI 0.70, 1.28]). The intervention was not cost effective. There was no evidence of any differences between groups for service‐related or participant‐reported secondary outcomes, for example, CAMHS acceptance of the index referral (intervention 277 (45%) versus control 262 (43%); RR: 1.06 [95% CI: 0.94, 1.19]) was similar between groups.ConclusionsAs delivered in this pragmatic trial, we found no evidence for the effectiveness or cost effectiveness of using a Standardised Diagnostic Assessment tool in aiding the detection of emotional disorders or clinical outcomes in clinically referred children and young people. Despite regular efforts to encourage clinicians to view the DAWBA report and consider its findings as part of assessment and diagnosis, we did not collect data on usage and therefore cannot confirm the extent to which clinicians did this. As a pragmatic trial that aimed to test the effectiveness of incorporating the DAWBA into usual practice and clinical care, our study found that, in the format as delivered in this trial, there was no impact on diagnosis or clinical outcomes.","PeriodicalId":187,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry","volume":"28 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The clinical and cost effectiveness of a STAndardised DIagnostic Assessment for children and adolescents with emotional difficulties: the STADIA multi‐centre randomised controlled trial\",\"authors\":\"Kapil Sayal, Laura Wyatt, Christopher Partlett, Colleen Ewart, Anupam Bhardwaj, Bernadka Dubicka, Tamsin Marshall, Julia Gledhill, Alexandra Lang, Kirsty Sprange, Louise Thomson, Sebastian Moody, Grace Holt, Helen Bould, Clare Upton, Matthew Keane, Edward Cox, Marilyn James, Alan Montgomery\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jcpp.14090\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"BackgroundStandardised Diagnostic Assessment tools, such as the Development and Well‐Being Assessment (DAWBA), may aid detection and diagnosis of emotional disorders but there is limited real‐world evidence of their clinical or cost effectiveness.MethodsWe conducted a multicentre, two‐arm parallel group randomised controlled trial in eight large National Health Service Trusts in England providing multidisciplinary specialist Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS). Participants (5–17 year‐olds with emotional difficulties referred to CAMHS) were randomly assigned (1:1), following referral receipt, to either receive the DAWBA and assessment‐as‐usual (intervention group) or assessment‐as‐usual (control group). Data were self‐reported by participants (parents and/or young person, depending on age) at baseline, 6‐ and 12‐month post‐randomisation and collected from clinical records up to 18 months post‐randomisation. The primary outcome was a clinician‐made diagnosis decision about the presence of an emotional disorder within 12 months of randomisation. Trial registration: ISRCTN15748675.ResultsIn total, 1,225 children and young people (58% female sex) were randomised (615 intervention; 610 control). Adherence to the intervention (full/partial completion) was 80% (494/615). At 12 months, 68 (11%) participants in the intervention group received an emotional disorder diagnosis versus 72 (12%) in the control group (adjusted risk ratio (RR) 0.94 [95% CI 0.70, 1.28]). The intervention was not cost effective. There was no evidence of any differences between groups for service‐related or participant‐reported secondary outcomes, for example, CAMHS acceptance of the index referral (intervention 277 (45%) versus control 262 (43%); RR: 1.06 [95% CI: 0.94, 1.19]) was similar between groups.ConclusionsAs delivered in this pragmatic trial, we found no evidence for the effectiveness or cost effectiveness of using a Standardised Diagnostic Assessment tool in aiding the detection of emotional disorders or clinical outcomes in clinically referred children and young people. Despite regular efforts to encourage clinicians to view the DAWBA report and consider its findings as part of assessment and diagnosis, we did not collect data on usage and therefore cannot confirm the extent to which clinicians did this. As a pragmatic trial that aimed to test the effectiveness of incorporating the DAWBA into usual practice and clinical care, our study found that, in the format as delivered in this trial, there was no impact on diagnosis or clinical outcomes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":187,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.14090\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.14090","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
The clinical and cost effectiveness of a STAndardised DIagnostic Assessment for children and adolescents with emotional difficulties: the STADIA multi‐centre randomised controlled trial
BackgroundStandardised Diagnostic Assessment tools, such as the Development and Well‐Being Assessment (DAWBA), may aid detection and diagnosis of emotional disorders but there is limited real‐world evidence of their clinical or cost effectiveness.MethodsWe conducted a multicentre, two‐arm parallel group randomised controlled trial in eight large National Health Service Trusts in England providing multidisciplinary specialist Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS). Participants (5–17 year‐olds with emotional difficulties referred to CAMHS) were randomly assigned (1:1), following referral receipt, to either receive the DAWBA and assessment‐as‐usual (intervention group) or assessment‐as‐usual (control group). Data were self‐reported by participants (parents and/or young person, depending on age) at baseline, 6‐ and 12‐month post‐randomisation and collected from clinical records up to 18 months post‐randomisation. The primary outcome was a clinician‐made diagnosis decision about the presence of an emotional disorder within 12 months of randomisation. Trial registration: ISRCTN15748675.ResultsIn total, 1,225 children and young people (58% female sex) were randomised (615 intervention; 610 control). Adherence to the intervention (full/partial completion) was 80% (494/615). At 12 months, 68 (11%) participants in the intervention group received an emotional disorder diagnosis versus 72 (12%) in the control group (adjusted risk ratio (RR) 0.94 [95% CI 0.70, 1.28]). The intervention was not cost effective. There was no evidence of any differences between groups for service‐related or participant‐reported secondary outcomes, for example, CAMHS acceptance of the index referral (intervention 277 (45%) versus control 262 (43%); RR: 1.06 [95% CI: 0.94, 1.19]) was similar between groups.ConclusionsAs delivered in this pragmatic trial, we found no evidence for the effectiveness or cost effectiveness of using a Standardised Diagnostic Assessment tool in aiding the detection of emotional disorders or clinical outcomes in clinically referred children and young people. Despite regular efforts to encourage clinicians to view the DAWBA report and consider its findings as part of assessment and diagnosis, we did not collect data on usage and therefore cannot confirm the extent to which clinicians did this. As a pragmatic trial that aimed to test the effectiveness of incorporating the DAWBA into usual practice and clinical care, our study found that, in the format as delivered in this trial, there was no impact on diagnosis or clinical outcomes.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry (JCPP) is a highly regarded international publication that focuses on the fields of child and adolescent psychology and psychiatry. It is recognized for publishing top-tier, clinically relevant research across various disciplines related to these areas. JCPP has a broad global readership and covers a diverse range of topics, including:
Epidemiology: Studies on the prevalence and distribution of mental health issues in children and adolescents.
Diagnosis: Research on the identification and classification of childhood disorders.
Treatments: Psychotherapeutic and psychopharmacological interventions for child and adolescent mental health.
Behavior and Cognition: Studies on the behavioral and cognitive aspects of childhood disorders.
Neuroscience and Neurobiology: Research on the neural and biological underpinnings of child mental health.
Genetics: Genetic factors contributing to the development of childhood disorders.
JCPP serves as a platform for integrating empirical research, clinical studies, and high-quality reviews from diverse perspectives, theoretical viewpoints, and disciplines. This interdisciplinary approach is a key feature of the journal, as it fosters a comprehensive understanding of child and adolescent mental health.
The Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry is published 12 times a year and is affiliated with the Association for Child and Adolescent Mental Health (ACAMH), which supports the journal's mission to advance knowledge and practice in the field of child and adolescent mental health.