↓ Skip to main content

TIGA-CUB – manualised psychoanalytic child psychotherapy versus treatment as usual for children aged 5–11 years with treatment-resistant conduct disorders and their primary carers: study protocol for…

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
177 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
TIGA-CUB – manualised psychoanalytic child psychotherapy versus treatment as usual for children aged 5–11 years with treatment-resistant conduct disorders and their primary carers: study protocol for a randomised controlled feasibility trial
Published in
Trials, September 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13063-017-2166-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elizabeth Edginton, Rebecca Walwyn, Kayleigh Burton, Robert Cicero, Liz Graham, Sadie Reed, Sandy Tubeuf, Maureen Twiddy, Alex Wright-Hughes, Lynda Ellis, Dot Evans, Tom Hughes, Nick Midgley, Paul Wallis, David Cottrell

Abstract

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommends evidence-based parenting programmes as a first-line intervention for conduct disorders (CD) in children aged 5-11 years. As these are not effective in 25-33% of cases, NICE has requested research into second-line interventions. Child and Adolescent Psychotherapists (CAPTs) address highly complex problems where first-line treatments have failed and there have been small-scale studies of Psychoanalytic Child Psychotherapy (PCP) for CD. A feasibility trial is needed to determine whether a confirmatory trial of manualised PCP (mPCP) versus Treatment as Usual (TaU) for CD is practicable or needs refinement. The aim of this paper is to publish the abridged protocol of this feasibility trial. TIGA-CUB (Trial on improving Inter-Generational Attachment for Children Undergoing Behaviour problems) is a two-arm, pragmatic, parallel-group, multicentre, individually randomised (1:1) controlled feasibility trial (target n = 60) with blinded outcome assessment (at 4 and 8 months), which aims to develop an optimum practicable protocol for a confirmatory, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial (RCT) (primary outcome: child's behaviour; secondary outcomes: parental reflective functioning and mental health, child and parent quality of life), comparing mPCP and TaU as second-line treatments for children aged 5-11 years with treatment-resistant CD and inter-generational attachment difficulties, and for their primary carers. Child-primary carer dyads will be recruited following a referral to, or re-referral within, National Health Service (NHS) Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) after an unsuccessful first-line parenting intervention. PCP will be delivered by qualified CAPTs working in routine NHS clinical practice, using a trial-specific PCP manual (a brief version of established PCP clinical practice). Outcomes are: (1) feasibility of recruitment methods, (2) uptake and follow-up rates, (3) therapeutic delivery, treatment retention and attendance, intervention adherence rates, (4) follow-up data collection, and (5) statistical, health economics, process evaluation, and qualitative outcomes. TIGA-CUB will provide important information on the feasibility and potential challenges of undertaking a confirmatory RCT to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of mPCP. Current Controlled Trials, ID: ISRCTN86725795 . Registered on 31 May 2016.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 177 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 177 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 12%
Researcher 17 10%
Student > Bachelor 14 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 3%
Other 25 14%
Unknown 81 46%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 38 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 7%
Social Sciences 7 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 5 3%
Other 14 8%
Unknown 86 49%