Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care and Psychotic Symptoms

2017 ◽  
Vol 56 (1) ◽  
pp. 89
Author(s):  
Ian Sinclair ◽  
Elizabeth Parry ◽  
Nina Biehal ◽  
John Fresen ◽  
Catherine Kay ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Foster Care ◽  
Psychotic Symptoms ◽  
Treatment Foster Care ◽  
Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care

scholarly journals Effects of Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care on Psychotic Symptoms in Girls

2014 ◽  
Vol 53 (12) ◽  
pp. 1279-1287 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richie Poulton ◽  
Mark J. Van Ryzin ◽  
Gordon T. Harold ◽  
Patricia Chamberlain ◽  
David Fowler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Foster Care ◽  
Psychotic Symptoms ◽  
Treatment Foster Care ◽  
Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care

scholarly journals Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care for Adolescents in English care: randomised trial and observational cohort evaluation

2014 ◽  
Vol 204 (3) ◽  
pp. 214-221 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. M. Green ◽  
N. Biehal ◽  
C. Roberts ◽  
J. Dixon ◽  
C. Kay ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Foster Care ◽  
Young People ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Antisocial Behaviour ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Treatment Foster Care ◽  
Observational Cohort ◽  
Secondary Outcomes ◽  
Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care ◽  
Children In Care

BackgroundChildren in care often have poor outcomes. There is a lack of evaluative research into intervention options.AimsTo examine the efficacy of Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care for Adolescents (MTFC-A) compared with usual care for young people at risk in foster care in England.MethodA two-arm single (assessor) blinded randomised controlled trial (RCT) embedded within an observational quasi-experimental case–control study involving 219 young people aged 11–16 years (trial registration: ISRCTN 68038570). The primary outcome was the Child Global Assessment Scale (CGAS). Secondary outcomes were ratings of educational attendance, achievement and rate of offending.ResultsThe MTFC-A group showed a non-significant improvement in CGAS outcome in both the randomised cohort (n= 34, adjusted mean difference 1.3, 95% CI −7.1 to 9.7,P= 0.75) and in the trimmed observational cohort (n= 185, adjusted mean difference 0.95, 95% CI −2.38 to 4.29,P= 0.57). No significant effects were seen in secondary outcomes. There was a possible differential effect of the intervention according to antisocial behaviour.ConclusionsThere was no evidence that the use of MTFC-A resulted in better outcomes than usual care. The intervention may be more beneficial for young people with antisocial behaviour but less beneficial than usual treatment for those without.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document