Family-based programmes for preventing smoking by children and adolescents

BACKGROUND: There is evidence that children's decisions to smoke are influenced by family and friends. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of interventions to help family members to strengthen non-smoking attitudes and promote non-smoking by children and other family members. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched 14 electronic bibliographic databases, including the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group specialized register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and CINAHL. We also searched unpublished material, and the reference lists of key articles. We performed both free-text Internet searches and targeted searches of appropriate websites, and we hand-searched key journals not available electronically. We also consulted authors and experts in the field. The most recent search was performed in July 2006. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions with children (aged 5-12) or adolescents (aged 13-18) and family members to deter the use of tobacco. The primary outcome was the effect of the intervention on the smoking status of children who reported no use of tobacco at baseline. Included trials had to report outcomes measured at least six months from the start of the intervention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We reviewed all potentially relevant citations and retrieved the full text to determine whether the study was an RCT and matched our inclusion criteria. Two authors independently extracted study data and assessed them for methodological quality. The studies were too limited in number and quality to undertake a formal meta-analysis, and we present a narrative synthesis. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 19 RCTs of family interventions to prevent smoking. We identified five RCTs in Category 1 (minimal risk of bias on all counts); nine in Category 2 (a risk of bias in one or more areas); and five in Category 3 (risks of bias in design and execution such that reliable conclusions cannot be drawn from the study).Considering the fourteen Category 1 and 2 studies together: (1) four of the nine that tested a family intervention against a control group had significant positive effects, but one showed significant negative effects; (2) one of the five RCTs that tested a family intervention against a school intervention had significant positive effects; (3) none of the six that compared the incremental effects of a family plus a school programme to a school programme alone had significant positive effects; (4) the one RCT that tested a family tobacco intervention against a family non-tobacco safety intervention showed no effects; and (5) the one trial that used general risk reduction interventions found the group which received the parent and teen interventions had less smoking than the one that received only the teen intervention (there was no tobacco intervention but tobacco outcomes were measured). For the included trials the amount of implementer training and the fidelity of implementation are related to positive outcomes, but the number of sessions is not. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Some well-executed RCTs show family interventions may prevent adolescent smoking, but RCTs which were less well executed had mostly neutral or negative results. There is thus a need for well-designed and executed RCTs in this area.

Family-based programmes for preventing smoking by children and adolescents (Protocol)

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To assess the effectiveness of interventions to help family members strengthen non-smoking attitudes and promote non-smoking by children and other family members by identifying and assessing RCT's that provide training, skills and support to family members to prevent smoking initiation. Hypothesis: This is an exploratory review, and only one hypothesis based on the literature review will be tested: "Interventions to help family members strengthen non-smoking attitudes and promote non-smoking by children and other family members are more effective in preventing children starting smoking than no intervention."

Physical activity levels among children attending family day care

Objective To objectively measure the physical activity (PA) levels of children attending family day care programs. Methods A total of 114 children from 47 family day care centers wore an accelerometer for the duration of their time in care. Time in moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) and total PA was calculated using previously validated cut points. Results Children accumulated 5.8 ± 3.2 minutes of MVPA and 10.4 ± 4.4 minutes of total PA per hour of attendance. Boys exhibited significantly higher levels of PA than girls. Among healthy weight children, 4- and 5-year-olds exhibited significantly higher levels of PA than 2- and 3-year-olds. Overweight and obese 4- and 5-year-olds exhibited significantly lower levels of PA than their healthy weight counterparts. Conclusions and Implications Children attending family day care participate in low levels of PA during the child care day. The results highlight the need for effective programs to promote PA in family day care.

Validity of family child care providers' proxy reports on children's physical activity

Background Interventions to promote physical activity (PA) in children attending family child care homes (FCCHs) require valid, yet practical, measurement tools. The aim of this study was to assess the validity of two proxy report instruments designed to measure PA in children attending FCCHs. Methods A sample of 37 FCCH providers completed the Burdette parent proxy report, modified for the family child care setting for 107 children 3.4±1.2 years of age. A second sample of 42 FCCH providers completed the Harro parent and teacher proxy report, modified for the family child care setting, for 131 children 3.8±1.3 years of age. Both proxy reports were assessed for validity using accelerometry as a criterion measure. Results Significant positive correlations were observed between provider-reported PA scores from the modified Burdette proxy report and objectively measured total PA (r=0.30; p<0.01) and moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA; r=0.34; p<0.01). Across levels of provider-reported PA, both total PA and MVPA increased significantly in a linear dose-response fashion. The modified Harro proxy report was not associated with objectively measured PA. Conclusion Proxy PA reports completed by family child care providers may be a valid assessment option in studies where more burdensome objective measures are not feasible.

Factors associated with physical activity in children attending family child care homes

Objective To determine the relationship between family child care home (FCCH) practices and characteristics, and objectively measured physical activity (PA) among children attending FCCHs. Methods FCCH practices and characteristics were assessed in 45 FCCHs in Oregon (USA) in 2010-2011 using the Nutrition and Physical Activity Self-Assessment for Child Care Instrument. Within the 45 FCCHs, 136 children between ages 2 and 5. years wore an accelerometer during child care attendance over a one-week period. Time spent in light, moderate, and vigorous PA per hour was calculated using intensity-related cut-points (Pate et al., 2006). Results FCCH characteristics and practices associated with higher levels of PA (min/h; p < 0.05) included provision of sufficient outdoor active play [32.2 (1.0) vs. 28.6 (1.3)], active play using portable play equipment [31.7 (1.0) vs. 29.3 (1.4)], the presence of a variety of fixed play equipment [32.2 (1.0) vs. 28.9 (1.3)], and suitable indoor play space [32.2 (1.0) vs. 28.6 (1.3)], engaging in active play with children [32.1 (1.1) vs. 29.6 (1.2)], and receiving activity-related training [33.1 (1.2) vs. 30.3 (1.1)]. Conclusions This is the first study to identify practices and characteristics of FCCHs that influence children's PA. These data should be considered when developing programs and policies to promote PA in FCCHs.

Bullying in children and adolescents : a modifiable risk factor for mental illness

It is a serious concern to health practitioners and policymakers that, in spite of substantial investment, there has been no meaningful decline in the prevalence of mental illness in Australia (Slade et al., 2009). It is now understood that a complex array of biopsychosocial factors confer varying degrees of risk of mental illness. Genetic predisposition, obstetric complications, environmental toxins, poverty, developmental delay, substance abuse, exposure to loss and trauma, chaotic family environments with accompanying abuse and neglect, chronic physical illness and maladaptive interpersonal interactions all contribute to an increased risk of developing mental disorders (Kieling et al., 2011). Bullying in childhood and adolescence is an identified risk factor for mental disorders, suicide attempts and drug and alcohol problems (Copeland et al., 2013; Moore et al., 2013)...

Family-based programmes for preventing smoking by children and adolescents (Review)

Background There is evidence that family and friends influence children's decisions to smoke. Objectives To assess the effectiveness of interventions to help families stop children starting smoking. Search methods We searched 14 electronic bibliographic databases, including the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group specialized register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL unpublished material, and key articles' reference lists. We performed free-text internet searches and targeted searches of appropriate websites, and hand-searched key journals not available electronically. We consulted authors and experts in the field. The most recent search was 3 April 2014. There were no date or language limitations. Selection criteria Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions with children (aged 5-12) or adolescents (aged 13-18) and families to deter tobacco use. The primary outcome was the effect of the intervention on the smoking status of children who reported no use of tobacco at baseline. Included trials had to report outcomes measured at least six months from the start of the intervention. Data collection and analysis We reviewed all potentially relevant citations and retrieved the full text to determine whether the study was an RCT and matched our inclusion criteria. Two authors independently extracted study data for each RCT and assessed them for risk of bias. We pooled risk ratios using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed effect model. Main results Twenty-seven RCTs were included. The interventions were very heterogeneous in the components of the family intervention, the other risk behaviours targeted alongside tobacco, the age of children at baseline and the length of follow-up. Two interventions were tested by two RCTs, one was tested by three RCTs and the remaining 20 distinct interventions were tested only by one RCT. Twenty-three interventions were tested in the USA, two in Europe, one in Australia and one in India. The control conditions fell into two main groups: no intervention or usual care; or school-based interventions provided to all participants. These two groups of studies were considered separately. Most studies had a judgement of 'unclear' for at least one risk of bias criteria, so the quality of evidence was downgraded to moderate. Although there was heterogeneity between studies there was little evidence of statistical heterogeneity in the results. We were unable to extract data from all studies in a format that allowed inclusion in a meta-analysis. There was moderate quality evidence family-based interventions had a positive impact on preventing smoking when compared to a no intervention control. Nine studies (4810 participants) reporting smoking uptake amongst baseline non-smokers could be pooled, but eight studies with about 5000 participants could not be pooled because of insufficient data. The pooled estimate detected a significant reduction in smoking behaviour in the intervention arms (risk ratio [RR] 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.68 to 0.84). Most of these studies used intensive interventions. Estimates for the medium and low intensity subgroups were similar but confidence intervals were wide. Two studies in which some of the 4487 participants already had smoking experience at baseline did not detect evidence of effect (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.17). Eight RCTs compared a combined family plus school intervention to a school intervention only. Of the three studies with data, two RCTS with outcomes for 2301 baseline never smokers detected evidence of an effect (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.96) and one study with data for 1096 participants not restricted to never users at baseline also detected a benefit (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.94). The other five studies with about 18,500 participants did not report data in a format allowing meta-analysis. One RCT also compared a family intervention to a school 'good behaviour' intervention and did not detect a difference between the two types of programme (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.38, n = 388). No studies identified any adverse effects of intervention. Authors' conclusions There is moderate quality evidence to suggest that family-based interventions can have a positive effect on preventing children and adolescents from starting to smoke. There were more studies of high intensity programmes compared to a control group receiving no intervention, than there were for other compairsons. The evidence is therefore strongest for high intensity programmes used independently of school interventions. Programmes typically addressed family functioning, and were introduced when children were between 11 and 14 years old. Based on this moderate quality evidence a family intervention might reduce uptake or experimentation with smoking by between 16 and 32%. However, these findings should be interpreted cautiously because effect estimates could not include data from all studies. Our interpretation is that the common feature of the effective high intensity interventions was encouraging authoritative parenting (which is usually defined as showing strong interest in and care for the adolescent, often with rule setting). This is different from authoritarian parenting (do as I say) or neglectful or unsupervised parenting.

Children who are homeless with their family: A literature review

This literature review was commissioned by the Commissioner for Children and Young People Western Australia to provide an overview of the issues affecting the wellbeing of children who are homeless with their families. This review outlines the scholarly evidence in relation to the following issues. • The causes and extent of children’s homelessness in Western Australia (and Australia), including pathways leading to family homelessness; • The impact of homelessness on children’s near-term and long-term wellbeing; • The service and support needs of children and families at risk of or experiencing homelessness; • Strategic approaches and systems for providing services to children and families; • Successful programs that are evidence-based and have been evaluated to show positive effects on children’s wellbeing (particularly programs replicated in multiple jurisdictions or applied across diverse population groups); • Children’s own views and experiences of homelessness and support services (particularly direct consultations with children), and; • Gaps in knowledge.

The effects of parental illness and other ill family members on the adjustment of children

Background This study addresses limitations of prior research that have used group comparison designs to test the effects of parental illness on youth. Purpose This study examined differences in adjustment between children of a parent with illness and peers from ‘healthy’ families controlling for the effects of whether a parent or non-parent family member is ill, illness type, demographics and caregiving. Methods Based on questionnaire data, groups were derived from a community sample of 2,474 youth (‘healthy’ family, n = 1768; parental illness, n = 336; other family member illness, n = 254; both parental and other family illness, n = 116). Results The presence of any family member with an illness is associated with greater risk of mental health difficulties for youth relative to peers from healthy families. This risk is elevated if the ill family member is a parent and has mental illness or substance misuse. Conclusions Serious health problems within a household adversely impact youth adjustment.

Postprocedural effects of gastrointestinal endoscopy performed as a day case procedure in children : implications for patient and family education

A prospective design that included a survey tool, nursing care records, and telephone interview was used to determine postprocedural effects experienced by children and families following gastrointestinal endoscopy performed as a day procedure. One hundred twenty-one children attending a pediatric gastroenterology unit for endoscopy under general anesthesia participated in the study. Physical symptoms, day care/school attendance, behavioral issues, and economic factors in the 72 hours post procedure were identified. Over half the children (n = 69, 57%) experienced pain in the hospital post procedure. Pain was reported by 73 children (60%) at home on the day of the procedure, by 55 children (45%) on Day 1 post procedure, and by 37 children (31%) on Day 2 post procedure. The throat was the most common site of pain. Nausea or vomiting was experienced by 37 children (31%) at some time following their procedure but was not associated with procedure type, age, or fasting time. Over half the children (n = 53, 51%) who usually attended day care or school did not attend the day following their procedure. Twenty-four parents (40%) who would normally have worked on the day after the procedure did not attend employment. These findings have been used to improve the preprocedural information and discharge management of patients treated in a pediatric gastroenterology ambulatory setting. © The Society of Gastroenterology Nurses & Associates 2007. All Rights Reserved.

The treatment of recurrent abdominal pain in children : a controlled comparison of cognitive-behavioral family intervention and standard pediatric care

This study describes the results of a controlled clinical trial involving 44 7- to 14-year-old children with recurrent abdominal pain who were randomly allocated to either cognitive-behavioral family intervention (CBFI) or standard pediatric care (SPC). Both treatment conditions resulted in significant improvements on measures of pain intensity and pain behavior. However, the children receiving CBFI had a higher rate of complete elimination of pain, lower levels of relapse at 6- and 12-month follow-up, and lower levels of interference with their activities as a result of pain and parents reported a higher level of satisfaction with the treatment than children receiving SPC. After controlling for pretreatment levels of pain, children's active self-coping and mothers' caregiving strategies were significant independent predictors of pain behavior at posttreatment.

Analysis of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 drug resistance in children receiving nucleoside analogue reverse-transcriptase inhibitors plus nevirapine, nelfinavir, or ritonavir (Pediatric AIDS Clinical Trials Group 377)

In Pediatric AIDS Clinical Trials Group 377, antiretroviral therapy-experienced children were randomized to 4 treatment arms that included different combinations of stavudine, lamivudine (3TC), nevirapine (Nvp), nelfinavir (Nfv), and ritonavir (Rtv). Previous treatment with zidovudine (Zdv), didanosine (ddI), or zalcitabine (ddC) was acceptable. Drug resistance ((R)) mutations were assessed before study treatment (baseline) and at virologic failure. Zdv(R), ddI(R), and ddC(R) mutations were detected frequently at baseline but were not associated with virologic failure. Children with drug resistance mutations at baseline had greater reductions in virus load over time than did children who did not. Nvp(R) and 3TC(R) mutations were detected frequently at virologic failure, and Nvp(R) mutations were more common among children receiving 3-drug versus 4-drug Nvp-containing regimens. Children who were maintained on their study regimen after virologic failure accumulated additional Nvp(R) and 3TC(R) mutations plus Rtv(R) and Nfv(R) mutations. However, Rtv(R) and Nfv(R) mutations were detected at unexpectedly low rates.

Family-based programmes for preventing smoking by children and adolescents: Evidence and implications for public health

- P -General population, nonsmoking children (aged 5 to 12) and adolescents (aged 13 to 18) with their parents - I -Interventions with children and family members intended to deter tobacco use. Any components to change parenting behaviour, parental or sibling smoking behaviour, or family communication and interaction. - C -Usual practice, or a program of no family intervention - O -Smoking status of children who reported no use of tobacco at baseline.

Portrait of Elly Goldschmidt and her children Ilse and Robert. Portraits Family

Digital Image