Empirically validated treatments and child clinical interventions - Comment

This commentary argues that empirically validated treatments for child and youth behaviour and emotional difficulties are available, but they are relatively inaccessible to the vast majority of Australian children and their families. Although effective interventions have been developed, few children receive these services. There are many children who have identifiable problems or who are at increased risk for psychosocial problems whose needs have not been adequately addressed by either the research or the professional community. These include children in rural and remote areas, Aboriginal and Tones Strait Islander children, children of migrants, and children with chronic physical illnesses. A comprehensive, preventively focused clinical science of prevention is needed to improve the reach and impact of psychological services for children.

Empirically validated interventions for adult disorders

The movement towards evidence-based practice in psychology and medicine should offer few problems in cognitive-behaviour therapies because it is consistent with the principles by which they have been developed and disseminated. However, the criteria for assessing empirical status, including the heavy emphasis on manualised treatments, need close examination. A possible outcome of the evidence-based movement would be to focus on the application of manualised treatments in both training and clinical practice; problems with that approach are discussed. If we are committed to evidence-based treatment, comparisons between psychological and pharmacological interventions should also be included so that rational health care decisions can be made. We should not be afraid of following the evidence, even when it supports treatments that are not cognitive-behavioural in stated orientation. Such results should be taken as an opportunity for theoretical development and new empirical inquiry rather than be a cause for concern.

Evaluation of interventions to reduce catheter-associated bloodstream infection: Continuous tailored education versus one basic lecture

Background: This study evaluated the impact of 2 models of educational intervention on rates of central venous catheter-associated bloodstream infections (CVC-BSIs). Methods: This was a prospective observational study conducted between January 2005 and June 2007 in 2 medical intensive care units (designated ICU A and ICU B) in a large teaching hospital. The study was divided into in 3 periods: baseline (only rates were evaluated), preintervention (questionnaire to evaluate knowledge of health care workers [HCWs] and observation of CVC care in both ICUs), and intervention (in ICU A, tailored, continuous intervention; in ICU B, a single lecture). The preintervention and intervention periods for each ICU were compared. Results: During the preintervention period, 940 CVC-days were evaluated in ICUA and 843 CVC-days were evaluated in ICU B. During the intervention period, 2175 CVC-days were evaluated in ICUA and 1694 CVC-days were evaluated in ICU B. Questions regarding CVC insertion, disinfection during catheter manipulation, and use of an alcohol-based product during dressing application were answered correctly by 70%-100% HCWs. Nevertheless, HCWs` adherence to these practices in the preintervention period was low for CVC handling and dressing, hand hygiene (6%-35%), and catheter hub disinfection (45%-68%). During the intervention period, HCWs` adherence to hand hygiene was 48%-98%, and adherence to hub disinfection was 82%-97%. CVC-BSI rates declined in both units. In ICUA, this decrease was progressive and sustained, from 12CVC-BSIs/1000 CVC-days at baseline to 0 after 9 months. In ICU B, the rate initially dropped from 16.2 to 0 CVC-BSIs/1000 CVC-days, but then increased to 13.7 CVC-BSIs/1000 CVC-days. Conclusion: Personal customized, continuous intervention seems to develop a ""culture of prevention"" and is more effective than single intervention, leading to a sustained reduction of infection rates.