Advertisement

Journal of Child and Family Studies

, Volume 27, Issue 10, pp 3329–3344 | Cite as

Cost-Effectiveness of Parent–Child Interaction Therapy in Clinics versus Homes: Client, Provider, Administrator, and Overall Perspectives

  • Alexis N. French
  • Brian T. Yates
  • Timothy R. Fowles
Original Paper
  • 117 Downloads

Abstract

Parent–Child Interaction Therapy (PCIT) is effective in decreasing negative child behaviors when delivered in clinics. Emerging research suggests that delivering PCIT in client homes can produce similar outcomes … but at what cost? Home PCIT still consumes valuable client time, but only for sessions. Home PCIT could reduce barriers to continued parent participation, and costs, by not requiring clients to spend time and money traveling to and from clinics. Home PCIT also does not require that parenting skills learned in clinics be generalized to homes. We assessed and compared costs of clinic and home PCIT at individual client and program levels of specificity from client and provider perspectives for 264 children and parents (clinic = 139, home = 125). We also included an administrator perspective and a client + provider + administrator = overall perspective. Multivariate analyses of covariance applied to imputed datasets found that, because significantly more sessions were held for PCIT delivered in homes than in clinics (a mean 18 versus 11 sessions, respectively), home PCIT cost significantly more from the overall perspective ($3913 versus $1821 per child receiving home versus clinic PCIT) and the provider perspective ($3326 versus $950 per child receiving home versus clinic PCIT), significantly less from the administrator perspective ($125 versus $397 per child receiving home versus clinic PCIT), and about the same from the client perspective ($352 versus $427 per child receiving home versus clinic PCIT). Cost-effectiveness ratios (CERs) calculated for individual clients were significantly better for clinic PCIT from provider and overall perspectives but not from the administrator or client perspectives.

Keywords

Parent–Child Interaction Therapy PCIT Costs Effectiveness Cost-effectiveness Stakeholder perspective 

Notes

Author Contributions

A.F.: designed and conducted data analyses for this study, supervised by B.Y. with input by T.F. A.F. and T.F. assisted B.Y. in writing and revising the manuscript.

Funding

This research was supported in part by Grant Number SM58493 from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Agency (SAMHSA) and administered by the State of Delaware’s Division of Prevention and Behavioral Health Services.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors. All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committees, i.e., Institutional Review Boards of both American University and the University of Delaware, and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments.

Informed Consent

This study was done with archival, deidentified clinical records. The American University IRB granted a waiver of consent to analyze these deidentified data.

Supplementary material

10826_2018_1159_MOESM1_ESM.docx (550 kb)
Supplementary Materials

References

  1. Ainsworth, M. D., Blehar, M. C., Waters, E., & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of attachment. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  2. Bagner, D. M., & Eyberg, S. M. (2007). Parent-child interaction therapy for disruptive behavior in children with mental retardation: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 36, 418–429.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bagner, D. M., Sheinkopf, S. J., Vohr, B. R., & Lester, B. M. (2010). Parenting intervention for externalizing behavior problems in children born premature: An initial examination. Journal of Developmental Behavioral Pediatrics, 31, 209–216.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Bell, S., & Eyberg, S. M. (2002). Parent-child interaction therapy: A dyadic intervention for the treatment of young children with conduct problems. In L. VandeCreek, S. Knapp & T. L. Jackson (Eds.), Innovations in clinical practice: A source book 20, (57–74). Sarasota, FL: Professional Resource Press.Google Scholar
  5. Beveridge, R. M., Fowles, T. R., Masse, J. J., McGoron, L., Smith, M. A., & Parrish, B. P., et al. (2015). State-wide dissemination and implementation of parent-child interaction therapy (PCIT): Application of theory. Children and Youth Services Review, 48, 38–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blomström, P., Ekman, M., Blomström Lundqvist, C., Calvert, M. J., Freemantle, N., & Lönnerholm, S., et al. (2008). Cost effectiveness of cardiac resynchronization therapy in the Nordic region: An analysis based on the CARE-HF trial. European Journal of Heart Failure, 10, 869–877.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejheart.2008.06.018.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Boggs, S. R., Eyberg, S. M., Edwards, D. L., Rayfield, A., Jacobs, J., Bagner, D., & Hood, K. K. (2004). Outcomes of parent–child interaction therapy: A comparison of treatment completers and study dropouts one to three years later. Child & Family Behavior Therapy, 26, 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chaffin, M., Silovsky, J. F., Funderburk, B., Valle, L. A., Brestan, E. V., & Balachova, T., et al. (2004). Parent-child interaction therapy with physically abusive parents: Efficacy for reducing future abuse reports. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 72, 500–510.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. CityFeet. (2015, March 20). Search commercial property listings, zip code, select property type: “office” and “medical office.” http://www.cityfeet.com
  10. Colvin, A., Eyberg, S. M., & Adams, C. D. (1999). Restandardization of the eyberg child behavior inventory. Gainesville, FL: University of Florida, Child Study Laboratory.Google Scholar
  11. Drummond, M. F., Sculpher, M. J., Claxton, K., Stoddart, G. L., & Torrance, G. W. (2015). Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. 4th edn. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Eyberg, S. M. (1988). Parent–child interaction therapy: Integration of traditional and behavioral concerns. Child and Family Behavior Therapy, 10, 33–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Eyberg, S. M. (2004). The PCIT story part 1: Conceptual foundation. PCIT Pages: The Parent-Child Interaction Therapy Newsletter, 1, 1–2.Google Scholar
  14. Eyberg, S. M., & Funderburk, B. W., (2011). Parent-Child Interaction Therapy protocol. Gainesville, FL: PCIT International. http://www.pcit.org/store/p2/2011_PCIT_Protocol--MULTIPLE_LANGUAGES_AVAILABLE%21.html
  15. Eyberg, S. M., Funderburk, B. W., Hembree-Kigin, T. L., McNeil, C. B., & Querido, J. G. (2001). Parent-Child Interaction Therapy with behavior problem children: One and two year maintenance of treatment effects in the family. Child & Family Behavior Therapy, 23, 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Eyberg, S. M., Nelson, M. M., & Boggs, S. R. (2008). Evidenced-based psychosocial treatments for children and adolescents with disruptive behavior. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 37, 215–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Eyberg, S. M., & Pincus, D. (1999). Eyberg Child Behavior Inventory & Sutter-Eyberg Student Behavior Inventory-Revised. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
  18. Fernandez, M. A., & Eyberg, S. M. (2009). Predicting treatment and follow-up attrition in Parent-Child Interaction Therapy. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 37, 431–441.Google Scholar
  19. Fowles, T. R., Masse, J. J., McGoron, K. L., Beveridge, R., Williamson, A., & Smith, M. S. (2018). Home-based vs. clinic-based Parent-Child Interaction Therapy (PCIT): Comparative effectiveness in the context of dissemination and implementation. Journal of Child and family Studies, 27, 1115–1129.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-017-0958-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Galanter, R., Self-Brown, S., Valente, J. R., Dorsey, S., Whitaker, D. J., Bertuglia-Haley, M., & Prieto, M. (2012). Effectiveness of parent-child interaction therapy delivered to at-risk families in the home setting. Child & Family Behavior Therapy, 34, 177–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ghosh, D., & Vogt, A. (2012). Outliers: An evaluation of methodologies. Joint Statistical Meetings (pp. 3455–3460). San Diego, CA: American Statistical Association.Google Scholar
  22. Glick, H. A., Doshi, J. A., Sonnad, S. S., & Polsky, D. (2015). Economic evaluation in clinical trial. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Goldfine, M. E., Wagner, S. M., Branstetter, S. A., & McNeil, C. B. (2008). Parent-Child Interaction Therapy: An examination of cost-effectiveness. Journal of Early and Intensive Behavior Intervention, 5, 119–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Graham, J. W., Olchowski, A. E., & Gilreath, T. D. (2007). How many imputations are really needed? Some practical clarifications of multiple imputation theory. Prevention Science, 8, 206–213.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Hanf, C., & Kling, J. (1973). Facilitating parent–child interaction: A two-stage training model. Portland, OR: University of Oregon Medical School. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  26. Heinrichs, N., Bertram, H., Kuschel, A., & Hahlweg, K. (2005). Parent recruitment and retention in a universal prevention program for child behavior and emotional problems: Barriers to research and program participation. Prevention Science, 6, 275–286.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Kang, H. (2013). The prevention and handling of missing data. Korean Journal of Anesthesiology, 64(5), 402–406.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. Kazdin, A. E., Holland, L., & Crowley, M. (1997). Family experience of barriers to treatment and premature termination from child therapy. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65, 453–463.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Lanier, P., Kohl, P., Benz, J., Swinger, D., Moussette, P., & Drake, B. (2011). Parent-child interaction therapy in a community setting: Examining outcomes, attrition, and treatment setting. Research on Social Work Practice, 1, 689–698.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. Levin, H. M., & McEwan, P. J. (2001). Cost-effectiveness analysis. 2nd edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  31. Loopnet. (2015, March 20). Search commercial property listings, zip code, select property type: “office” and “medical office.” http://www.loopnet.com
  32. MapQuest. (2015, April 21). Search distance between to zip codes. http://www.mapquest.com
  33. Masse, J. J., & McNeil, C. B. (2008). In-home parent-child interaction therapy: Clinical considerations. Child & Family Behavior Therapy, 30, 127–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Matos, M., Bauermeister, J. J., & Bernal, G. (2009). Parent-child interaction therapy for Puerto Rican preschool children with ADHD and behavior problems: A pilot efficacy study. Family Process, 48, 232–252.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. McCabe, K., & Yeh, M. (2009). Parent child interaction therapy for Mexican Americans: A randomized clinical trial. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 38, 753–759.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Neumann, P. J., Sanders, G. D., Russell, L. B., Siegel, J. E., & Ganiats, T. G. (2017). Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. 2nd edn. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Nixon, R. D. (2001). Changes in hyperactivity and temperament in behaviourally disturbed preschoolers after parent-child interaction therapy (PCIT). Behaviour Change, 18, 168–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Nock, M. K., & Kazdin, A. E. (2001). Parent expectancies for child therapy: Assessment and relation to participation in treatment. Journal of Child and family Studies, 10, 155–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Nulty, D. D. (2008). The adequacy of response rates to online and paper surveys: what can be done? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33, 301–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Patterson, G. R. (1982). A social learning approach: 3. Coercive family process. Eugene, OR: Castalia.Google Scholar
  41. Rich, B. A., & Eyberg, S. M. (2001). Accuracy of assessment: The discriminative and predictive power of the Eyberg Child Behavior Inventory. Ambulatory Child Health, 7, 249–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Rubin, D. B. (1987). Multiple imputation for nonresponse in surveys. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sampaio, F., Enebrink, P., Mihalopoulos, C., & Feldman, I. (2016). Cost-effectiveness of four parenting programs and bibliotherapy for parents of children with conduct problems. Journal of Mental Health Policy and Economics, 19, 201–212.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Sava, F. A., Yates, B. T., Lupu, V., Hatieganu, I., Szentagotai, A., & David, D. (2009). Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of cognitive therapy, rational emotive behavioral therapy, and fluoxetine (Prozac®) in treating depression: A randomized clinical trial. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 65, 36–52.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Schuhmann, E. M., Foote, R., Eyberg, S. M., Boggs, S., & Algina, J. (1998). Parent-child interaction therapy: Interim report of a randomized trial with short-term maintenance. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 27, 34–45.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Siegert, F. A., & Yates, B. T. (1980). Cost-effectiveness of individual in-office, individual in-home, and group delivery systems for behavioral child-management. Evaluation and the Health Professions, 3, 123–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sterne, J. A., White, I. A., Carlin, J. B., Spratt, M., Royston, P., & Keyword, M. G., et al. (2009). Multiple imputation for missing data in epidemiological and clinical research: Potential and pitfalls. British Medical Journal, 338, b2393.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Thomas, R., & Zimmer-Gembeck, M. J. (2011). Accumulating evidence for parent-child interaction therapy in the prevention of child maltreatment. Child Development, 82, 177–192.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2015a). Online inflation calculator. http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm
  50. U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2015b). Delaware - May 2014 OES State Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/ecec_03112015.htm
  51. U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2015c). Delaware - May 2014 OES State Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates. http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_de.htm#00-0000
  52. U.S. General Services Administration (2015). Search per diem rates for 2015. http://www.gsa.gov/portal/content/100715
  53. Ware, L. M., McNeil, C. B., Masse, J., & Stevens, S. (2008). Efficacy of in-home parent-child interaction therapy. Child & Family Behavior Therapy, 30, 99–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Yates, B. T. (1980). Improving effectiveness and reducing costs in mental health. Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas.Google Scholar
  55. Yates, B. T. (1994). Toward the incorporation of costs, cost-effectiveness analysis, and cost-benefit analysis into clinical research. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 62, 729–736.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Yates, B. T. (1996). Analyzing costs, procedures, processes, and outcomes in human services: An introduction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Yates, B. T. (1999). Measuring and improving cost, cost-effectiveness, and cost-benefit for substance abuse treatment programs: A manual. Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse. (NIH Publication No. 99-4518).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Yates, B. T. (2009). Cost-inclusive evaluation: A banquet of approaches for including costs, benefits, and cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analyses in your next evaluation. Evaluation and Program Planning, 32, 52–54.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Yates, B. T., Haven, W. G., & Thoresen, C. E. (1979). Cost-effectiveness analysis at Learning House: How much change for how much money? In J. S. Stumphauzer (Ed.), Progress in behavior therapy with delinquents (pp. 186–222). Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alexis N. French
    • 1
  • Brian T. Yates
    • 1
  • Timothy R. Fowles
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyAmerican UniversityWashingtonUSA
  2. 2.Department of Psychological and Brain SciencesUniversity of DelawareNewarkUSA

Personalised recommendations