Browsing by Subject "Early intervention"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    A pilot study of participatory video in early psychosis: Qualitative findings
    (PAGEPress, 2022-10-04) MacDougall, Arlene G.; Price, Elizabeth; Glen, Sarah; Wiener, Joshua C.; Kukan, Sahana; Powe, Laura; Bird, Richelle; Lysaker, Paul H.; Anderson, Kelly K.; Norman, Ross M. G.; Psychiatry, School of Medicine
    For people with psychotic disorders, developing a personal narrative about one’s experiences with psychosis can help promote recovery. This pilot study examined participants’ reactions to and experiences of participatory video as an intervention to help facilitate recovery-oriented narrative development in early psychosis. Outpatients of an early psychosis intervention program were recruited to participate in workshops producing short documentary-style videos of their collective and individual experiences. Six male participants completed the program and took part in a focus group upon completion and in an individual semistructured interview three months later. Themes were identified from the focus group and interviews and then summarized for descriptive purposes. Prominent themes included impacts of the videos on the participants and perceived impacts on others, fulfilment from sharing experiences and expressing oneself, value of collaboration and cohesion in a group, acquiring interpersonal and technological skills, and recommendations for future implementation. Findings of this study suggest that participatory video is an engaging means of self-definition and self-expression among young people in recovery from early psychosis.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Essential components of early intevention programs for psychosis: a qualitative study of available services in the United States
    (2014-12) White, Dominique A.; Salyers, Michelle P.; McGuire, Alan B.; McGrew, John H., 1953-; Minor, Kyle S.
    Programs providing interventions for early psychosis are becoming commonplace in the United States (US); however the terrain of existing services within programs remains undocumented. Unlike other countries, the US does not have a systematic approach to defining and treating this population. We examined program characteristics, clinical services, and treatment population parameters for early intervention programs across the US. A semi-structured telephone interview was conducted with program directors between July 2013 and April 2014. Content analysis was used to identify the presence or absence of 32 evidenced based practices recently recommended for early intervention programs (Addington, et al., 2013). Frequent client requests were identified and functional definitions of the population served were assessed. A total of 34 eligible programs were identified; 31 (91.2%) program representatives agreed to be interviewed. Of the 32 essential components, the most prevalent were individual psychoeducation and outcomes tracking; the least prevalent were outreach services and communication with inpatient units. The population was most frequently defined by age restrictions, and restrictions on the duration of psychosis. Emergent themes of client requests included functional and social recovery as well as help meeting practical needs. Findings have the ability to assist researchers and policy-makers in determining best practice models and creating measures of fidelity. This study provides critical feedback on services for the early psychosis population and identifies research to practice gaps and areas for improvement moving forward.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    “Watch Me!” Training Increases Knowledge and Impacts Attitudes Related to Developmental Monitoring and Referral Among Childcare Providers
    (Springer, 2020-11-25) Chödrön, Gail; Barger, Brian; Pizur-Barnekow, Kris; Viehweg, Stephan; Puk-Ament, Alexandra; Pediatrics, School of Medicine
    Objectives: To evaluate the impact of "Watch Me!" developmental monitoring training on childcare providers' knowledge and attitudes related to monitoring developmental milestones and making recommended referrals when there is a concern about a child's development. Methods: A pretest-posttest design using web-based surveys was used to assess the impact of "Watch Me!" training on knowledge and attitudes related to conducting five key components of developmental monitoring (tracking development, recognizing delays, talking to parents about development, talking to parents about concerns, and making referrals). Variables included belief that developmental monitoring is important and is part of childcare provider role; perceived knowledge of, access to tools for, and prioritization of developmental monitoring; and ability to list recommended referrals when there is a concern. Results: Childcare providers demonstrated a significant pre-post increase in perceived knowledge and access to the tools to engage in five core components of developmental monitoring after completing "Watch Me!" training. There was also a significant pre-post increase in childcare providers' ability to list the child's doctor as an appropriate referral (39 pre-63% post), but not in the ability to list Part C/Part B programs as an appropriate referral (56 pre-58% post). CONCLUSIONS FOR PRACTICE: "Watch Me!" training may be effective at impacting targeted areas of knowledge and attitude about developmental monitoring among childcare providers in the short term.