Multisystemic Therapy and Functional Family Therapy compared on their effectiveness using the propensity score method

Hester V. Eeren*, Lucas M. A. Goossens, Ron H. J. Scholte, Jan J. V. Busschbach, Rachel E. A. van der Rijken

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

3 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Multisystemic Therapy (MST) and Functional Family Therapy (FFT) have overlapping target populations and treatment goals. In this study, these interventions were compared on their effectiveness using a quasi-experimental design. Between October, 2009 and June, 2014, outcome data were collected from 697 adolescents (mean age 15.3 (SD 1.48), 61.9% male) assigned to either MST or FFT (422 MST; 275 FFT). Data were gathered during Routine Outcome Monitoring. The primary outcome was externalizing problem behavior (Child Behavior Checklist and Youth Self Report). Secondary outcomes were the proportion of adolescents living at home, engaged in school or work, and who lacked police contact during treatment. Because of the non-random assignment, a propensity score method was used to control for observed pre-treatment differences. Because the risk-need-responsivity (RNR) model guided treatment assignment, effectiveness was also estimated in youth with and without a court order as an indicator of their risk level. Looking at the whole sample, no difference in effect was found with regard to externalizing problems. For adolescents without a court order, effects on externalizing problems were larger after MST. Because many more adolescents with a court order were assigned to MST compared to FFT, the propensity score method could not balance the treatment groups in this subsample. In conclusion, few differences between MST and FFT were found. In line with the RNR model, higher risk adolescents were assigned to the more intensive treatment, namely MST. In the group with lower risk adolescents, this more intensive treatment was more effective in reducing externalizing problems.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1037-1050
JournalJournal of Abnormal Child Psychology
Volume46
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2018

Keywords

  • Propensity score
  • Comparative effectiveness research
  • Adolescent
  • Quasi-experimental study
  • Behavioral problems
  • JUVENILE-OFFENDERS
  • CAUSAL INFERENCE
  • EFFICACY
  • BIAS
  • ADOLESCENTS
  • PREVENTION
  • CHILDREN
  • TRIALS
  • MODEL
  • YOUTH

Cite this

Eeren, Hester V. ; Goossens, Lucas M. A. ; Scholte, Ron H. J. ; Busschbach, Jan J. V. ; van der Rijken, Rachel E. A. / Multisystemic Therapy and Functional Family Therapy compared on their effectiveness using the propensity score method. In: Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology. 2018 ; Vol. 46, No. 5. pp. 1037-1050.
@article{a5e66fb6b7d748abad2bca3142337b75,
title = "Multisystemic Therapy and Functional Family Therapy compared on their effectiveness using the propensity score method",
abstract = "Multisystemic Therapy (MST) and Functional Family Therapy (FFT) have overlapping target populations and treatment goals. In this study, these interventions were compared on their effectiveness using a quasi-experimental design. Between October, 2009 and June, 2014, outcome data were collected from 697 adolescents (mean age 15.3 (SD 1.48), 61.9{\%} male) assigned to either MST or FFT (422 MST; 275 FFT). Data were gathered during Routine Outcome Monitoring. The primary outcome was externalizing problem behavior (Child Behavior Checklist and Youth Self Report). Secondary outcomes were the proportion of adolescents living at home, engaged in school or work, and who lacked police contact during treatment. Because of the non-random assignment, a propensity score method was used to control for observed pre-treatment differences. Because the risk-need-responsivity (RNR) model guided treatment assignment, effectiveness was also estimated in youth with and without a court order as an indicator of their risk level. Looking at the whole sample, no difference in effect was found with regard to externalizing problems. For adolescents without a court order, effects on externalizing problems were larger after MST. Because many more adolescents with a court order were assigned to MST compared to FFT, the propensity score method could not balance the treatment groups in this subsample. In conclusion, few differences between MST and FFT were found. In line with the RNR model, higher risk adolescents were assigned to the more intensive treatment, namely MST. In the group with lower risk adolescents, this more intensive treatment was more effective in reducing externalizing problems.",
keywords = "Propensity score, Comparative effectiveness research, Adolescent, Quasi-experimental study, Behavioral problems, JUVENILE-OFFENDERS, CAUSAL INFERENCE, EFFICACY, BIAS, ADOLESCENTS, PREVENTION, CHILDREN, TRIALS, MODEL, YOUTH",
author = "Eeren, {Hester V.} and Goossens, {Lucas M. A.} and Scholte, {Ron H. J.} and Busschbach, {Jan J. V.} and {van der Rijken}, {Rachel E. A.}",
year = "2018",
doi = "10.1007/s10802-017-0392-4",
language = "English",
volume = "46",
pages = "1037--1050",
journal = "Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology",
issn = "0091-0627",
publisher = "SPRINGER/PLENUM PUBLISHERS",
number = "5",

}

Multisystemic Therapy and Functional Family Therapy compared on their effectiveness using the propensity score method. / Eeren, Hester V.; Goossens, Lucas M. A.; Scholte, Ron H. J.; Busschbach, Jan J. V.; van der Rijken, Rachel E. A.

In: Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, Vol. 46, No. 5, 2018, p. 1037-1050.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Multisystemic Therapy and Functional Family Therapy compared on their effectiveness using the propensity score method

AU - Eeren, Hester V.

AU - Goossens, Lucas M. A.

AU - Scholte, Ron H. J.

AU - Busschbach, Jan J. V.

AU - van der Rijken, Rachel E. A.

PY - 2018

Y1 - 2018

N2 - Multisystemic Therapy (MST) and Functional Family Therapy (FFT) have overlapping target populations and treatment goals. In this study, these interventions were compared on their effectiveness using a quasi-experimental design. Between October, 2009 and June, 2014, outcome data were collected from 697 adolescents (mean age 15.3 (SD 1.48), 61.9% male) assigned to either MST or FFT (422 MST; 275 FFT). Data were gathered during Routine Outcome Monitoring. The primary outcome was externalizing problem behavior (Child Behavior Checklist and Youth Self Report). Secondary outcomes were the proportion of adolescents living at home, engaged in school or work, and who lacked police contact during treatment. Because of the non-random assignment, a propensity score method was used to control for observed pre-treatment differences. Because the risk-need-responsivity (RNR) model guided treatment assignment, effectiveness was also estimated in youth with and without a court order as an indicator of their risk level. Looking at the whole sample, no difference in effect was found with regard to externalizing problems. For adolescents without a court order, effects on externalizing problems were larger after MST. Because many more adolescents with a court order were assigned to MST compared to FFT, the propensity score method could not balance the treatment groups in this subsample. In conclusion, few differences between MST and FFT were found. In line with the RNR model, higher risk adolescents were assigned to the more intensive treatment, namely MST. In the group with lower risk adolescents, this more intensive treatment was more effective in reducing externalizing problems.

AB - Multisystemic Therapy (MST) and Functional Family Therapy (FFT) have overlapping target populations and treatment goals. In this study, these interventions were compared on their effectiveness using a quasi-experimental design. Between October, 2009 and June, 2014, outcome data were collected from 697 adolescents (mean age 15.3 (SD 1.48), 61.9% male) assigned to either MST or FFT (422 MST; 275 FFT). Data were gathered during Routine Outcome Monitoring. The primary outcome was externalizing problem behavior (Child Behavior Checklist and Youth Self Report). Secondary outcomes were the proportion of adolescents living at home, engaged in school or work, and who lacked police contact during treatment. Because of the non-random assignment, a propensity score method was used to control for observed pre-treatment differences. Because the risk-need-responsivity (RNR) model guided treatment assignment, effectiveness was also estimated in youth with and without a court order as an indicator of their risk level. Looking at the whole sample, no difference in effect was found with regard to externalizing problems. For adolescents without a court order, effects on externalizing problems were larger after MST. Because many more adolescents with a court order were assigned to MST compared to FFT, the propensity score method could not balance the treatment groups in this subsample. In conclusion, few differences between MST and FFT were found. In line with the RNR model, higher risk adolescents were assigned to the more intensive treatment, namely MST. In the group with lower risk adolescents, this more intensive treatment was more effective in reducing externalizing problems.

KW - Propensity score

KW - Comparative effectiveness research

KW - Adolescent

KW - Quasi-experimental study

KW - Behavioral problems

KW - JUVENILE-OFFENDERS

KW - CAUSAL INFERENCE

KW - EFFICACY

KW - BIAS

KW - ADOLESCENTS

KW - PREVENTION

KW - CHILDREN

KW - TRIALS

KW - MODEL

KW - YOUTH

U2 - 10.1007/s10802-017-0392-4

DO - 10.1007/s10802-017-0392-4

M3 - Article

VL - 46

SP - 1037

EP - 1050

JO - Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology

JF - Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology

SN - 0091-0627

IS - 5

ER -