Parent–Child Interaction Therapy (PCIT) is an empirically supported intervention originally developed to treat disruptive behavior problems in children between the ages of 2 and 7 years. Since its creation over 40 years ago, PCIT has been studied internationally with various populations and has been found to be an effective intervention for numerous behavioral and emotional issues. This article summarizes progress in the PCIT literature over the past decade (2006–2017) and outlines future directions for this important work. Recent PCIT research related to treatment effectiveness, treatment components, adaptations for specific populations (age groups, cultural groups, military families, individuals diagnosed with specific disorders, trauma survivors, and the hearing-impaired), format changes (group and home-based), teacher–child interaction training (TCIT), intensive PCIT (I-PCIT), treatment as prevention (for externalizing problems, child maltreatment, and developmental delays), and implementation are discussed.

Purpose: Behavior disorders in early childhood are linked to a variety of negative outcomes for both children and families. Parent–Child Interaction Therapy (PCIT), an evidence-based parent-training program, demonstrates large effect sizes in reducing child problem behavior for dyads who complete treatment; however, a high number of families seeking treatment in community-based settings terminate from PCIT prior to meeting the protocol’s strict graduation criteria. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of PCIT on child behavior problems for families who received at least a small dose of PCIT but not enough to meet the strict mastery criteria required for graduation. Patients and methods: This study employed one of the largest community research samples conducted with PCIT (2,787 children and their families across the state of Oregon, 1,318 with usable data) to determine how PCIT impacts both graduates and early terminators. Results: While families who graduated from PCIT (17.7% of the sample) demonstrated a very large effect size in problem behavior intensity improvements (d=1.65), families who terminated treatment early, but after attending at least four treatment sessions (51.7% of the sample), still showed significant improvements in behavior problems with a medium-to-large effect size (d=0.70). In contrast, very early terminators (those attending fewer than four treatment sessions, 0.3% of the sample), demonstrated little improvement at the time of dropout from services (d=0.12). Conclusion: Though early terminators in PCIT have previously been identified as treatment failures, the present study discusses the reconceptualization of “dropouts” in relation to some positive evidence of treatment outcomes, the implications for community-based service delivery, and possible future directions.

There is strong evidence to show links between attachment security in young children and a range of positive outcomes in social, emotional, and psychological domains. The aims of this review were to provide a narrative summary of (1) the attachment-based interventions currently available for caregivers of toddlers aged 12–24 months and for which research about the impact of the program on child attachment patterns has been reported, and (2) the empirical effectiveness of these interventions at improving attachment security. A number of interventions were shown to be associated with shifts to secure and/or organized attachment, with Child-Parent Psychotherapy and Attachment and Biobehavioral Catch-Up emerging as the interventions with the strongest evidence bases. For most interventions, evidence came from just a single research study, and in some cases from studies that were not randomized controlled trials. In order for clinicians to make informed decisions about the interventions they use with parents and toddlers, it is vital that further research be conducted to test the efficacy of all available attachment-based parenting programs using randomized controlled trial designs, in a range of settings and clinical and cultural groups, and with longitudinal follow-ups.

Differential diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) in adolescents is difficult due to similar behavioral topography. For instance, restrictive, repetitive behavior, cognitive rigidity, anxiety, and avoidance contribute to impairment in social relationships and daily living skills in both conditions. The diagnostic picture for youth with ASD and/or OCD may be further clouded by high rates of co-occurring gender-diverse clinical concerns, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, tic disorder, depression, and anxiety disorders With increased prevalence and improved identification of ASD, OCD, and gender-identity-related distress, more adolescents are seeking treatment. It is vital that providers are knowledgeable about best practices for diagnosing and treating these overlapping symptoms. This review describes the state of the literature regarding presentation and prevalence of ASD, OCD, and gender-identity concerns separately and as co-occurring phenomena. Sex differences and gender-diversity among individuals with ASD and OCD are also reviewed. We briefly describe evidence-based behavioral treatments for ASD, OCD, gender-identity-related distress as separate and co-occurring considerations. Recommendations for tailoring within these therapies and family involvement are discussed.