De-implementation of detrimental feeding practices: a pilot protocol

Implementing a Treatment for People with Serious Mental Illness in Jail: A Mixed-Methods Study of Stakeholder Perspectives on Feasibility and Acceptability

People with mental illness are over-represented in the U.S. criminal legal system. Jail presents an optimal opportunity to provide needed mental health care as the entry point to corrections. However, there is a lack of programming available in jails, which may be partly due to limited understanding of how to successfully implement interventions in this complex setting. We implemented a nine-session psychotherapeutic intervention for people with serious mental illness in a county jail. As part of a larger implementation-effectiveness hybrid study, we gathered mixed-methods data from stakeholders (treatment recipients and jail administrators) on the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention's implementation. In focus group discussions and qualitative interviews, treatment recipients (n = 29) provided qualitative and quantitative data on their perceptions of the implementation's feasibility and acceptability. Jail administrators (n = 6) completed two quantitative self-report measures on their perceptions of the treatment's feasibility and acceptability. Qualitative analyses were conducted by two coders using inductive thematic template analysis; seven global themes relating to treatment recipients' perceptions of the assets and hindrances to feasibility and acceptability were developed and are presented with supporting quotations. Quantitatively, all treatment recipients endorsed the intervention's feasibility (100%), and nearly all (97%) endorsed its acceptability. On both self-report measures, jail administrators' mean scores fell above a-priori thresholds indicating feasibility and acceptability. We found qualitative and quantitative support for the use of this intervention in jail from both sets of stakeholders. These results have implications for clinical service and policy in jail, where service providers struggle to meet the considerable demand for mental health services.

De-Implementation of Detrimental Feeding Practices in Childcare: Mixed Methods Evaluation of Community Partner Selected Strategies

This pilot evaluated strategies to decrease detrimental feeding practices in early care and education, which are hypothesized to compete with evidence-based feeding and obesity prevention practices. This study made two key comparisons: (1) a between-site comparison of sites receiving (a) no implementation or de-implementation strategies (i.e., Basic Support; B), (b) implementation strategies only (i.e., Enhanced Support; E), and (c) implementation and de-implementation strategies (i.e., De-implementation + Enhanced Support; D + E) and (2) a within-site pre-post comparison among sites with D + E. At nutrition lessons, the D + E group had more Positive Comments (Hedege’s g = 0.60) and higher Role Model fidelity (Hedege’s g = 1.34) compared to the E group. At meals, assistant teachers in the D + E group had higher Positive Comments than in the B group (g = 0.72). For within-group comparisons, the D + E group decreased Negative Comments (t(19) = 2.842, p = 0.01), increased Positive Comments (t(20) = 2.314, p = 0.031), and improved use of the program mascot at nutrition lessons (t(21) = 3.899, p = 0.001). At meals, lead teachers’ Negative Comments decreased (t(22) = 2.73, p = 0.01). Qualitative data identified strengths and opportunities for iteration. Despite a COVID interruption, mid-point comparisons and qualitative feedback suggest promise of the de-implementation strategy package.

An Overview of Research Opportunities to Increase the Impact of Nutrition Intervention Research in Early Childhood and Education Care Settings According to the RE-AIM Framework

Objective: To highlight opportunities for future nutrition intervention research within early childhood and education care (ECEC) settings, with a focus on generating evidence that has applicability to real-world policy and practice. Methods: An overview of opportunities to progress the field was developed by the authors using a collaborative writing approach and informed by recent research in the field. The group developed a list of recommendations aligned with the reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation and maintenance (RE-AIM) framework. Pairs of authors drafted individual sections of the manuscript, which were then reviewed by a separate pair. The first and senior author consolidated all sections of the manuscript and sought critical input on the draft iterations of the manuscript. Results: Interventions that employ digital platforms (reach) in ECEC settings, as well as research in the family day care setting (effectiveness) were identified as areas of opportunities. Research understanding the determinants of and effective strategies for dissemination (adoption), the implementation of nutrition programs, in addition to de-implementation (implementation) of inappropriate nutrition practices, is warranted. For maintenance, there is a need to better understand sustainability and the sustainment of interventions, in addition to undertaking policy-relevant research. Conclusions: The ECEC setting is prime for innovative and practical nutrition intervention research.

Table Talk: revision of an observational tool to characterize the feeding environment in early care and education settings

Objective

The Table Talk tool is an observational assessment of early care and education teacher (ECET) mealtime practices. The Table Talk Revised (TT-R) tool incorporates new constructs that emerged from qualitative research and teases apart existing categories to improve nuance of data capture. The objective of this study was to evaluate the TT-R, document interrater reliability for the TT-R, and report on ECET feeding communications in broader settings than previously studied (i.e., beyond a single Lunch and Head Start only).

Methods

Trained observers conducted mealtime observations in classrooms (N_classroms = 63, 10 sites) during Breakfast and two Lunches for both Lead and Assistant ECETs (N = 126). Classrooms were spread across Head Start in an urban area (60%), Head Starts in a rural area (24%), and a state-funded preschool (16%).

Results

On average, there were 22.17 (SD = 10.92) total verbal feeding communications at Breakfast, 37.72 (SD = 15.83) at Lunch₁, and 34.39 (SD = 15.05) at Lunch₂ with meals averaging 25 min. The most commonly observed supportive statement category was Exploring Foods for Lead (Breakfast = 1.61, Lunch₁ = 3.23, Lunch₂ = 2.70) and Assistant ECETs (Breakfast = .89, Lunch₁ = 2.03) except for Lunch₂ which was Encourages Trying in a Positive Way (Lunch₂ = 1.30). The most commonly observed unsupportive statement category was Firm Behavioral Control for both Lead (Breakfast = 3.61, Lunch₁ = 5.84, Lunch₂ = 5.51) and Assistants ECETs (Breakfast = 3.11, Lunch₁ = 6.38, Lunch₂ = 4.32). The majority of Interclass Correlation Coefficients indicating interrater reliability were in the excellent range (64%) for commonly occurring statement categories, and 14 of the 19 low frequency statement categories had > 80% agreement.

Conclusions and implications

Overall, items added to the Table Talk tool performed well, and interrater reliability was favorable. Our study also documented differences between Lead and Assistant teachers in mealtime practices and illustrated differing patterns of interaction between lunches and breakfast, important findings to inform future research and practice. The TT-R may be a useful measurement tool for monitoring and evaluating ECET practices in mealtime environments as well as informing intervention.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-020-10087-8.