A randomized controlled trial of a proportionate universal parenting program delivery model (E-SEE Steps) to enhance child social-emotional wellbeing

A cost-effectiveness analysis of a universal, preventative-focused, parent and infant programme

BACKGROUND

This study assessed whether a relatively newly developed Parent and Infant (PIN) parenting support programme was cost-effective when compared to services as usual (SAU).

METHODS

The cost-effectiveness of the PIN programme versus SAU was assessed from an Irish health and social care perspective over a 24-month timeframe and within the context of a non-randomised, controlled before-and-after trial. In total, 163 parent-infant dyads were included in the study (86 intervention, 77 control). The primary outcome measure for the economic evaluation was the Parenting Sense of Competence Scale (PSOC).

RESULTS

The average cost of the PIN programme was €647 per dyad. The mean (SE) cost (including programme costs) was €7,027 (SE €1,345) compared to €4,811 (SE €593) in the control arm, generating a (non-significant) mean cost difference of €2,216 (bootstrap 95% CI -€665 to €5,096; p = 0.14). The mean incremental cost-effectiveness of the PIN service was €614 per PSOC unit gained (bootstrap 95% CI €54 to €1,481). The probability that the PIN programme was cost-effective, was 87% at a willingness-to-pay of €1,000 per one unit change in the PSOC.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that the PIN programme was cost-effective at a relatively low willingness-to-pay threshold when compared to SAU. This study addresses a significant knowledge gap in the field of early intervention by providing important real world evidence on the implementation costs and cost-effectiveness of a universal early years parenting programme. The challenges involved in assessing the cost-effectiveness of preventative interventions for very young children and their parents are also discussed.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN17488830 (Date of registration: 27/11/15). This trial was retrospectively registered.

Early parenting interventions to prevent internalising problems in children and adolescents: a global systematic review and network meta-analysis

QUESTION

We compared the effectiveness of different types of parenting interventions based on an a priori taxonomy, and the impact of waitlists versus treatment as usual (TAU), in reducing child internalising problems.

STUDY SELECTION AND ANALYSIS

We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis of published and unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) until 1 October 2022 that investigated parenting interventions with children younger than 4 years.

EXCLUSION CRITERIA

studies with children born preterm, with intellectual disabilities, or families receiving support for current abuse, neglect, and substance misuse. We assessed the certainty of evidence using the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis framework. We used random-effects network meta-analysis to estimate standardised mean differences (SMDs) with 95% credible intervals (CrIs).

FINDINGS

Of 20 520 citations identified, 59 RCTs (18 349 participants) were eligible for the network meta-analysis. Parenting interventions focusing on the dyadic relationship (SMD: -0.26, 95% CrI: -0.43 to -0.08) and those with mixed focus (-0.09, -0.17 to -0.02) were more effective in reducing internalising problems than TAU at the first time point available. All interventions were more effective than waitlist, which increased the risk of internalising problems compared with TAU (0.36, 0.19 to 0.52). All effects attenuated at later follow-ups. Most studies were rated as with 'high risk' or 'some concerns' using the Risk of Bias Assessment Tool V.2. There was no strong evidence of effect modification by theoretically informed components or modifiers.

CONCLUSIONS

We found preliminary evidence that relationship-focused and mixed parenting interventions were effective in reducing child internalising problems, and the waitlist comparator increased internalising problems with implications for waiting times between referral and support. Considering the high risk of bias of most studies included, the findings from this meta-analysis should be interpreted with caution. PROSPERO registration number CRD42020172251.

A quasi-experimental effectiveness evaluation of the 'Incredible Years Toddler' parenting programme on children's development aged 5: A study protocol

Child behavioural and mental health problems have become a public health crisis. The consequences of poor mental health in childhood have large economic costs and consequences for the individual, their families, and for society. Early intervention through parenting programmes can reduce the onset of poor mental health in childhood, hence evaluating the effectiveness of parenting programmes is critical. The 'Incredible Years Toddler' parent programme is an education and training intervention designed to enhance the social and emotional wellbeing of children aged 1-3 years. Whilst previous studies show Incredible Years Toddler to provide promising effects on child outcomes in the short term, the research samples have lacked ethnic diversity and representation from socioeconomically deprived families. This quasi-experimental study is registered on ISRCTN (ISRCTN49991769). We will investigate the effectiveness of Incredible Years Toddler being delivered in three neighbourhoods in inner city Bradford, England. These neighbourhoods contain a socially and ethnically diverse population with 84% living in the poorest decile for England and Wales. Parents with a child aged 1-3 years old who are enrolled in Born in Bradford's Better Start interventional family cohort study are eligible for this study. Intervention participants will be matched to a demographically comparable control group using propensity score matching. This study will use retrospective and prospective data from participants who attended Incredible Years groups between September 2018 and April 2024. The required minimum sample is n = 1336 (ratio 1:3) to detect a small effect (odds = 1.5, d = .20) on the Early Years Foundation Stage profile total score at age 5; a measure of early child development that is routinely collected by teachers. We will also establish whether these effects are moderated by child age at entry to intervention, programme delivery mode, socioeconomic status, and ethnicity. We will also estimate the cost of the intervention and conduct a cost-consequence analysis.

Predictors of Mother and Infant Emergency Department Attendance and Admission: A Prospective Observational Study

OBJECTIVE

To explore the predictors of emergency department attendance and admission for mothers and their infants.

METHODS

Self-reported emergency department (ED) attendance and admission, sociodemographic, mental health, and other measures were recorded at baseline and at 12 months at 4 sites in England between May 2017 and March 2020.

RESULTS

Infants' gestational age (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.88, p = 0.001), mothers' mental health (OR 2.40, 95% CI 1.30 to 4.41, p = 0.005) and mothers' attendance at ED (OR 2.34, 95% CI 1.13 to 4.84, p = 0.022) predicted infant ED attendance. Frequency of attendance was predicted by ED site (IRR 0.46, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.73, p = 0.001) and mothers' age (IRR 0.96, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.00, p = 0.028). Infant hospital admissions were predominantly for respiratory (40%) and other infectious diseases (21%) and were predicted by previous health problems (OR 3.25, 95% CI 1.76 to 6.01, p < 0.001). Mothers' ED attendance was predicted by mixed or multiple ethnic origin (OR 9.62, 95% CI 2.19 to 42.27, p = 0.003), having a male infant (OR 2.08, 95% CI 1.03 to 4.20, p = 0.042), and previous hospitalisation (OR 4.15, 95% CI 1.81 to 9.56, p = 0.001). Hospital admission was largely for reproductive health issues (61%) with frequency predicted by having attended the ED at least once (IRR 3.39, 95% CI 1.66 to 6.93, p = 0.001), and being anxious or depressed (IRR 3.10, 95% CI 1.14 to 8.45, p = 0.027).

CONCLUSIONS FOR PRACTICE

Improving the reproductive and mental health of mothers may help to avoid poor maternal and infant health outcomes and reduce emergency service utilisation and hospitalisation.

Barriers and facilitators in the delivery of a proportionate universal parenting program model (E-SEE Steps) in community family services

Background

A proportionate universal (PU) approach to early years’ service provision has been advocated to improve children’s health and development and to reduce health inequality, by ensuring that services provide timely and high-quality parenting support commensurate with need. Process-oriented research is critical to examine the factors that contribute to, or hinder, the effective delivery/implementation of such a model in community-based family services. This study aimed to assess the delivery, acceptability and feasibility of a new PU parenting intervention model (called E-SEE Steps), using the Incredible Years® (IY) parent program, when delivered by trained health/family service staff in three “steps”—one universal step (the IY Babies Book), and two targeted steps (group-based IY Infant and Toddler programs).

Methods

An embedded mixed-methods process evaluation within a pragmatic parallel two-arm, assessor blinded, randomized controlled trial was conducted in community services in four local authorities in England. The process evaluation used qualitative data gathered via interviews and focus groups with intervention arm parents who were offered the targeted steps (n = 29), practitioners (n = 50), service managers (n = 7) and IY program mentors (n = 3). This was supplemented by quantitative data collected using group leader pre-training (n = 50) and post-delivery (n = 39) questionnaires, and research notes of service design decisions.

Results

The E-SEE Steps model was acceptable to most parents, particularly when it was accompanied by engagement strategies that supported attendance, such as providing childcare. Practitioners also highlighted the positive development opportunities provided by the IY training and supervision. However, participant views did not support the provision of the IY Babies book as a standalone universal component, and there were barriers to eligible parents—particularly those with low mood—taking up the targeted programs. Service providers struggled to align the PU model with their commissioned service contracts and with their staff capacity to engage appropriate parents, including tackling common barriers to attendance.

Conclusions

Despite general enthusiasm and support for delivering high-quality parenting programs in community services in the England, several barriers exist to successfully delivering IY in a proportionate universal model within current services/systems.

A proportionate, universal parenting programme to enhance social-emotional well-being in infants and toddlers in England: the E-SEE Steps RCT

Background

Mental disorders have become a public health crisis. Early prevention is key. Parenting programmes are effective for children aged ≥ 3 years; however, there is a lack of evidence of their effectiveness for children aged ≤ 2 years.

Objectives

To establish if the model named Enhancing Social–Emotional Health and Well-being in the Early Years (E-SEE) Steps can (1) enhance child social emotional well-being and establish whether or not it is cost-effective at 20 months of age when compared with services as usual; and (2) be delivered as a proportionate universal model with fidelity.

Design

A pragmatic two-arm randomised controlled trial and economic appraisal, with an embedded process evaluation to examine the outcomes, implementation and cost-effectiveness of the intervention, and intervention uptake, compared with services as usual. The study had an external pilot phase (which was originally planned as an internal pilot).

Setting

The intervention was delivered in community settings by early years children’s services and/or public health staff in four sites.

Participants

A total of 341 parents of infants aged ≤ 8 weeks were randomised in a ratio of 5 : 1 (intervention, n = 285; control, n = 56). The target sample was 606 parents.

Intervention

Two Incredible Years® parenting programmes (i.e. infant and toddler) delivered in a proportionate universal model with three levels [one universal (book) and two targeted group-based parenting programmes].

Main outcome measures

Child social and emotional well-being (primary outcome) was assessed using the Ages and Stages Questionnaire: Social and Emotional, 2nd edition, at 2, 9 and 18 months after randomisation. Parent depression (secondary key outcome) was assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 items. Both questionnaires were eligibility screeners for targeted groups.

Results

The primary outcome analysis provided no evidence that the E-SEE Steps model was effective in enhancing child social and emotional well-being. The adjusted mean difference was 3.02 on the original Ages and Stages Questionnaire: Social and Emotional, 2nd edition, in favour of the control [95% confidence interval –0.03 to 6.08; p = 0.052; N = 321 (intervention, n = 268; control, n = 53)]. Analysis of the key secondary outcome (i.e. parent depression levels as assessed by the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 items) provided weak evidence on the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 items in favour of the intervention (adjusted mean difference –0.61, 95% confidence interval –1.34 to 0.12; p = 0.1). Other secondary outcomes did not differ between arms. The economic analysis showed that the E-SEE Steps model was associated with higher costs and was marginally more effective (0.031 quality-adjusted life-years gained from E-SEE Steps compared with SAU, 95% confidence interval –0.008 to 0.071) than services as usual, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of approximately £20,062 per quality-adjusted life-year compared with services as usual. Overall take-up of the targeted parenting programmes was low. Sites, although enthusiastic, identified barriers to delivering the intervention.

Limitations

The target sample size was not met and the study was not powered to explore the effectiveness of each level of intervention. Most parents in the sample were well educated and, therefore, the results are unlikely to be generalisable, particularly to those at greatest risk of poor social and emotional well-being.

Conclusions

The E-SEE Steps proportionate universal model did not enhance child social and emotional well-being, but generated non-significant improvements in parent health outcomes, resulting in considerable uncertainty around the cost-effectiveness of the intervention. The primary and key secondary outcome gave inconsistent signals. Although, with system changes, increased resources and adaptations to the intervention, the model could be implemented, evidence for positive outcomes from the E-SEE Steps model is poor.

Future work

The universal-level E-SEE Step data (i.e. the Incredible Years book) from the external pilot will be pooled with the main trial data for further exploration up to follow-up 1, which is the time point at which most change was seen.

Trial registration

This trial is registered as ISRCTN11079129.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Public Health Research programme and will be published in full in Public Health Research; Vol. 10, No. 8. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.