Barriers and facilitators in the delivery of a proportionate universal parenting program model (E-SEE Steps) in community family services
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 re...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | PloS one 2022-06, Vol.17 (6), p.e0265946 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | |
---|---|
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | e0265946 |
container_title | PloS one |
container_volume | 17 |
creator | Berry, Vashti Mitchell, Siobhan B Blower, Sarah Whittaker, Karen Wilkinson, Kath McGilloway, Sinead Mason-Jones, Amanda Carr, Rachel Margaret Bywater, Tracey |
description | 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).
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.
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.
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. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1371/journal.pone.0265946 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_plos_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_plos_journals_2686268218</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A707006850</galeid><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_847c85bf8bf246e8a46827a2a57a3f7d</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>A707006850</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c593t-a1522ea2b56944bffaef07433454a6274e3bccd5aff2a51dd581b43b4c45cf493</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptUt1u0zAYjRCIjcIbILDEzbho8b-TG6QxFZg0iYvBtfXFsTtXSRzstFIfgbfGodm0oimKEn0-P_6OTlG8JXhFmCKftmEXe2hXQ-jtClMpKi6fFeekYnQpKWbPH_2fFa9S2mIsWCnly-KMCVlJpsR58ecLxOhtTAj6BjkwvvUjjCEPfI_GO4sa2_q9jQcUHAI0xDCEOPrQw2jRrp-OErRogGj70febCbGJ0KEuZCa6WC9v12t0O9ohfZwkTei6TBsP2azz7QElG_fe2PS6eOGgTfbN_F0Uv76uf159X978-HZ9dXmzNKJi4xKIoNQCrfMKnNfOgXVYcca44CCp4pbVxjQCnKMgSNOIktSc1dxwYRyv2KJ4f9Qd2pD0nGLSVJYyv5SUGXF9RDQBtnqIvoN40AG8_jcIcaMhR2Baq0uuTClqV9aOcmlL4FlCQXZWwJxqstbn2W1Xd7YxOaQI7Yno6Unv7_Qm7HVFKqIwzwIXs0AMv3c2jbrzydi2hd6G3XRvJarsmRNYFB_-gz693YzaQF7A9y5kXzOJ6kuFFcayFDijVk-g8tPYzptcOefz_ITAjwQTQ0rRuocdCdZTYe8vo6fC6rmwmfbucT4PpPuGsr-AVeqd</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2686268218</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Barriers and facilitators in the delivery of a proportionate universal parenting program model (E-SEE Steps) in community family services</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Public Library of Science (PLoS) Journals Open Access</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><creator>Berry, Vashti ; Mitchell, Siobhan B ; Blower, Sarah ; Whittaker, Karen ; Wilkinson, Kath ; McGilloway, Sinead ; Mason-Jones, Amanda ; Carr, Rachel Margaret ; Bywater, Tracey</creator><contributor>Mordaunt, Dylan A.</contributor><creatorcontrib>Berry, Vashti ; Mitchell, Siobhan B ; Blower, Sarah ; Whittaker, Karen ; Wilkinson, Kath ; McGilloway, Sinead ; Mason-Jones, Amanda ; Carr, Rachel Margaret ; Bywater, Tracey ; Mordaunt, Dylan A.</creatorcontrib><description>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).
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.
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.
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.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0265946</identifier><identifier>PMID: 35696375</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Public Library of Science</publisher><subject>Acceptability ; Biology and Life Sciences ; Children ; Children & youth ; Cost analysis ; Design ; Evaluation ; Families & family life ; Health Status Disparities ; Humans ; Infant ; Intervention ; Medicine and Health Sciences ; Methods ; Modelling ; Parenting ; Parents ; Parents & parenting ; Parents - education ; People and Places ; Qualitative analysis ; Questionnaires ; Research and Analysis Methods ; Social Sciences ; Social service ; Social Welfare ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Training ; Universalism</subject><ispartof>PloS one, 2022-06, Vol.17 (6), p.e0265946</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2022 Public Library of Science</rights><rights>2022 Berry et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2022 Berry et al 2022 Berry et al</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c593t-a1522ea2b56944bffaef07433454a6274e3bccd5aff2a51dd581b43b4c45cf493</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c593t-a1522ea2b56944bffaef07433454a6274e3bccd5aff2a51dd581b43b4c45cf493</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-6438-3731 ; 0000-0001-8962-0991 ; 0000-0001-6972-0100 ; 0000-0003-0988-3201</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9191704/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9191704/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,864,885,2102,2928,23866,27924,27925,53791,53793,79600,79601</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35696375$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Mordaunt, Dylan A.</contributor><creatorcontrib>Berry, Vashti</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mitchell, Siobhan B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Blower, Sarah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Whittaker, Karen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wilkinson, Kath</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McGilloway, Sinead</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mason-Jones, Amanda</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carr, Rachel Margaret</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bywater, Tracey</creatorcontrib><title>Barriers and facilitators in the delivery of a proportionate universal parenting program model (E-SEE Steps) in community family services</title><title>PloS one</title><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><description>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).
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.
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.
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.</description><subject>Acceptability</subject><subject>Biology and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Children</subject><subject>Children & youth</subject><subject>Cost analysis</subject><subject>Design</subject><subject>Evaluation</subject><subject>Families & family life</subject><subject>Health Status Disparities</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Infant</subject><subject>Intervention</subject><subject>Medicine and Health Sciences</subject><subject>Methods</subject><subject>Modelling</subject><subject>Parenting</subject><subject>Parents</subject><subject>Parents & parenting</subject><subject>Parents - education</subject><subject>People and Places</subject><subject>Qualitative analysis</subject><subject>Questionnaires</subject><subject>Research and Analysis Methods</subject><subject>Social Sciences</subject><subject>Social service</subject><subject>Social Welfare</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><subject>Training</subject><subject>Universalism</subject><issn>1932-6203</issn><issn>1932-6203</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNptUt1u0zAYjRCIjcIbILDEzbho8b-TG6QxFZg0iYvBtfXFsTtXSRzstFIfgbfGodm0oimKEn0-P_6OTlG8JXhFmCKftmEXe2hXQ-jtClMpKi6fFeekYnQpKWbPH_2fFa9S2mIsWCnly-KMCVlJpsR58ecLxOhtTAj6BjkwvvUjjCEPfI_GO4sa2_q9jQcUHAI0xDCEOPrQw2jRrp-OErRogGj70febCbGJ0KEuZCa6WC9v12t0O9ohfZwkTei6TBsP2azz7QElG_fe2PS6eOGgTfbN_F0Uv76uf159X978-HZ9dXmzNKJi4xKIoNQCrfMKnNfOgXVYcca44CCp4pbVxjQCnKMgSNOIktSc1dxwYRyv2KJ4f9Qd2pD0nGLSVJYyv5SUGXF9RDQBtnqIvoN40AG8_jcIcaMhR2Baq0uuTClqV9aOcmlL4FlCQXZWwJxqstbn2W1Xd7YxOaQI7Yno6Unv7_Qm7HVFKqIwzwIXs0AMv3c2jbrzydi2hd6G3XRvJarsmRNYFB_-gz693YzaQF7A9y5kXzOJ6kuFFcayFDijVk-g8tPYzptcOefz_ITAjwQTQ0rRuocdCdZTYe8vo6fC6rmwmfbucT4PpPuGsr-AVeqd</recordid><startdate>20220613</startdate><enddate>20220613</enddate><creator>Berry, Vashti</creator><creator>Mitchell, Siobhan B</creator><creator>Blower, Sarah</creator><creator>Whittaker, Karen</creator><creator>Wilkinson, Kath</creator><creator>McGilloway, Sinead</creator><creator>Mason-Jones, Amanda</creator><creator>Carr, Rachel Margaret</creator><creator>Bywater, Tracey</creator><general>Public Library of Science</general><general>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6438-3731</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8962-0991</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6972-0100</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0988-3201</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20220613</creationdate><title>Barriers and facilitators in the delivery of a proportionate universal parenting program model (E-SEE Steps) in community family services</title><author>Berry, Vashti ; Mitchell, Siobhan B ; Blower, Sarah ; Whittaker, Karen ; Wilkinson, Kath ; McGilloway, Sinead ; Mason-Jones, Amanda ; Carr, Rachel Margaret ; Bywater, Tracey</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c593t-a1522ea2b56944bffaef07433454a6274e3bccd5aff2a51dd581b43b4c45cf493</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Acceptability</topic><topic>Biology and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Children</topic><topic>Children & youth</topic><topic>Cost analysis</topic><topic>Design</topic><topic>Evaluation</topic><topic>Families & family life</topic><topic>Health Status Disparities</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Infant</topic><topic>Intervention</topic><topic>Medicine and Health Sciences</topic><topic>Methods</topic><topic>Modelling</topic><topic>Parenting</topic><topic>Parents</topic><topic>Parents & parenting</topic><topic>Parents - education</topic><topic>People and Places</topic><topic>Qualitative analysis</topic><topic>Questionnaires</topic><topic>Research and Analysis Methods</topic><topic>Social Sciences</topic><topic>Social service</topic><topic>Social Welfare</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><topic>Training</topic><topic>Universalism</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Berry, Vashti</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mitchell, Siobhan B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Blower, Sarah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Whittaker, Karen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wilkinson, Kath</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McGilloway, Sinead</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mason-Jones, Amanda</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carr, Rachel Margaret</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bywater, Tracey</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Materials Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>Access via ProQuest (Open Access)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Berry, Vashti</au><au>Mitchell, Siobhan B</au><au>Blower, Sarah</au><au>Whittaker, Karen</au><au>Wilkinson, Kath</au><au>McGilloway, Sinead</au><au>Mason-Jones, Amanda</au><au>Carr, Rachel Margaret</au><au>Bywater, Tracey</au><au>Mordaunt, Dylan A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Barriers and facilitators in the delivery of a proportionate universal parenting program model (E-SEE Steps) in community family services</atitle><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><date>2022-06-13</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>17</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>e0265946</spage><pages>e0265946-</pages><issn>1932-6203</issn><eissn>1932-6203</eissn><abstract>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).
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.
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.
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.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Public Library of Science</pub><pmid>35696375</pmid><doi>10.1371/journal.pone.0265946</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6438-3731</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8962-0991</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6972-0100</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0988-3201</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1932-6203 |
ispartof | PloS one, 2022-06, Vol.17 (6), p.e0265946 |
issn | 1932-6203 1932-6203 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_plos_journals_2686268218 |
source | MEDLINE; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Public Library of Science (PLoS) Journals Open Access; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry |
subjects | Acceptability Biology and Life Sciences Children Children & youth Cost analysis Design Evaluation Families & family life Health Status Disparities Humans Infant Intervention Medicine and Health Sciences Methods Modelling Parenting Parents Parents & parenting Parents - education People and Places Qualitative analysis Questionnaires Research and Analysis Methods Social Sciences Social service Social Welfare Surveys and Questionnaires Training Universalism |
title | Barriers and facilitators in the delivery of a proportionate universal parenting program model (E-SEE Steps) in community family services |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-27T20%3A43%3A01IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_plos_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Barriers%20and%20facilitators%20in%20the%20delivery%20of%20a%20proportionate%20universal%20parenting%20program%20model%20(E-SEE%20Steps)%20in%20community%20family%20services&rft.jtitle=PloS%20one&rft.au=Berry,%20Vashti&rft.date=2022-06-13&rft.volume=17&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=e0265946&rft.pages=e0265946-&rft.issn=1932-6203&rft.eissn=1932-6203&rft_id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0265946&rft_dat=%3Cgale_plos_%3EA707006850%3C/gale_plos_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2686268218&rft_id=info:pmid/35696375&rft_galeid=A707006850&rft_doaj_id=oai_doaj_org_article_847c85bf8bf246e8a46827a2a57a3f7d&rfr_iscdi=true |