Cargando…

Randomized controlled trial and economic evaluation of nurse-led group support for young mothers during pregnancy and the first year postpartum versus usual care

BACKGROUND: Child maltreatment is a significant public health problem. Group Family Nurse Partnership (gFNP) is a new intervention for young, expectant mothers implemented successfully in pilot studies. This study was designed to determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of gFNP in reducing...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Barnes, Jacqueline, Stuart, Jane, Allen, Elizabeth, Petrou, Stavros, Sturgess, Joanna, Barlow, Jane, Macdonald, Geraldine, Spiby, Helen, Aistrop, Dipti, Melhuish, Edward, Kim, Sung Wook, Elbourne, Diana
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5667036/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29092713
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-017-2259-y
_version_ 1783275431225458688
author Barnes, Jacqueline
Stuart, Jane
Allen, Elizabeth
Petrou, Stavros
Sturgess, Joanna
Barlow, Jane
Macdonald, Geraldine
Spiby, Helen
Aistrop, Dipti
Melhuish, Edward
Kim, Sung Wook
Elbourne, Diana
author_facet Barnes, Jacqueline
Stuart, Jane
Allen, Elizabeth
Petrou, Stavros
Sturgess, Joanna
Barlow, Jane
Macdonald, Geraldine
Spiby, Helen
Aistrop, Dipti
Melhuish, Edward
Kim, Sung Wook
Elbourne, Diana
author_sort Barnes, Jacqueline
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Child maltreatment is a significant public health problem. Group Family Nurse Partnership (gFNP) is a new intervention for young, expectant mothers implemented successfully in pilot studies. This study was designed to determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of gFNP in reducing risk factors for maltreatment with a potentially vulnerable population. METHODS: A multi-site, randomized controlled, parallel-arm trial and prospective economic evaluation was conducted, with allocation via remote randomization (minimization by site, maternal age group) to gFNP or usual care. Participants were expectant mothers aged below 20 years with at least one live birth, or aged 20–24 years with no live births and with low educational qualifications. Data from maternal interviews at baseline and when infants were 2, 6 and 12 months, and video-recording at 12 months, were collected by researchers blind to allocation. Cost information came from weekly logs completed by gFNP family nurses and other service delivery data reported by participants. Primary outcomes measured at 12 months were parenting attitudes (Adult-Adolescent Parenting Index, AAPI-2) and maternal sensitivity (CARE Index). The economic evaluation was conducted from a UK NHS and personal social services perspective with cost-effectiveness expressed in terms of incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. The main analyses were intention-to-treat with additional complier average causal effects (CACE) analyses. RESULTS: Between August 2013 and September 2014, 492 names of potential participants were received of whom 319 were eligible and 166 agreed to take part, 99 randomly assigned to receive gFNP and 67 to usual care. There were no between-arm differences in AAPI-2 total (7 · 5/10 in both, SE 0.1), difference adjusted for baseline, site and maternal age group 0 · 06 (95% CI − 0 · 15 to 0 · 28, p = 0 · 59) or CARE Index (intervention 4 · 0 (SE 0 · 3); control 4 · 7 (SE 0 · 4); difference adjusted for site and maternal age group − 0 · 68 (95% CI − 1 · 62 to 0 · 16, p = 0 · 25) scores. The probability that gFNP is cost-effective based on the QALY measure did not exceed 3%. CONCLUSIONS: The trial did not support gFNP as a means of reducing the risk of child maltreatment in this population but slow recruitment adversely affected group size and consequently delivery of the intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN78814904. Registered on 17 May 2013. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-2259-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5667036
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56670362017-11-08 Randomized controlled trial and economic evaluation of nurse-led group support for young mothers during pregnancy and the first year postpartum versus usual care Barnes, Jacqueline Stuart, Jane Allen, Elizabeth Petrou, Stavros Sturgess, Joanna Barlow, Jane Macdonald, Geraldine Spiby, Helen Aistrop, Dipti Melhuish, Edward Kim, Sung Wook Elbourne, Diana Trials Research BACKGROUND: Child maltreatment is a significant public health problem. Group Family Nurse Partnership (gFNP) is a new intervention for young, expectant mothers implemented successfully in pilot studies. This study was designed to determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of gFNP in reducing risk factors for maltreatment with a potentially vulnerable population. METHODS: A multi-site, randomized controlled, parallel-arm trial and prospective economic evaluation was conducted, with allocation via remote randomization (minimization by site, maternal age group) to gFNP or usual care. Participants were expectant mothers aged below 20 years with at least one live birth, or aged 20–24 years with no live births and with low educational qualifications. Data from maternal interviews at baseline and when infants were 2, 6 and 12 months, and video-recording at 12 months, were collected by researchers blind to allocation. Cost information came from weekly logs completed by gFNP family nurses and other service delivery data reported by participants. Primary outcomes measured at 12 months were parenting attitudes (Adult-Adolescent Parenting Index, AAPI-2) and maternal sensitivity (CARE Index). The economic evaluation was conducted from a UK NHS and personal social services perspective with cost-effectiveness expressed in terms of incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. The main analyses were intention-to-treat with additional complier average causal effects (CACE) analyses. RESULTS: Between August 2013 and September 2014, 492 names of potential participants were received of whom 319 were eligible and 166 agreed to take part, 99 randomly assigned to receive gFNP and 67 to usual care. There were no between-arm differences in AAPI-2 total (7 · 5/10 in both, SE 0.1), difference adjusted for baseline, site and maternal age group 0 · 06 (95% CI − 0 · 15 to 0 · 28, p = 0 · 59) or CARE Index (intervention 4 · 0 (SE 0 · 3); control 4 · 7 (SE 0 · 4); difference adjusted for site and maternal age group − 0 · 68 (95% CI − 1 · 62 to 0 · 16, p = 0 · 25) scores. The probability that gFNP is cost-effective based on the QALY measure did not exceed 3%. CONCLUSIONS: The trial did not support gFNP as a means of reducing the risk of child maltreatment in this population but slow recruitment adversely affected group size and consequently delivery of the intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN78814904. Registered on 17 May 2013. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-2259-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-11-01 /pmc/articles/PMC5667036/ /pubmed/29092713 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-017-2259-y Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Barnes, Jacqueline
Stuart, Jane
Allen, Elizabeth
Petrou, Stavros
Sturgess, Joanna
Barlow, Jane
Macdonald, Geraldine
Spiby, Helen
Aistrop, Dipti
Melhuish, Edward
Kim, Sung Wook
Elbourne, Diana
Randomized controlled trial and economic evaluation of nurse-led group support for young mothers during pregnancy and the first year postpartum versus usual care
title Randomized controlled trial and economic evaluation of nurse-led group support for young mothers during pregnancy and the first year postpartum versus usual care
title_full Randomized controlled trial and economic evaluation of nurse-led group support for young mothers during pregnancy and the first year postpartum versus usual care
title_fullStr Randomized controlled trial and economic evaluation of nurse-led group support for young mothers during pregnancy and the first year postpartum versus usual care
title_full_unstemmed Randomized controlled trial and economic evaluation of nurse-led group support for young mothers during pregnancy and the first year postpartum versus usual care
title_short Randomized controlled trial and economic evaluation of nurse-led group support for young mothers during pregnancy and the first year postpartum versus usual care
title_sort randomized controlled trial and economic evaluation of nurse-led group support for young mothers during pregnancy and the first year postpartum versus usual care
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5667036/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29092713
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-017-2259-y
work_keys_str_mv AT barnesjacqueline randomizedcontrolledtrialandeconomicevaluationofnurseledgroupsupportforyoungmothersduringpregnancyandthefirstyearpostpartumversususualcare
AT stuartjane randomizedcontrolledtrialandeconomicevaluationofnurseledgroupsupportforyoungmothersduringpregnancyandthefirstyearpostpartumversususualcare
AT allenelizabeth randomizedcontrolledtrialandeconomicevaluationofnurseledgroupsupportforyoungmothersduringpregnancyandthefirstyearpostpartumversususualcare
AT petroustavros randomizedcontrolledtrialandeconomicevaluationofnurseledgroupsupportforyoungmothersduringpregnancyandthefirstyearpostpartumversususualcare
AT sturgessjoanna randomizedcontrolledtrialandeconomicevaluationofnurseledgroupsupportforyoungmothersduringpregnancyandthefirstyearpostpartumversususualcare
AT barlowjane randomizedcontrolledtrialandeconomicevaluationofnurseledgroupsupportforyoungmothersduringpregnancyandthefirstyearpostpartumversususualcare
AT macdonaldgeraldine randomizedcontrolledtrialandeconomicevaluationofnurseledgroupsupportforyoungmothersduringpregnancyandthefirstyearpostpartumversususualcare
AT spibyhelen randomizedcontrolledtrialandeconomicevaluationofnurseledgroupsupportforyoungmothersduringpregnancyandthefirstyearpostpartumversususualcare
AT aistropdipti randomizedcontrolledtrialandeconomicevaluationofnurseledgroupsupportforyoungmothersduringpregnancyandthefirstyearpostpartumversususualcare
AT melhuishedward randomizedcontrolledtrialandeconomicevaluationofnurseledgroupsupportforyoungmothersduringpregnancyandthefirstyearpostpartumversususualcare
AT kimsungwook randomizedcontrolledtrialandeconomicevaluationofnurseledgroupsupportforyoungmothersduringpregnancyandthefirstyearpostpartumversususualcare
AT elbournediana randomizedcontrolledtrialandeconomicevaluationofnurseledgroupsupportforyoungmothersduringpregnancyandthefirstyearpostpartumversususualcare