Cargando…

De-implementation of detrimental feeding practices: a pilot protocol

BACKGROUND: Early childhood educators (ECEs) often use detrimental feeding practices and are slow to implement positive feeding practices. Nevertheless, few studies have aimed to understand and change ECEs’ feeding practices. This gap needs to be addressed because implementation (i.e., adding new, e...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Swindle, Taren, Rutledge, Julie M., Johnson, Susan L., Selig, James P., Curran, Geoff M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7678218/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33292711
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40814-020-00720-z
_version_ 1783612111234007040
author Swindle, Taren
Rutledge, Julie M.
Johnson, Susan L.
Selig, James P.
Curran, Geoff M.
author_facet Swindle, Taren
Rutledge, Julie M.
Johnson, Susan L.
Selig, James P.
Curran, Geoff M.
author_sort Swindle, Taren
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Early childhood educators (ECEs) often use detrimental feeding practices and are slow to implement positive feeding practices. Nevertheless, few studies have aimed to understand and change ECEs’ feeding practices. This gap needs to be addressed because implementation (i.e., adding new, evidence-based practices) and de-implementation (i.e., stopping low-value or harmful practices) are distinct processes that require unique strategies. METHODS: We will develop a de-implementation strategy for detrimental feeding practices using evidence-based quality improvement (EBQI) sessions to engage stakeholders and draw on the Niven process model for de-implementation. Then, we will investigate the effects of the de-implementation strategy in a proof-of-principle study. The de-implementation strategy will be evaluated in 2 partnering childcare agencies using a pre-post, within-site design. For our primary outcome, we will interview educators throughout the school year to assess the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention and survey them with standard measures for assessing feasibility and acceptability. For secondary outcomes, we will investigate its effects on the use of detrimental and evidence-based feeding practices by teachers and impacts on child BMI and diet. DISCUSSION: The current study will establish the feasibility and acceptability of our de-implementation approach and will provide preliminary data toward 3 predicted secondary outcomes: (1) decreased detrimental feeding practices by ECEs, (2) increased adoption of and fidelity to nutrition promotion practices, and (3) improved child dietary outcomes. These results are expected to contribute to the uptake and sustainability of mealtime interventions to improve the diets of young children. Results will also apply to the field of implementation science by informing processes for developing de-implementation approaches in a community setting.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7678218
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-76782182020-11-20 De-implementation of detrimental feeding practices: a pilot protocol Swindle, Taren Rutledge, Julie M. Johnson, Susan L. Selig, James P. Curran, Geoff M. Pilot Feasibility Stud Study Protocol BACKGROUND: Early childhood educators (ECEs) often use detrimental feeding practices and are slow to implement positive feeding practices. Nevertheless, few studies have aimed to understand and change ECEs’ feeding practices. This gap needs to be addressed because implementation (i.e., adding new, evidence-based practices) and de-implementation (i.e., stopping low-value or harmful practices) are distinct processes that require unique strategies. METHODS: We will develop a de-implementation strategy for detrimental feeding practices using evidence-based quality improvement (EBQI) sessions to engage stakeholders and draw on the Niven process model for de-implementation. Then, we will investigate the effects of the de-implementation strategy in a proof-of-principle study. The de-implementation strategy will be evaluated in 2 partnering childcare agencies using a pre-post, within-site design. For our primary outcome, we will interview educators throughout the school year to assess the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention and survey them with standard measures for assessing feasibility and acceptability. For secondary outcomes, we will investigate its effects on the use of detrimental and evidence-based feeding practices by teachers and impacts on child BMI and diet. DISCUSSION: The current study will establish the feasibility and acceptability of our de-implementation approach and will provide preliminary data toward 3 predicted secondary outcomes: (1) decreased detrimental feeding practices by ECEs, (2) increased adoption of and fidelity to nutrition promotion practices, and (3) improved child dietary outcomes. These results are expected to contribute to the uptake and sustainability of mealtime interventions to improve the diets of young children. Results will also apply to the field of implementation science by informing processes for developing de-implementation approaches in a community setting. BioMed Central 2020-11-19 /pmc/articles/PMC7678218/ /pubmed/33292711 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40814-020-00720-z Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. 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 in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Study Protocol
Swindle, Taren
Rutledge, Julie M.
Johnson, Susan L.
Selig, James P.
Curran, Geoff M.
De-implementation of detrimental feeding practices: a pilot protocol
title De-implementation of detrimental feeding practices: a pilot protocol
title_full De-implementation of detrimental feeding practices: a pilot protocol
title_fullStr De-implementation of detrimental feeding practices: a pilot protocol
title_full_unstemmed De-implementation of detrimental feeding practices: a pilot protocol
title_short De-implementation of detrimental feeding practices: a pilot protocol
title_sort de-implementation of detrimental feeding practices: a pilot protocol
topic Study Protocol
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7678218/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33292711
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40814-020-00720-z
work_keys_str_mv AT swindletaren deimplementationofdetrimentalfeedingpracticesapilotprotocol
AT rutledgejuliem deimplementationofdetrimentalfeedingpracticesapilotprotocol
AT johnsonsusanl deimplementationofdetrimentalfeedingpracticesapilotprotocol
AT seligjamesp deimplementationofdetrimentalfeedingpracticesapilotprotocol
AT currangeoffm deimplementationofdetrimentalfeedingpracticesapilotprotocol