RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Over 3000 infants suffer a brain injury around the time of birth every year in England. Although these injuries can have important implications for children and their families, our understanding of how these injuries affect children's lives is limited. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The aim of the CHERuB study (Childhood Health and Educational outcomes afteR perinatal Brain injury) is to investigate longitudinal childhood health and educational outcomes after perinatal brain injury through the creation of a population-matched cohort study. This study will use the Department of Health and Social Care definition of perinatal brain injury which includes infants with intracranial haemorrhage, preterm white matter injury, hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy, perinatal stroke, central nervous system infections, seizures and kernicterus. All children born with a perinatal brain injury in England between 2008 and 2019 will be included (n=54 176) and two matched comparator groups of infants without brain injury will be created: a preterm control group identified from the National Neonatal Research Data Set and a term/late preterm control group identified using birth records. The national health, education and social care records of these infants will be linked to ascertain their longitudinal childhood outcomes between 2008 and 2023. This cohort will include approximately 170 000 children. The associations between perinatal brain injuries and survival without neurosensory impairment, neurodevelopmental impairments, chronic health conditions and mental health conditions throughout childhood will be examined using regression methods and time-to-event analyses. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has West London Research Ethics Committee and Confidential Advisory Group approval (20/LO/1023 and 22/CAG/0068 issued 20/10/2022). Findings will be published in open-access journals and publicised via the CHERuB study website, social media accounts and our charity partners.
Assuntos
Lesões Encefálicas , Humanos , Recém-Nascido , Feminino , Lactente , Pré-Escolar , Inglaterra/epidemiologia , Criança , Masculino , Estudos de Coortes , Projetos de Pesquisa , Saúde da Criança , Escolaridade , Estudos LongitudinaisRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: There is limited evidence on the effectiveness of parenting interventions to improve disruptive behaviour in children with intellectual developmental disabilities. This clinical trial evaluated whether an adapted group parenting intervention for preschool children with intellectual developmental disabilities who display challenging behaviour is superior to treatment as usual in England. STUDY DESIGN: 261 children aged 30-59 months with moderate to severe intellectual developmental disabilities and challenging behaviour were randomised to either the intervention (Stepping Stones Triple P) and treatment as usual or treatment as usual alone. The primary outcome was the parent-rated Child Behaviour Checklist at 52 weeks after randomisation. A health economic evaluation was also completed. RESULTS: We found no significant difference between arms on the primary outcome (mean difference -4.23; 95% CI: -9.99 to 1.53; p = 0.147). However, a subgroup analysis suggests the intervention was effective for participants randomised before the COVID-19 pandemic (mean difference -7.12; 95% CI: -13.44 to -0.81; p = 0.046). Furthermore, a complier average causal effects analysis (mean difference -11.53; 95% CI: -26.97 to 3.91; p = 0.143) suggests the intervention requires participants to receive a sufficient intervention dose. The intervention generated statistically significant cost savings (-£1,057.88; 95% CI -£3,218.6 to -£46.67) but the mean point estimate in Quality Adjusted Life Years was similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: This study did not find an effect of the intervention on reducing challenging behaviour, but this may have been influenced by problems with engagement. The intervention could be considered by services as an early intervention if families are supported to attend, especially given its low cost.
Assuntos
Deficiência Intelectual , Pais , Humanos , Pré-Escolar , Masculino , Feminino , Deficiência Intelectual/psicologia , Pais/psicologia , Pais/educação , Comportamento Problema/psicologia , COVID-19/psicologia , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Poder Familiar/psicologia , Inglaterra , Deficiências do Desenvolvimento/terapiaRESUMO
More than 10 million children have been born with assisted reproductive technology (ART) as we begin to enter the third generation of individuals conceived by ART. Here we summarise key messages from an enlarging body of literature regarding their health. Earlier research had pointed towards increases in perinatal, neonatal and neurological risks, such as preterm birth, low birth weight, congenital malformations and cerebral palsy. Many of these risks have continued to persist in most recent work but have shown reduction. Newer research proposes long-term cardiometabolic and endocrine concerns. Fortunately, most reports conclude there is little or no risk of increased childhood malignancy or abnormal neurodevelopment. Moving forward, new research may benefit from changes in comparator groups and a better understanding of infertility per se in ART, and the confounding role it probably plays in many of the known risk associations, to reliably scan the horizon for health threats for individuals born after ART.
RESUMO
Background: Stepping Stones Triple P is an adapted intervention for parents of young children with developmental disabilities who display behaviours that challenge, aiming at teaching positive parenting techniques and promoting a positive parent-child relationship. Objective: To evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of level 4 Stepping Stones Triple P in reducing behaviours that challenge in children with moderate to severe intellectual disabilities. Design, setting, participants: A parallel two-arm pragmatic multisite single-blind randomised controlled trial recruited a total of 261 dyads (parent and child). The children were aged 30-59 months and had moderate to severe intellectual disabilities. Participants were randomised, using a 3 : 2 allocation ratio, into the intervention arm (Stepping Stones Triple P; nâ =â 155) or treatment as usual arm (nâ =â 106). Participants were recruited from four study sites in Blackpool, North and South London and Newcastle. Intervention: Level 4 Stepping Stones Triple P consists of six group sessions and three individual phone or face-to-face contacts over 9 weeks. These were changed to remote sessions after 16 March 2020 due to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Main outcome measure: The primary outcome measure was the parent-reported Child Behaviour Checklist, which assesses the severity of behaviours that challenge. Results: We found a small non-significant difference in the mean Child Behaviour Checklist scores (-4.23, 95% CI -9.98 to 1.52, pâ =â 0.146) in the intervention arm compared to treatment as usual at 12 months. Per protocol and complier average causal effect sensitivity analyses, which took into consideration the number of sessions attended, showed the Child Behaviour Checklist mean score difference at 12 months was lower in the intervention arm by -10.77 (95% CI -19.12 to -2.42, pâ =â 0.014) and -11.53 (95% CI -26.97 to 3.91, pâ =â 0.143), respectively. The Child Behaviour Checklist mean score difference between participants who were recruited before and after the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic was estimated as -7.12 (95% CI -13.44 to -0.81) and 7.61 (95% CI -5.43 to 20.64), respectively (pâ =â 0.046), suggesting that any effect pre-pandemic may have reversed during the pandemic. There were no differences in all secondary measures. Stepping Stones Triple P is probably value for money to deliver (-£1057.88; 95% CI -£3218.6 to -£46.67), but decisions to roll this out as an alternative to existing parenting interventions or treatment as usual may be dependent on policymaker willingness to invest in early interventions to reduce behaviours that challenge. Parents reported the intervention boosted their confidence and skills, and the group format enabled them to learn from others and benefit from peer support. There were 20 serious adverse events reported during the study, but none were associated with the intervention. Limitations: There were low attendance rates in the Stepping Stones Triple P arm, as well as the coronavirus disease 2019-related challenges with recruitment and delivery of the intervention. Conclusions: Level 4 Stepping Stones Triple P did not reduce early onset behaviours that challenge in very young children with moderate to severe intellectual disabilities. However, there was an effect on child behaviours for those who received a sufficient dose of the intervention. There is a high probability of Stepping Stones Triple P being at least cost neutral and therefore worth considering as an early therapeutic option given the long-term consequences of behaviours that challenge on people and their social networks. Future work: Further research should investigate the implementation of parenting groups for behaviours that challenge in this population, as well as the optimal mode of delivery to maximise engagement and subsequent outcomes. Study registration: This study is registered as NCT03086876 (https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03086876?term=Hassiotis±Angela&draw=1&rank=1). Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: HTA 15/162/02) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 6. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.
Research shows that in children without learning disabilities, parenting groups which support parents to develop skills to manage behaviours that challenge in their child can be helpful. The National Institute of Health and Care Excellence recommended that more research was needed to strengthen the evidence for such interventions for children with moderate to severe learning disability who are more likely to display behaviours that challenge in England. In this study, we tested in real-world conditions a programme called level 4 Stepping Stones Triple P, which has shown positive results in trials outside of the United Kingdom. Trained therapists delivered six groups and three individual sessions over 9 weeks to parents of children aged 3059 months with moderate to severe learning disabilities. Two hundred and sixty-one parents were allocated to one of two arms by chance (randomisation): one received Stepping Stones Triple P and treatment as usual and the other treatment as usual only. Treatment as usual included support and advice by general practitioners or community child development teams. Our primary outcome was parent-reported child behaviour at 12 months after randomisation. We also collected data on other outcomes and carried out interviews with parents, service managers and therapists to find out their views about Stepping Stones Triple P. We did not find that Stepping Stones Triple P reduces behaviours that challenge in the child more than treatment as usual at 12 months. However, when we looked at people who received more than half of the sessions, there was a larger reduction in behaviours which suggests that Stepping Stones Triple P works for families if they attend the full programme. Stepping Stones Triple P seems to be good value for money, as we found that at 12 months (covering 10 months of costs), the Stepping Stones Triple P cost £1058 less than treatment as usual from a health and social care perspective. As such, Stepping Stones Triple P is fairly cheap to deliver and a suitable early intervention for behaviours that challenge especially because of positive feedback from parents. Throughout the trial, we included a Parent Advisory Group that oversaw study materials, interview topic guides and promotion of the study.