Impact of a Brief Group Intervention to Enhance Parenting and the Home Learning Environment for Children Aged 6-36 Months: a Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial.

This study evaluated the effectiveness of a group parenting intervention designed to strengthen the home learning environment of children from disadvantaged families. Two cluster randomised controlled superiority trials were conducted in parallel and delivered within existing services: a 6-week parenting group (51 locations randomised; 986 parents) for parents of infants (aged 6-12 months), and a 10-week facilitated playgroup (58 locations randomised; 1200 parents) for parents of toddlers (aged 12-36 months). Each trial had three conditions: intervention (smalltalk group-only); enhanced intervention with home coaching (smalltalk plus); and 'standard'/usual practice controls. Parent-report and observational measures were collected at baseline, 12 and 32 weeks follow-up. Primary outcomes were parent verbal responsivity and home learning activities at 32 weeks. In the infant trial, there were no differences by trial arm for the primary outcomes at 32 weeks. In the toddler trial at 32-weeks, participants in the smalltalk group-only trial showed improvement compared to the standard program for parent verbal responsivity (effect size (ES) = 0.16; 95% CI 0.01, 0.36) and home learning activities (ES = 0.17; 95% CI 0.01, 0.38) but smalltalk plus did not. For the secondary outcomes in the infant trial, several initial differences favouring smalltalk plus were evident at 12 weeks, but not maintained to 32 weeks. For the toddler trial, differences in secondary outcomes favouring smalltalk plus were evident at 12 weeks and maintained to 32 weeks. These trials provide some evidence of the benefits of a parenting intervention focused on the home learning environment for parents of toddlers but not infants. TRIAL REGISTRATION: 8 September 2011; ACTRN12611000965909 .

A novel method of rapid appraisal of clinical practice guidelines for children with enuresis.

BACKGROUND: Enuresis (bedwetting) is a common but variably managed pediatric condition. Despite an abundance of published documents which provide recommendations for clinical evaluation and management of enuresis, no formal appraisal of their methodological quality has been undertaken. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study is to evaluate the quality of current pediatric guidelines for enuresis (bedwetting) using a novel method of appraisal. STUDY DESIGN: A comprehensive gray literature search was undertaken to identify guideline documents that provided recommendations for management of enuresis in children and adolescents. The search strategy included guideline databases, targeted websites, Google search engines, and MEDLINE. Guideline documents included clinical practice guidelines, consensus documents, position statements, and other clinical review documents. Each document underwent basic appraisal by two independent assessors using the International Centre for Allied Health Evidence (iCAHE) Guideline Quality Checklist. Those documents which (1) had an iCAHE quality score of ≥10; (2) used a systematic search strategy; and (3) linked evidence to their recommendations underwent further detailed appraisal using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument. RESULTS: Eighteen documents were shortlisted for basic appraisal. The iCAHE highlighted a lack of information regarding underlying evidence and dates (mean score 36% and 41%, respectively). Only three documents met basic quality criteria and progressed to detailed appraisal using the AGREE II. These included guidelines produced by the Paediatric Society of New Zealand and National Clinical Guideline Centre and a position statement from the Canadian Paediatric Society. All three guidelines presented clear and unambiguous recommendations (mean score 80%). However, information regarding stakeholder involvement was lacking (mean score 50%). CONCLUSIONS: Several guidelines exist for the evaluation and management of children with enuresis, but many lack appropriate methodological quality standards. The guideline produced by the National Clinical Guideline Centre achieved the highest quality rating and is recommended for future adaptation and implementation in relevant clinical settings.