Comparing the effectiveness of home visiting paraprofessionals and mental health professionals delivering a postpartum depression preventive intervention: a cluster-randomized non-inferiority clinical trial.

To determine whether pregnant women receiving the Mothers and Babies group-based intervention exhibited greater depressive symptom reductions and fewer new cases of major depression than women receiving usual community-based services, and to examine whether groups run by paraprofessional home visitors and mental health professionals yielded similar depressive symptom reductions and prevention of major depression. Using a cluster-randomized design, 37 home visiting programs were randomized to usual home visiting, Mothers and Babies delivered via home visiting paraprofessionals, or Mothers and Babies delivered via mental health professionals. Baseline assessments were conducted prenatally with follow-up extending to 24 weeks postpartum. Eligibility criteria were ≥ 16 years old, ≤ 33 gestation upon referral, and Spanish/English speaking. Depressive symptoms at 24 weeks postpartum was the primary outcome. Eight hundred seventy-four women were enrolled. Neither intervention arm was superior to usual care in decreasing depressive symptoms across the sample (p = 0.401 home visiting paraprofessional vs. control; p = 0.430 mental health professional vs. control). Post hoc analyses suggest a positive intervention effect for women exhibiting mild depressive symptoms at baseline. We have evidence of non-inferiority, as the model-estimated mean difference in depressive symptoms between intervention arms (0.01 points, 95% CI: -0.79, 0.78) did not surpass our pre-specified margin of non-inferiority of two points. Although we did not find statistically significant differences between intervention and control arms, non-inferiority analyses found paraprofessional home visitors generated similar reductions in depressive symptoms as mental health professionals. Additionally, Mothers and Babies appears to reduce depressive symptoms among women with mild depressive symptoms when delivered by mental health professionals. This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (initial post: December 1, 2016; identifier: NCT02979444).

Acceptability and appropriateness of a perinatal depression preventive group intervention: a qualitative analysis.

BACKGROUND: Perinatal depression is a prevalent public health concern. Although preventive interventions exist, there is limited literature on the acceptability and appropriateness of these interventions, especially those delivered by paraprofessionals. The Mothers and Babies Program (MB) is a group-based perinatal depression preventive intervention delivered prenatally. A cluster-randomized controlled trial examined the acceptability, appropriateness, and effectiveness of MB delivered by mental health professionals compared to paraprofessional staff from home visiting programs. METHODS: The full study enrolled 874 pregnant women. Fifty-three facilitators were trained and delivered the MB intervention to women in one of seven states in the United States. Semi-structured interviews were attempted with a randomly-selected subset of the full sample of pregnant women who received the MB intervention and with all facilitators. Specifically, interviews were conducted with 88 women who received the MB group intervention (45 in the paraprofessional-led arm and 43 in the mental health professional-led arm) and 46 women who facilitated the groups (27 home visiting staff and 19 mental health professionals). Interviews were conducted over the phone in English or Spanish and audio recorded. The recordings were translated into English, as needed, and transcribed. Thematic analysis was conducted using NVIVO to identify key themes related to intervention acceptability and appropriateness. Similarities and differences between study arms were explored. RESULTS: Clients and facilitators found the MB content and group format acceptable. Challenges included maintaining group attendance, transportation issues, and managing group discussion. Overall, facilitators found the intervention appropriate for pregnant clients with some challenges presented for clients in crisis situations, experiencing housing instability, and with literacy and learning challenges. Participants provided suggestions for improvement, both for the course content and implementation. There were no significant differences found between study arms. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, clients and facilitators enjoyed MB irrespective of study arm, and facilitators found the intervention appropriate for the population. These findings add to the qualitative literature on perinatal depression preventive interventions, specifically those delivered by paraprofessionals. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (Initial post: December 1, 2016; identifier: NCT02979444).

Comparing the Effectiveness of Clinicians and Paraprofessionals to Reduce Disparities in Perinatal Depression via the Mothers and Babies Course: Protocol for a Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Postpartum depression is highly prevalent in low-income women and has significant health and mental health effects on mother and child. Home visiting (HV) programs provide services to large numbers of perinatal women in the United States and are a logical setting for delivering mental health services. Although there are interventions that reduce the risk of developing postpartum depression among low-income women, none have used nonhealth or nonmental health professionals as interventionists. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to outline the protocol of a cluster randomized trial funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute that evaluates whether the Mothers and Babies (MB) group intervention, when led by paraprofessional home visitors, is more efficacious than usual care. It will also examine if MB, when led by home visitors, is not inferior to MB delivered by mental health professionals (MHPs). MB has previously demonstrated efficacy when delivered by MHPs, and pilot work indicated promising results using home visitors to deliver the intervention. METHODS: A cluster randomized trial is being conducted with 38 HV programs. Sixteen HV programs will deliver MB using MHPs, 16 will deliver MB using paraprofessional home visitors, and 6 will deliver usual HV services. The study employs a modified covariate-constrained randomization design at the site level. We anticipate recruiting 933 women aged ≥16 years enrolled in HV programs, who are 33 or more weeks' gestation and speak either English or Spanish. Women in the 2 intervention arms will receive the 6-session MB group intervention. Baseline, postintervention, 12-week postpartum, and 24-week postpartum assessments will be conducted to assess client outcomes. The primary outcome will be the change in Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology Self-Report 16 scores from baseline to 24-week follow-up. Secondary outcomes associated with core MB content will also be examined. Semistructured interviews will be conducted with home visitors and MHPs who are group facilitators and 90 study participants to gain data on intervention successes and challenges. Analyses will proceed at the participant level. Primary analyses for depressive symptoms score at 24 weeks postpartum will involve a linear mixed model, controlling for baseline symptoms and other covariates, and random effects to account for clustering. RESULTS: We have recruited 838 women through the end of August 2018. Recruitment will be completed at the end of September 2018. CONCLUSIONS: There is considerable potential to disseminate MB to HV programs throughout the United States. Should our results demonstrate home visitor efficacy when compared with usual care and/ noninferiority between home visitors and MHPs in improving mental health outcomes, no additional financial resources would be required for the existing HV staff to implement MB. Should this study determine that home visitors are less effective than MHPs, we will generate more wide-scale evidence on MB effectiveness when led by MHPs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02979444; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02979444 (Archived by Webcite at http://www.webcitation.org/archive.php). INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/11624.