Initial Evaluation Practices to Identify Young Children with Delays and Disabilities.

The value of early intervention is well demonstrated; however, less is known about the processes that initial evaluation teams use to evaluate and determine young children's eligibility for early intervention (EI) and preschool special education. The present study surveyed multidisciplinary early childhood providers (N = 1445) who conduct initial evaluations for young children. Quantitative survey data were analyzed using descriptive analyses to describe the location of initial evaluations, tools used, team membership, and approaches to eligibility determination for children with possible delays and disabilities. Evaluation practices varied greatly, but evaluation teams most often included early childhood special educators and speech and language pathologists, school psychologists or other specialists were less frequently involved. Eligibility approaches were also wide-ranging with percentage delay and standard deviation below the mean most often used; several challenges when determining eligibility were also described. Evaluations for EI and preschool special education were compared to look at variations. Statistically significant differences were found when comparing evaluations focused on eligibility for EI or preschool special education. Implications and future directions are explored. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40688-023-00467-3.

Early Childhood Administrator Perspectives About Preschool Inclusion: A Qualitative Interview Study.

This qualitative phenomenological study utilized structured interviews with 23 preschool administrators to explore their beliefs about preschool inclusion and needed resources for providing high-quality preschool inclusion. Themes emerged regarding administrators' beliefs about inclusion, including divergent understandings of inclusion as something that is either for all or for some children. Administrators placed a high value on families' preferences regarding preschool inclusion and at times focused their descriptions of inclusion on logistical aspects of placements and funding. Administrators said they needed additional money and personnel resources to provide high-quality preschool inclusion. Study findings are discussed in the context of the paucity of research on administrator perspectives regarding inclusion and implications for supporting administrators who play a key role in implementing preschool inclusion. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10643-023-01448-0.

Delivery of supported self-management in remote asthma reviews: A systematic rapid realist review.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic forced health care systems globally to adapt quickly to remote modes of health care delivery, including for routine asthma reviews. A core component of asthma care is supporting self-management, a guideline-recommended intervention that reduces the risk of acute attacks, and improves asthma control and quality of life. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to explore context and mechanisms for the outcomes of clinical effectiveness, acceptability and safety of supported self-management delivery within remote asthma consultations. DESIGN: The review followed standard methodology for rapid realist reviews. An External Reference Group (ERG) provided expert advice and guidance throughout the study. We systematically searched four electronic databases and, with ERG advice, selected 18 papers that explored self-management delivery during routine asthma reviews. SETTING, PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTION: Health care professional delivery of supported self-management for asthma patients during remote (specifically including telephone and video) consultations. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Data were extracted using Context-Mechanism-Outcome (C-M-O) configurations and synthesised into overarching themes using the PRISMS taxonomy of supported self-management as a framework to structure the findings. RESULTS: The review findings identified how support for self-management delivered remotely was acceptable (often more acceptable than in-person consultations), and was a safe and effective alternative to face-to-face reviews. In addition, remote delivery of supported self-management was associated with; increased patient convenience, improved access to and attendance at remote reviews, and offered continuity of care. DISCUSSION: Remote delivery of supported self-management for asthma was generally found to be clinically effective, acceptable, and safe with the added advantage of increasing accessibility. Remote reviews could provide the core content of an asthma review, including remote completion of asthma action plans. CONCLUSION: Our findings support the option of remote delivery of routine asthma care for those who have this preference, and offer healthcare professionals guidance on embedding supported self-management into remote asthma reviews. PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patient and public contribution was provided by a representative of the Asthma UK Centre for Applied Research (AUKCAR) patient and public involvement (PPI) group. The PPI representative reviewed the findings, and feedback and comments were considered. This lead to further interpretations of the data which were included in the final manuscript.

Estimation of the minimal clinically important difference on the Aberrant Behaviour Checklist-Irritability (ABC-I) for people with intellectual disabilities who display aggressive challenging behaviour: A triangulated approach.

BACKGROUND: The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) is relevant in the estimation of improvement in a patient outcome. AIM: To determine the MCID on the Aberrant Behaviour Checklist-Irritability (ABC-I), widely used to measure the effects of intervention for aggressive challenging behaviour in people with intellectual disabilities. METHOD AND PROCEDURES: We utilised distribution and anchor based methods to estimate the ABC-I MCID. We extracted data from 15 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for meta-analysis. We conducted three online workshops with family carers and professionals to consider meaningful change in case vignettes of increasing severity of aggressive challenging behaviour. OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: We did not find overlap in the range of values between the two approaches. The meta-analysis indicated a range of MCID on the ABC-I (0.05, 4.94) whilst the anchor-based estimation indicated a larger change (6.6, 16.6). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: The MCID is essential in interpreting the results from intervention studies. The present work was undertaken as part of a wider programme on the development and testing of a psychosocial intervention for aggressive challenging behaviour, and it is of interest to researchers in justifying how they choose and determine the MCID on the outcome of interest.

Early childhood educators' provision of remote learning during COVID-19.

This study utilized a nationally distributed survey to explore early childhood teachers' experience of providing remote learning to young children and their families during the early months of the U.S. response to the COVID-19 pandemic. A convergent parallel mixed-methods design was used to analyze 805 participants' responses to closed and open-ended survey questions. Results indicated that teachers provided various remote learning activities and spent more time planning instruction and communicating with families than providing instruction directly to children. Early childhood teachers reported several positive aspects of remote learning and various challenges during the initial months of the pandemic. Study findings are discussed in the context of policy and practical implications for supporting early childhood teachers to deliver high-quality and developmentally appropriate remote learning for all young children and their families.

Shifting to Remote Learning During COVID-19: Differences for Early Childhood and Early Childhood Special Education Teachers.

This study explored similarities and differences in how early childhood education (ECE) teachers (n = 947) and early childhood special education (ECSE) teachers (n = 160) provided remote learning to young children and their families following COVID-19 shelter in place orders in the spring of 2020. The most utilized remote learning activities for both ECE and ECSE teachers were the provision of activities for families to use at home, communication with families, online lessons, and singing songs and reading books. Both types of professionals spent more time planning and communicating with families than providing instruction to children. Results of chi-square tests of independence revealed differences in activities provided, how time was spent, and training received by professional role. Open-ended responses revealed particular challenges for ECE and ECSE teachers. Findings are discussed in the context of how the early childhood field adapted quickly to remote learning during COVID-19 and the implications for ongoing technology support for early childhood personnel based on their professional role. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10643-021-01218-w.

Developing theory-based asthma self-management interventions for South Asians and African Americans: A systematic review.

PURPOSE: Intervention development guidelines suggest that behavioural interventions benefit from being theory-based. Minority populations typically benefit less from asthma self-management interventions, and the extent to which appropriate theory has been used for culturally tailored interventions has not been addressed. We aimed to determine theory use and theoretical domains targeted in asthma self-management interventions for South Asian and Black populations. METHODS: We systematically searched electronic databases, research registers, manually searched relevant journals and reference lists of reviews for randomised controlled trials of asthma self-management for South Asian and Black populations, and extracted data using the Theory Coding Scheme to inform if/how theory was used and explore its associations with asthma outcomes, and the Theoretical Domains Framework was used to identify targeted theoretical domains and its relationship to effectiveness of asthma outcomes. RESULTS: 20 papers (19 trials) were identified; theory was not extensively used in interventions. It was unclear whether theory use or theoretical domains targeted in interventions improved asthma outcomes. South Asian interventions included 'behavioural regulation', while 'reinforcement' was mostly used in African American interventions. 'Knowledge' was central for all populations, though there were differences related to 'environmental context and resources' e.g., language adaptations for South Asians; asthma resources provided for African Americans. Author descriptions of interventions targeting providers were limited. CONCLUSIONS: There was little evidence of theory-based approaches used in cultural interventions for asthma self-management. Demystifying theoretical concepts (and cultural interpretations of constructs) may provide clarity for 'non-experts', enabling mainstream use of theory-driven approaches in intervention development.

Does therapeutic writing help people with long-term conditions? Systematic review, realist synthesis and economic considerations.

BACKGROUND: Writing therapy to improve physical or mental health can take many forms. The most researched model of therapeutic writing (TW) is unfacilitated, individual expressive writing (written emotional disclosure). Facilitated writing activities are less widely researched. DATA SOURCES: Databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Linguistics and Language Behaviour Abstracts, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, were searched from inception to March 2013 (updated January 2015). REVIEW METHODS: Four TW practitioners provided expert advice. Study procedures were conducted by one reviewer and checked by a second. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised comparative studies were included. Quality was appraised using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Unfacilitated and facilitated TW studies were analysed separately under International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision chapter headings. Meta-analyses were performed where possible using RevMan version 5.2.6 (RevMan 2012, The Cochrane Collaboration, The Nordic Cochrane Centre, Copenhagen, Denmark). Costs were estimated from a UK NHS perspective and three cost-consequence case studies were prepared. Realist synthesis followed Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Synthesis: Evolving Standards guidelines. OBJECTIVES: To review the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of TW for people with long-term conditions (LTCs) compared with no writing, or other controls, reporting any relevant clinical outcomes. To conduct a realist synthesis to understand how TW might work, and for whom. RESULTS: From 14,658 unique citations, 284 full-text papers were reviewed and 64 studies (59 RCTs) were included in the final effectiveness reviews. Five studies examined facilitated TW; these were extremely heterogeneous with unclear or high risk of bias but suggested that facilitated TW interventions may be beneficial in individual LTCs. Unfacilitated expressive writing was examined in 59 studies of variable or unreported quality. Overall, there was very little or no evidence of any benefit reported in the following conditions (number of studies): human immunodeficiency virus (six); breast cancer (eight); gynaecological and genitourinary cancers (five); mental health (five); asthma (four); psoriasis (three); and chronic pain (four). In inflammatory arthropathies (six) there was a reduction in disease severity [n = 191, standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.96 to -0.26] in the short term on meta-analysis of four studies. For all other LTCs there were either no data, or sparse data with no or inconsistent, evidence of benefit. Meta-analyses conducted across all of the LTCs provided no evidence that unfacilitated emotional writing had any effect on depression at short- (n = 1563, SMD -0.06, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.17, substantial heterogeneity) or long-term (n = 778, SMD -0.04 95% CI -0.18 to 0.10, little heterogeneity) follow-up, or on anxiety, physiological or biomarker-based outcomes. One study reported costs, no studies reported cost-effectiveness and 12 studies reported resource use; and meta-analysis suggested reduced medication use but no impact on health centre visits. Estimated costs of intervention were low, but there was insufficient evidence to judge cost-effectiveness. Realist synthesis findings suggested that facilitated TW is a complex intervention and group interaction contributes to the perception of benefit. It was unclear from the available data who might benefit most from facilitated TW. LIMITATION: Difficulties with developing realist synthesis programme theory meant that mechanisms operating during TW remain obscure. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, there is little evidence to support the therapeutic effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of unfacilitated expressive writing interventions in people with LTCs. Further research focused on facilitated TW in people with LTCs could be informative. STUDY REGISTRATION: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42012003343. FUNDING: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.