Barriers and facilitators in the delivery of a proportionate universal parenting program model (E-SEE Steps) in community family services.

BACKGROUND: A proportionate universal (PU) approach to early years' service provision has been advocated to improve children's health and development and to reduce health inequality, by ensuring that services provide timely and high-quality parenting support commensurate with need. Process-oriented research is critical to examine the factors that contribute to, or hinder, the effective delivery/implementation of such a model in community-based family services. This study aimed to assess the delivery, acceptability and feasibility of a new PU parenting intervention model (called E-SEE Steps), using the Incredible Years® (IY) parent program, when delivered by trained health/family service staff in three "steps"-one universal step (the IY Babies Book), and two targeted steps (group-based IY Infant and Toddler programs). METHODS: An embedded mixed-methods process evaluation within a pragmatic parallel two-arm, assessor blinded, randomized controlled trial was conducted in community services in four local authorities in England. The process evaluation used qualitative data gathered via interviews and focus groups with intervention arm parents who were offered the targeted steps (n = 29), practitioners (n = 50), service managers (n = 7) and IY program mentors (n = 3). This was supplemented by quantitative data collected using group leader pre-training (n = 50) and post-delivery (n = 39) questionnaires, and research notes of service design decisions. RESULTS: The E-SEE Steps model was acceptable to most parents, particularly when it was accompanied by engagement strategies that supported attendance, such as providing childcare. Practitioners also highlighted the positive development opportunities provided by the IY training and supervision. However, participant views did not support the provision of the IY Babies book as a standalone universal component, and there were barriers to eligible parents-particularly those with low mood-taking up the targeted programs. Service providers struggled to align the PU model with their commissioned service contracts and with their staff capacity to engage appropriate parents, including tackling common barriers to attendance. CONCLUSIONS: Despite general enthusiasm and support for delivering high-quality parenting programs in community services in the England, several barriers exist to successfully delivering IY in a proportionate universal model within current services/systems.

Postnatal Exercise Partners Study (PEEPS): a pilot randomized trial of a dyadic physical activity intervention for postpartum mothers and a significant other.

Background: Research suggests dyadic interventions can increase physical activity; such interventions are untested within postpartum parent couples. Methods: A three-armed pilot randomized trial addressed this gap and tested which type of dyadic intervention is most effective. Inactive postpartum mothers and a significant other were recruited in Australia (n = 143 assessed for eligibility) and randomised in a single-blinded fashion (i.e. participants were blinded) to 1 of 3 dyadic conditions involving a single face-to-face session with access to web-based group support: a minimal treatment control (n = 34), collaborative planning group (n = 38), or collaborative planning + need supportive communication group (n = 30). Participants were asked to wear their accelerometers for 8 days and completed self-report measures at baseline, end of intervention (week 4), and follow-up (week 12). We expected dyads in the collaborative planning + need supportive communication group would have the greatest increases in Physical Activity (PA), autonomous motivation, and partners' need supportive behaviours; and decreases in controlled motivation and controlling partner behaviours. Results: Results from 51 dyads using Bayesian actor-partner interdependence models provided some evidence for a small positive effect on total PA at follow-up for postpartum mothers in the collaborative planning group and for partners in the collaborative planning + need supportive communication group. Furthermore, partners in the collaborative planning + need supportive communication group were more likely to engage in some vigorous PA. At follow-up, postpartum mothers in the collaborative planning + need supportive communication group scored lower on personal autonomous reasons. Conclusions: The impact of prior specification mean intervention effects need to be interpreted with caution. Progression to a full trial is warranted.