Nurse-led home-visitation programme for first-time mothers in reducing maltreatment and improving child health and development (BB:2-6): longer-term outcomes from a randomised cohort using data linkage

Effectiveness of nurse-home visiting in improving child and maternal outcomes prenatally to age two years: a randomised controlled trial (British Columbia Healthy Connections Project)

BACKGROUND

We investigated the effectiveness of Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP), a prenatal-to-age-two-years home-visiting programme, in British Columbia (BC), Canada.

METHODS

For this randomised controlled trial, we recruited participants from 26 public health settings who were: <25 years, nulliparous, <28 weeks gestation and experiencing socioeconomic disadvantage. We randomly allocated participants (one-to-one; computer-generated) to intervention (NFP plus existing services) or comparison (existing services) groups. Prespecified outcomes were prenatal substance exposure (reported previously); child injuries (primary), language, cognition and mental health (problem behaviour) by age two years; and subsequent pregnancies by 24 months postpartum. Research interviewers were masked. We used intention-to-treat analyses. (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01672060.) RESULTS: From 2013 to 2016 we enrolled 739 participants (368 NFP, 371 comparison) who had 737 children. Counts for child injury healthcare encounters [rate per 1,000 person-years or RPY] were similar for NFP (223 [RPY 316.17]) and comparison (223 [RPY 305.43]; rate difference 10.74, 95% CI -46.96, 68.44; rate ratio 1.03, 95% CI 0.78, 1.38). Maternal-reported language scores (mean, M [SD]) were statistically significantly higher for NFP (313.46 [195.96]) than comparison (282.77 [188.15]; mean difference [MD] 31.33, 95% CI 0.96, 61.71). Maternal-reported problem-behaviour scores (M [SD]) were statistically significantly lower for NFP (52.18 [9.19]) than comparison (54.42 [9.02]; MD -2.19, 95% CI -3.62, -0.75). Subsequent pregnancy counts were similar (NFP 115 [RPY 230.69] and comparison 117 [RPY 227.29]; rate difference 3.40, 95% CI -55.54, 62.34; hazard ratio 1.01, 95% CI 0.79, 1.29). We observed no unanticipated adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

NFP did not reduce child injuries or subsequent maternal pregnancies but did improve maternal-reported child language and mental health (problem behaviour) at age two years. Follow-up of long-term outcomes is warranted given that further benefits may emerge across childhood and adolescence.

Primary Care Interventions to Prevent Child Maltreatment: Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

Importance

Child maltreatment is associated with serious negative physical, psychological, and behavioral consequences.

Objective

To review the evidence on primary care-feasible or referable interventions to prevent child maltreatment to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force.

Data Sources

PubMed, Cochrane Library, and trial registries through February 2, 2023; references, experts, and surveillance through December 6, 2023.

Study Selection

English-language, randomized clinical trials of youth through age 18 years (or their caregivers) with no known exposure or signs or symptoms of current or past maltreatment.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Two reviewers assessed titles/abstracts, full-text articles, and study quality, and extracted data; when at least 3 similar studies were available, meta-analyses were conducted.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Directly measured reports of child abuse or neglect (reports to Child Protective Services or removal of the child from the home); proxy measures of abuse or neglect (injury, visits to the emergency department, hospitalization); behavioral, developmental, emotional, mental, or physical health and well-being; mortality; harms.

Results

Twenty-five trials (N = 14 355 participants) were included; 23 included home visits. Evidence from 11 studies (5311 participants) indicated no differences in likelihood of reports to Child Protective Services within 1 year of intervention completion (pooled odds ratio, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.84-1.27]). Five studies (3336 participants) found no differences in removal of the child from the home within 1 to 3 years of follow-up (pooled risk ratio, 1.06 [95% CI, 0.37-2.99]). The evidence suggested no benefit for emergency department visits in the short term (<2 years) and hospitalizations. The evidence was inconclusive for all other outcomes because of the limited number of trials on each outcome and imprecise results. Among 2 trials reporting harms, neither reported statistically significant differences. Contextual evidence indicated (1) widely varying practices when screening, identifying, and reporting child maltreatment to Child Protective Services, including variations by race or ethnicity; (2) widely varying accuracy of screening instruments; and (3) evidence that child maltreatment interventions may be associated with improvements in some social determinants of health.

Conclusion and Relevance

The evidence base on interventions feasible in or referable from primary care settings to prevent child maltreatment suggested no benefit or insufficient evidence for direct or proxy measures of child maltreatment. Little information was available about possible harms. Contextual evidence pointed to the potential for bias or inaccuracy in screening, identification, and reporting of child maltreatment but also highlighted the importance of addressing social determinants when intervening to prevent child maltreatment.

Embedding nurse home visiting in universal healthcare: 6-year follow-up of a randomised trial

OBJECTIVE

Nurse home visiting (NHV) is designed to redress child and maternal health inequities. Of the previous trials to investigate NHV benefits beyond preschool, none were designed for populations with universal healthcare. To address this evidence gap, we investigated whether the Australian 'right@home' NHV programme improved child and maternal outcomes when children turned 6 and started school.

METHODS

A screening survey identified pregnant women experiencing adversity from antenatal clinics across two states (Victoria, Tasmania). 722 were randomised: 363 to the right@home programme (25 visits promoting parenting and home learning environment) and 359 to usual care. Child measures at 6 years (first school year): Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ), Social Skills Improvement System (SSIS), Childhood Executive Functioning Inventory (CHEXI) (maternal/teacher-reported); general health and paediatric quality of life (maternal-reported) and reading/school adaptation items (teacher-reported). Maternal measures: Personal Well-being Index (PWI), Depression Anxiety Stress Scales, warm/hostile parenting, Child-Parent Relationship Scale (CPRS), emotional abuse and health/efficacy items. Following best-practice methods for managing missing data, outcomes were compared between groups (intention-to-treat) using regression models adjusted for stratification factors, baseline variables and clustering (nurse/site level).

RESULTS

Mothers reported on 338 (47%) children, and teachers on 327 (45%). Patterns of group differences favoured the programme arm, with small benefits (effect sizes ranging 0.15-0.26) evident for SDQ, SSIS, CHEXI, PWI, warm parenting and CPRS.

CONCLUSIONS

Four years after completing the right@home programme, benefits were evident across home and school contexts. Embedding NHV in universal healthcare systems from pregnancy can offer long-term benefits for families experiencing adversity.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN89962120.

The impact of a specialist home-visiting intervention on the language outcomes of young mothers and their children: a pragmatic randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Young mothers are more likely to provide a suboptimal early language environment for their children who in turn show impairments in their language development, yet few studies have used observational methods to assess the effectiveness of home-visiting programmes in improving the language outcomes of young mothers and their children. The Family Nurse Partnership (FNP) is a licensed home-visiting intervention developed in the USA and introduced into practice in England. The intervention involves up to 64 structured home visits from early pregnancy until the child's second birthday by specially recruited and trained Family Nurses. We assessed the effectiveness of FNP in improving the language outcomes of first-time teenage mothers and their infants.

METHOD

We conducted a pragmatic, non-blinded, randomised controlled trial to test whether the FNP programme improved mothers' and children's language production at 24 months postpartum. Eligible participants were nulliparous, aged 19 years or younger, and were recruited at less than 25 weeks' gestation from community midwifery settings (Country). Pregnant young mothers were randomly assigned to FNP plus usual care (n = 243) or usual care alone (n = 233). At 24 months postpartum, mother-child dyads were observed during a standardised free-play task with their first-born child and features of their language production was coded. Data was analysed using multi-level modelling; linear or poisson/negative binomial regression models were used as appropriate.

RESULTS

A small effect of FNP on mothers' productive language was detected, where mothers in the FNP group demonstrated higher mean length of utterances than mothers who received usual care alone, mean difference (adjusted by minimisation variables and by site, linear regression) = 0.10, p < .05, 95% CI (0.004-0.20), d = .18. No differences were detected between groups regarding other characteristics of maternal language or children's language outcomes.

CONCLUSION

This observational study conducted within the context of a randomised-controlled trial suggests that the FNP home-visiting programme may have a small, but potentially important impact on young mothers' speech to their toddlers. Exploratory analyses identified family environment, maternal, and child related predictors of the language outcomes of young mothers and their offspring. Trial registration This trial is registered with ISRCTN, number ISRCTN23019866, 20/04/2009.