Education Program for Caregivers of Children With Gross Motor Delays

February 19, 2024 updated by: Nathalie Maitre, Emory University

Three for the Under Three

The main objective of this project is to determine whether an educational intervention delivered via social media can improve parent understanding of child development and progression in child's developmental goals. A secondary objective is to determine whether this intervention can improve parent-related outcomes, such as well-being, parent-child bonding, attitudes toward parenting, satisfaction with the educational program.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Detailed Description

Gross motor delays in childhood are common, though they vary in severity and outcome. Early detection and intervention are critical to promote best neurodevelopmental outcomes for these children; equally important is support for parents and/or caregivers of children with identified motor delays. Parent education programs for caregivers of children with gross motor delays have been shown to improve parent knowledge of motor development and decrease parental stress when offered in conjunction with physical therapy treatment, however, there is a lack of peer-reviewed evidence demonstrating the efficacy of educational interventions provided over a social media platform for the population targeted in this study.

Caregivers of children with gross motor delays will be randomized to receive an educational intervention delivered via social media over a 9 week period, or to receive the intervention after a 9 week waiting period.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

92

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • Georgia
      • Atlanta, Georgia, United States, 30322
        • Children's Healthcare of Atlanta
      • Atlanta, Georgia, United States, 30322
        • Emory University
      • Atlanta, Georgia, United States, 30322
        • Emory Healthcare System

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

14 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Parent or legal guardian of child under 3 years with an identified motor delay
  • Access to device with high-speed internet to access Facebook
  • English speaking
  • Resides in the continental United States

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Non-English-speaking

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Parent Educational Program
Caregivers of children with gross motor delays who are randomized to receive an educational intervention delivered through social media.
The intervention is a series of 9 educational modules delivered via social media that will teach participants: 1) principles of infant learning, 2) principles of infant motor learning, and 3) principles of positive parenting.
No Intervention: Control Group
Caregivers of children with gross motor delays who are randomized to the waitlist control group who will receive an educational intervention delivered through social media after a 9 week waiting period.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change in Child Development Understanding Score
Time Frame: Baseline, Week 9 (post-intervention)
Parent understanding of child development will be measured using a 24-item questionnaire with true/false and multiple choice questions. Total scores range from 0 to 24 and higher scores indicate better understanding of child development.
Baseline, Week 9 (post-intervention)
Change in Child Development Goals
Time Frame: Baseline, Week 9 (post-intervention)
Progression in specific developmental goals will be measured qualitatively by asking parents what their motor goals are for their child at the baseline assessment and asking what improvement have been made for those goals following completion of the intervention. A score is not calculated for this assessment.
Baseline, Week 9 (post-intervention)
Change in Developmental Assessment of Young Children - Second Edition (DAYC-2) Gross Motor Subdomain Score
Time Frame: Baseline, Week 9 (post-intervention)
Progression in child's developmental goals are measured with administration of the Gross Motor Subdomain of the DAYC-2 instrument. Children are assessed on age appropriate gross motor skills and items receive a score of 1 if the child exhibits the skill or a score of 0 if the skill is not exhibited or is exhibited inconsistently. The number of items varies based on the age of the child. Raw scores are standardized and the standardized scores correspond with a descriptive term, where scores less than 70 = Very Poor, scores of 70-79 = Poor, scores of 80-89 = Below Average, scores of 90-110 = Average, scores of 111-120 = above average, scores of 121-130 = superior, and scores greater than 130 are Very Superior.
Baseline, Week 9 (post-intervention)

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change in Parenting Stress Index, Fourth Edition Short Form (PSI-4-SF) Score
Time Frame: Baseline, Week 9 (post-intervention)
To assess parental stress, the PSI-4-SF yields scores on the following subscales: 1) Parental Distress, 2) Parent-Child Dysfunctional Interaction, and 3) Difficult Child. The instrument has 36 items which are responded to on a 5-point scale ranging from Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree. A Total Stress Score is obtained by combining the subscales. The software to score the PSI-4-SF provides a percentile score. Percentile scores between 16 and 84% are considered normal stress, while scores of 85-89% indicate high stress and scores of 90% or higher indicate stress levels that may be clinically significant.
Baseline, Week 9 (post-intervention)
Change in Mother-to-Infant Bonding Scale (MIBS) Score
Time Frame: Baseline, Week 9 (post-intervention)
The Mother-to-Infant Bonding Scale (MIBS) is an 8-item questionnaire in which the mother/caregiver self-reports her feelings towards her baby. Responses are given on a 4-point scale where 0 = not at all and 3 = very much. Total scores range from 0 to 24 and some items are reversed scored so that higher scores indicate worse bonding between mother and infant.
Baseline, Week 9 (post-intervention)
Change in Perceived Maternal Parenting Self-Efficacy (PMP S-E) Score
Time Frame: Baseline, Week 9 (post-intervention)
Attitude towards parenting is measured using the Perceived Maternal Parenting Self-Efficacy (PMP S-E) instrument. The PMP S-E is a 20-item Likert scale survey asking parents to rate personal importance/value of parenting and confidence in parenting choices. Responses are given on a 4-point scale where 1 = strongly disagree and 4 = strongly agree. Total scores range from 20 to 80 and higher scores indicate greater parenting self-efficacy.
Baseline, Week 9 (post-intervention)
Change in Satisfaction with Learning Content
Time Frame: Up to Week 9
Parent satisfaction with the program will be assessed with weekly surveys asking participants to respond to 15 statements to measure how well they liked the content and delivery method of the educational modules. Responses are given on a 5-point scale where 1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree. Total scores range from 15 to 75, where higher scores indicate greater satisfaction with the learning content.
Up to Week 9
Satisfaction with the Intervention
Time Frame: Week 9 (post-intervention)
Parent satisfaction with the program will be assessed qualitatively through facilitated discussions at the conclusion of the intervention period. This assessment of satisfaction is not measured quantitatively and a score is not calculated.
Week 9 (post-intervention)

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Nathalie Maitre, MD, PhD, Emory University

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

September 28, 2022

Primary Completion (Actual)

November 2, 2023

Study Completion (Actual)

November 2, 2023

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

September 13, 2022

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

September 13, 2022

First Posted (Actual)

September 15, 2022

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

February 20, 2024

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

February 19, 2024

Last Verified

February 1, 2024

More Information

Terms related to this study

Other Study ID Numbers

  • Study00004252

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Subscribe