Group-based parenting interventions to promote child development in rural Kenya: a multi-arm, cluster-randomised community effectiveness trial

Jill E Luoto, Italo Lopez Garcia, Frances E Aboud, Daisy R Singla, Lia C H Fernald, Helen O Pitchik, Uzaib Y Saya, Ronald Otieno, Edith Alu, Jill E Luoto, Italo Lopez Garcia, Frances E Aboud, Daisy R Singla, Lia C H Fernald, Helen O Pitchik, Uzaib Y Saya, Ronald Otieno, Edith Alu

Abstract

Background: Early childhood development (ECD) programmes can help address early disadvantages for the 43% of children younger than 5 years in low-income and middle-income countries who have compromised development. We aimed to test the effectiveness of two group-based delivery models for an integrated ECD responsive stimulation and nutrition education intervention using Kenya's network of community health volunteers.

Methods: We implemented a multi-arm, cluster-randomised community effectiveness trial in three rural subcounties across 60 villages (clusters) in western Kenya. Eligible participants were mothers or female primary caregivers aged 15 years or older with children aged 6-24 months at enrolment. If married or in established relationships, fathers or male caregivers aged 18 years or older were also eligible. Villages were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to one of three groups: group-only delivery with 16 fortnightly sessions; mixed delivery combining 12 group sessions with four home visits; and a comparison group. Villages in the intervention groups were randomly assigned (1:1) to invite or not invite fathers and male caregivers to participate. Households were surveyed at baseline and immediately post-intervention. Assessors were masked. Primary outcomes were child cognitive and language development (score on the Bayley Scales of Infant Development third edition), socioemotional development (score on the Wolke scale), and parental stimulation (Home Observation for Measurement of the Environment inventory). Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03548558.

Findings: Between Oct 1 and Nov 12, 2018, 1152 mother-child dyads were enrolled and randomly assigned (n=376 group-only intervention, n=400 mixed-delivery intervention, n=376 comparison group). At the 11-month endline survey (Aug 5-Oct 31, 2019), 1070 households were assessed for the primary outcomes (n=346 group only, n=373 mixed delivery, n=351 comparison). Children in group-only villages had higher cognitive (effect size 0·52 SD [95% CI 0·21-0·83]), receptive language (0·42 SD [0·08-0·77]), and socioemotional scores (0·23 SD [0·03-0·44]) than children in comparison villages at endline. Children in mixed-delivery villages had higher cognitive (0·34 SD [0·05-0·62]) and socioemotional scores (0·22 SD [0·05-0·38]) than children in comparison villages; there was no difference in language scores. Parental stimulation also improved for group-only (0·80 SD [0·49-1·11]) and mixed-delivery villages (0·77 SD [0·49-1·05]) compared with the villages in the comparison group. Including fathers in the intervention had no measurable effect on any of the primary outcomes.

Interpretation: Parenting interventions delivered by trained community health volunteers in mother-child groups can effectively promote child development in low-resource settings and have great potential for scalability.

Funding: Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development of the National Institutes of Health.

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of interests

We declare no competing interests.

Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Figures

Figure 1:
Figure 1:
Trial profile
Figure 2:. Effects of treatment on the…
Figure 2:. Effects of treatment on the treated for child cognition
The figure shows mean estimated effects of treatment on the treated with 95% CIs under both delivery models. Compliance to the intervention is defined based on the number (out of 16) of sessions attended. CIs get larger as the number of compliers decreases. For comparison, the estimated effects in the intention-to-treat population under both delivery models are included using horizontal dashed lines (data shown in table 2).

References

    1. Black MM, Walker SP, Fernald LCH, et al. Early childhood development coming of age: science through the life course. Lancet 2017; 389: 77–90.
    1. Richter LM, Daelmans B, Lombardi J, et al. Investing in the foundation of sustainable development: pathways to scale up for early childhood development. Lancet 2017; 389: 103–18.
    1. Britto PR, Lye SJ, Proulx K, et al. Nurturing care: promoting early childhood development. Lancet 2017; 389: 91–102.
    1. Gertler P, Heckman J, Pinto R, et al. Labor market returns to an early childhood stimulation intervention in Jamaica. Science 2014; 344: 998–1001.
    1. Britto PR, Singh M, Dua T, Kaur R, Yousafzai AK. What implementation evidence matters: scaling-up nurturing interventions that promote early childhood development. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2018; 1419: 5–16.
    1. Tomlinson M, Darmstadt GL, Yousafzai AK, et al. Global research priorities to accelerate programming to improve early childhood development in the sustainable development era: a CHNRI exercise. J Glob Health 2019; 9: 020703.
    1. Horton S, Black MM. Chapter 24. Identifying an essential package for early child development: economic analysis. In: Bundy D, Nd S, Horton S, et al., eds. Child and adolescent health and development, 3rd edn. Washington DC: The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, 2017: 343–53.
    1. Singla DR, Kumbakumba E, Aboud FE. Effects of a parenting intervention to address maternal psychological wellbeing and child development and growth in rural Uganda: a community-based, cluster randomised trial. Lancet Glob Health 2015; 3: e458–69.
    1. Aboud FE, Yousafzai AK. Global health and development in early childhood. Annu Rev Psychol 2015; 66: 433–57.
    1. Jeong J, McCoy DC, Yousafzai AK, Salhi C, Fink G. Paternal stimulation and early child development in low- and middle-income countries. Pediatrics 2016; 138: e20161357.
    1. The Demographic and Health Surveys Program . Kenya demographic and health survey 2008–2009 final report. (accessed Aug 3, 2016).
    1. Luoto JE, Lopez Garcia I, Aboud FE, Fernald LCH, Singla DR. Testing means to scale early childhood development interventions in rural Kenya: the Msingi Bora cluster randomized controlled trial study design and protocol. BMC Public Health 2019; 19: 259.
    1. Yousafzai AK, Rasheed MA, Rizvi A, Armstrong R, Bhutta ZA. Effect of integrated responsive stimulation and nutrition interventions in the Lady Health Worker programme in Pakistan on child development, growth, and health outcomes: a cluster-randomised factorial effectiveness trial. Lancet 2014; 384: 1282–93.
    1. Bayley N Bayley Scales of Infant Development and Toddler Development: technical manual. Bloomington, MN: Pearson, 2006.
    1. Rademeyer V, Jacklin L. A study to evaluate the performance of black South African urban infants on the Bayley Scales of Infant Development III. South African J Child Heal 2013; 7: 54–59.
    1. Hanlon C, Medhin G, Worku B, et al. Adapting the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development in Ethiopia: evaluation of reliability and validity. Child Care Health Dev 2016; 42: 699–708.
    1. Pendergast LL, Schaefer BA, Murray-Kolb LE, et al. Assessing development across cultures: invariance of the Bayley-III Scales across seven international MAL-ED sites. Sch Psychol Q 2018; 33: 604–14.
    1. Wolke D, Skuse D, Mathisen B. Behavioral style in failure-to-thrive infants: a preliminary communication. J Pediatr Psychol 1990; 15: 237–54.
    1. Hamadani JD, Tofail F, Hilaly A, Huda SN, Engle P, Grantham-McGregor SM. Use of Family Care Indicators and their relationship with child development in Bangladesh. J Health Popul Nutr 2010; 28: 23–33.
    1. Bradley RH, Caldwell BM. The HOME inventory and family demographics. Dev Psychol 1984; 20: 315–20.
    1. de Onis M, Garza C, Victora CG, Onyango AW, Frongillo EA, Martines J. The WHO Multicentre Growth Reference Study: planning, study design, and methodology. Food Nutr Bull 2004; 25 (suppl): S15–26.
    1. WHO, UNICEF. Global strategy for infant and young child feeding. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2003.
    1. Ballard T, Coates J, Swindale A, Deitchler M. Household Hunger Scale: indicator definition and measurement guide. Washington, DC: Food and Nutrition Technical Assistance II Project, 2011.
    1. Attanasio OP, Fernández C, Fitzsimons EOA, Grantham-McGregor SM, Meghir C, Rubio-Codina M. Using the infrastructure of a conditional cash transfer program to deliver a scalable integrated early child development program in Colombia: cluster randomized controlled trial. BMJ 2014; 349: g5785.
    1. Romano JP, Wolf M. Stepwise multiple testing as formalized data snooping. Econometrica 2005; 73: 1237–82.
    1. MacKinnon DP, Pirlott AG. Statistical approaches for enhancing causal interpretation of the M to Y relation in mediation analysis. Pers Soc Psychol Rev 2015; 19: 30–43.
    1. Hamadani JD, Mehrin SF, Tofail F, et al. Integrating an early childhood development programme into Bangladeshi primary health-care services: an open-label, cluster-randomised controlled trial. Lancet Glob Health 2019; 7: e366–75.
    1. Grantham-McGregor SM, Powell CA, Walker SP, Himes JH. Nutritional supplementation, psychosocial stimulation, and mental development of stunted children: the Jamaican Study. Lancet 1991; 338: 1–5.
    1. Andrew A, Attanasio O, Fitzsimons E, Grantham-McGregor S, Meghir C, Rubio-Codina M. Impacts 2 years after a scalable early childhood development intervention to increase psychosocial stimulation in the home: a follow-up of a cluster randomised controlled trial in Colombia. PLoS Med 2018; 15: e1002556.
    1. Zmyj N, Seehagen S. The role of a model’s age for young children’s imitation: a research review. Infant Child Dev 2013; 22: 622–41.

Source: PubMed

Sponsoren und Mitarbeiter

Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

3
Abonnieren