Article Text
PDF
Abstract
Objective and design This study aimed to determine the feasibility and effectiveness of a parent training programme for parents of children with neurological conditions and behaviours that challenge.
Setting Child and adolescent mental health service within a specialist children’s hospital.
Participants Parents of 31 children with neurological conditions and behaviours that challenge.
Interventions Parents attended a 6-week evidence-based behavioural parenting programme delivered in a group format, either face-to-face or remote.
Main outcome measures Feasibility was determined by attendance rates. Effectiveness was analysed primarily using parent-reported measures of child behaviour (Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire, Paediatric Quality of Life and Goal-Based Outcomes). Secondary measures of parental well-being were also reported (Brief Parental Self-Efficacy Scale, Depression Anxiety Stress Scale Short Form and Parental Sense of Competence). Paired t-tests or Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were conducted to analyse differences preintervention and postintervention.
Results The attendance rates for the face-to-face and remote groups were 80% and 79%, respectively. Medium to large effect sizes were reported for most measures of child behaviour and parental well-being. There were statistically significant improvements found postintervention in children’s behaviour (p=0.014), quality of life (p<0.001), goal-based outcomes (p<0.001), parental self-efficacy (p<0.001) and parental anxiety (p=0.030). Anecdotal feedback showed that parents indicated the group format was acceptable.
Conclusions The group parenting intervention for parents of children with heterogeneous neurological conditions and behaviours that challenge appears feasible and effective in improving child behaviour and parental well-being.
- Paediatrics
- Neurology
- Mental health
- Child Health Services
- Psychology
Data availability statement
As this audit was part of routine clinical practice participants did not give written consent for their raw data to be shared publicly.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Data availability statement
As this audit was part of routine clinical practice participants did not give written consent for their raw data to be shared publicly.
Footnotes
Contributors EM, MH-M, NP IH and TM contributed to the design and delivery of the clinical work. AF contributed to the manuscript write-up and analysis of the results, with support from NP and EM. All authors contributed to revising the drafts and the final approval of the manuscript.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.