IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2021i1p106-d709234.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Efficacy of an Enhanced Implementation Strategy to Increase Parent Engagement with a Health Promotion Program in Childcare

Author

Listed:
  • Courtney T. Luecking

    (Department of Dietetics and Human Nutrition, College of Agriculture, Food and Environment, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40506, USA)

  • Cody D. Neshteruk

    (Department of Population Health Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC 27710, USA)

  • Stephanie Mazzucca

    (Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO 63130, USA)

  • Dianne S. Ward

    (Center for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention, Department of Nutrition, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA)

Abstract

Previous efforts to involve parents in implementation of childcare-based health promotion interventions have yielded limited success, suggesting a need for different implementation strategies. This study evaluated the efficacy of an enhanced implementation strategy to increase parent engagement with Healthy Me , Healthy We . This quasi-experimental study included childcare centers from the second of two waves of a cluster-randomized trial. The standard approach (giving parents intervention materials, prompting participation at home, inviting participation with classroom events) was delivered in 2016–2017 (29 centers, 116 providers, and 199 parents). The enhanced approach (standard plus seeking feedback, identifying and addressing barriers to parent participation) was delivered in 2017–2018 (13 centers, 57 providers, and 114 parents). Parent engagement was evaluated at two levels. For the center-level, structured interview questions with providers throughout the intervention were systematically scored. For the parent-level, parents completed surveys following the intervention. Differences in parent engagement were evaluated using linear regression (center-level) and mixed effects (parent-level) models. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.025 for two primary outcomes. There was no difference in parent engagement between approaches at the center-level, β = −1.45 (95% confidence interval, −4.76 to 1.87), p = 0.38l. However, the enhanced approach had higher parent-level scores, β = 3.60, (95% confidence interval, 1.49 to 5.75), p < 0.001. In the enhanced approach group, providers consistently reported greater satisfaction with the intervention than parents ( p < 0.001), yet their fidelity of implementing the enhanced approach was low (less than 20%). Results show promise that parent engagement with childcare-based health promotion innovations can positively respond to appropriately designed and executed implementation strategies, but strategies need to be feasible and acceptable for all stakeholders.

Suggested Citation

  • Courtney T. Luecking & Cody D. Neshteruk & Stephanie Mazzucca & Dianne S. Ward, 2021. "Efficacy of an Enhanced Implementation Strategy to Increase Parent Engagement with a Health Promotion Program in Childcare," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(1), pages 1-15, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2021:i:1:p:106-:d:709234
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/1/106/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/1/106/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dobson, Douglas & Cook, Thomas J., 1980. "Avoiding type III error in program evaluation : Results from a field experiment," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 269-276, January.
    2. Joel Gittelsohn & Rachel Novotny & Angela Cristina Bizzotto Trude & Jean Butel & Bent Egberg Mikkelsen, 2018. "Challenges and Lessons Learned from Multi-Level Multi-Component Interventions to Prevent and Reduce Childhood Obesity," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-14, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tidmarsh, Grace & Whiting, Richard & Thompson, Janice L. & Cumming, Jennifer, 2022. "Assessing the fidelity of delivery style of a mental skills training programme for young people experiencing homelessness," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    2. Sarah Avellar & Diane Paulsell, "undated". "Lessons Learned from the Home Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness Review," Mathematica Policy Research Reports ff3a4a4ffd574ae0805ac5723, Mathematica Policy Research.
    3. Humphreys, David K. & Eisner, Manuel P., 2014. "Do flexible alcohol trading hours reduce violence? A theory-based natural experiment in alcohol policy," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 1-9.
    4. Kalafat, John & Illback, Robert J. & Sanders, Daniel Jr., 2007. "The relationship between implementation fidelity and educational outcomes in a school-based family support program: Development of a model for evaluating multidimensional full-service programs," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 136-148, May.
    5. Escribano, Silvia & Espada, José P. & Orgilés, Mireia & Morales, Alexandra, 2016. "Implementation fidelity for promoting the effectiveness of an adolescent sexual health program," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 81-87.
    6. Michelle Estradé & Ellen J. I. van Dongen & Angela C. B. Trude & Lisa Poirier & Sheila Fleischhacker & Caroline R. Wensel & Leslie C. Redmond & Marla Pardilla & Jacqueline Swartz & Margarita S. Treuth, 2021. "Exposure to a Multilevel, Multicomponent Obesity Prevention Intervention (OPREVENT2) in Rural Native American Communities: Variability and Association with Change in Diet Quality," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(22), pages 1-11, November.
    7. Eva Lantos Rezmovic, 1984. "Assessing Treatment Implementation Amid the Slings and Arrows of Reality," Evaluation Review, , vol. 8(2), pages 187-204, April.
    8. Trine Top Klein-Wengel & Jonas Vestergaard Nielsen & Søren Smedegaard & Thomas Skovgaard, 2021. "The Role of Local Leaders in the Implementation of Adult-Initiated Motor Skill Development and Physical Activity in Preschool—A Case Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(24), pages 1-18, December.
    9. Akin, Becci A. & Bryson, Stephanie A. & Testa, Mark F. & Blase, Karen A. & McDonald, Tom & Melz, Heidi, 2013. "Usability testing, initial implementation, and formative evaluation of an evidence-based intervention: Lessons from a demonstration project to reduce long-term foster care," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 19-30.
    10. Louise Schinckus & Stephan Van den Broucke & Gerard van der Zanden & Diane Levin-Zamir & Gabriele Mueller & Henna Riemenschneider & Victoria Hayter & Lucy Yardley & Dean Schillinger & Gerardine Doyle , 2021. "To Adapt or Not to Adapt: The Association between Implementation Fidelity and the Effectiveness of Diabetes Self-Management Education," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(8), pages 1-15, April.
    11. Hilary Thomson & Sian Thomas & Eva Sellstrom & Mark Petticrew, 2011. "PROTOCOL: Housing improvements for health and associated socio‐economic outcomes," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 7(1), pages 1-38.
    12. Loubna Belaid & Magalie Benoit & Navdeep Kaur & Azari Lili & Valery Ridde, 2020. "Population Health Intervention Implementation Among Migrants With Precarious Status in Montreal: Underlying Theory and Key Challenges," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(2), pages 21582440209, May.
    13. Amanda Fernandes & Mònica Ubalde-López & Tiffany C. Yang & Rosemary R. C. McEachan & Rukhsana Rashid & Léa Maitre & Mark J. Nieuwenhuijsen & Martine Vrijheid, 2023. "School-Based Interventions to Support Healthy Indoor and Outdoor Environments for Children: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(3), pages 1-24, January.
    14. Fleuren, Margot A.H. & van Dommelen, Paula & Dunnink, Trudy, 2015. "A systematic approach to implementing and evaluating clinical guidelines: The results of fifteen years of Preventive Child Health Care guidelines in the Netherlands," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 136, pages 35-43.
    15. repec:mpr:mprres:7046 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Gifford, Elizabeth J. & Wells, Rebecca S. & Bai, Yu & Malone, Patrick S., 2015. "Is implementation fidelity associated with improved access to care in a School-based Child and Family Team model?," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 41-49.
    17. Finn-Aage Esbensen & Kristy N. Matsuda & Terrance J. Taylor & Dana Peterson, 2011. "Multimethod Strategy for Assessing Program Fidelity: The National Evaluation of the Revised G.R.E.A.T. Program," Evaluation Review, , vol. 35(1), pages 14-39, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2021:i:1:p:106-:d:709234. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.