Dataset Information

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

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.

SUBMITTER: Luoto JE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8054650 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPoor nutrition and infectious diseases can prevent children from reaching their developmental potential. We aimed to assess the effects of improvements in water, sanitation, handwashing, and nutrition on early child development in rural Kenya.MethodsIn this cluster-randomised controlled trial, we enrolled pregnant women in their second or third trimester from three counties (Kakamega, Bungoma, and Vihiga) in Kenya's western region, with an average of 12 households per cluster. Groups of nine geographically adjacent clusters were block-randomised, using a random number generator, into the six intervention groups (including monthly visits to promote target behaviours), a passive control group (no visits), or a double-sized active control group (monthly household visits to measure child mid-upper arm circumference). The six intervention groups were: chlorinated drinking water; improved sanitation; handwashing with soap; combined water, sanitation, and handwashing; improved nutrition through counselling and provision of lipid-based nutrient supplements; and combined water, sanitation, handwashing, and nutrition. Here we report on the prespecified secondary child development outcomes: gross motor milestone achievement assessed with the WHO module at year 1, and communication, gross motor, personal social, and combined scores measured by the Extended Ages and Stages Questionnaire (EASQ) at year 2. Masking of participants was not possible, but data assessors were masked. Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01704105.FindingsBetween Nov 27, 2012, and May 21, 2014, 8246 women residing in 702 clusters were enrolled. No clusters were lost to follow-up, but 2212 households with 2279 children were lost to follow-up by year 2. 5791 (69%) children were measured at year 1 and 6107 (73%) at year 2. At year 1, compared with the active control group, the combined water, sanitation, handwashing, and nutrition group had greater rates of attaining the standing with assistance milestone (hazard ratio 1·23, 95% CI 1·09-1·40) and the walking with assistance milestone (1·32, 1·17-1·50), and the handwashing group had a greater rate of attaining the standing alone milestone (1·15, 1·01-1·31). There were no differences when comparing the other intervention groups with the active control group on any of the motor milestone measures at year 1. At year 2, there were no differences among groups for the communication, gross motor, personal social, or combined EASQ scores.InterpretationThe handwashing and combined water, sanitation, handwashing, and nutrition interventions might have improved child motor development after 1 year, although after 2 years there were no other differences between groups. Future research should examine ways to make community health and nutrition programmes more effective at supporting child development.FundingBill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Project description:BackgroundEarly childhood development (ECD) programs can help address disadvantages for the 43% of children under 5 in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) experiencing compromised development. However, very few studies from LMIC settings include information on their program's cost-effectiveness or potential returns to investment. We estimated the cost-effectiveness, benefit-cost ratios (BCRs), and returns on investment (ROIs) for 2 effective group-based delivery models of an ECD parenting intervention that utilized Kenya's network of local community health volunteers (CHVs).Methods and findingsBetween October 1 and November 12, 2018, 1,152 mothers with children aged 6 to 24 months were surveyed from 60 villages in rural western Kenya. After baseline, villages were randomly assigned to one of 3 intervention arms: a group-only delivery model with 16 fortnightly sessions, a mixed-delivery model combining 12 group sessions with 4 home visits, and a control group. At endline (August 5 to October 31, 2019), 1,070 children were retained and assessed for primary outcomes including cognitive and receptive language development (with the Bayley Scales of Infant Development, Third Edition) and socioemotional development (with the Wolke scale). Children in the 2 intervention arms showed better developmental outcomes than children in the control arm, although the group-only delivery model generally had larger effects on children. Total program costs included provider's implementation costs collected during the intervention period using financial reports from the local nongovernmental organization (NGO) implementer, as well as societal costs such as opportunity costs to mothers and delivery agents. We combined program impacts with these total costs to estimate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), as well as BCRs and the program's ROI for the government based on predictions of future lifetime wages and societal costs. Total costs per child were US$140 in the group-only arm and US$145 in the mixed-delivery arm. Because of higher intention-to-treat (ITT) impacts at marginally lower costs, the group-only model was the most cost-effective across all child outcomes. Focusing on child cognition in this arm, we estimated an ICER of a 0.37 standard deviation (SD) improvement in cognition per US$100 invested, a BCR of 15.5, and an ROI of 127%. A limitation of our study is that our estimated BCR and ROI necessarily make assumptions about the discount rate, income tax rates, and predictions of intervention impacts on future wages and schooling. We examine the sensitivity of our results to these assumptions.ConclusionsTo the best of our knowledge, this study is the first economic evaluation of an effective ECD parenting intervention targeted to young children in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) and the first to adopt a societal perspective in calculating cost-effectiveness that accounts for opportunity costs to delivery agents and program participants. Our cost-effectiveness and benefit-cost estimates are higher than most of the limited number of prior studies from LMIC settings providing information about costs. Our results represent a strong case for scaling similar interventions in impoverished rural settings, and, under reasonable assumptions about the future, demonstrate that the private and social returns of such investments are likely to largely outweigh their costs.Trial registrationThis trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03548558, June 7, 2018. American Economic Association RCT Registry trial AEARCTR-0002913.

Project description:BackgroundPoor nutrition and exposure to faecal contamination are associated with diarrhoea and growth faltering, both of which have long-term consequences for child health. We aimed to assess whether water, sanitation, handwashing, and nutrition interventions reduced diarrhoea or growth faltering.MethodsThe WASH Benefits cluster-randomised trial enrolled pregnant women from villages in rural Kenya and evaluated outcomes at 1 year and 2 years of follow-up. Geographically-adjacent clusters were block-randomised to active control (household visits to measure mid-upper-arm circumference), passive control (data collection only), or compound-level interventions including household visits to promote target behaviours: drinking chlorinated water (water); safe sanitation consisting of disposing faeces in an improved latrine (sanitation); handwashing with soap (handwashing); combined water, sanitation, and handwashing; counselling on appropriate maternal, infant, and young child feeding plus small-quantity lipid-based nutrient supplements from 6-24 months (nutrition); and combined water, sanitation, handwashing, and nutrition. Primary outcomes were caregiver-reported diarrhoea in the past 7 days and length-for-age Z score at year 2 in index children born to the enrolled pregnant women. Masking was not possible for data collection, but analyses were masked. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01704105.FindingsBetween Nov 27, 2012, and May 21, 2014, 8246 women in 702 clusters were enrolled and randomly assigned an intervention or control group. 1919 women were assigned to the active control group; 938 to passive control; 904 to water; 892 to sanitation; 917 to handwashing; 912 to combined water, sanitation, and handwashing; 843 to nutrition; and 921 to combined water, sanitation, handwashing, and nutrition. Data on diarrhoea at year 1 or year 2 were available for 6494 children and data on length-for-age Z score in year 2 were available for 6583 children (86% of living children were measured at year 2). Adherence indicators for sanitation, handwashing, and nutrition were more than 70% at year 1, handwashing fell to less than 25% at year 2, and for water was less than 45% at year 1 and less than 25% at year 2; combined groups were comparable to single groups. None of the interventions reduced diarrhoea prevalence compared with the active control. Compared with active control (length-for-age Z score -1·54) children in nutrition and combined water, sanitation, handwashing, and nutrition were taller by year 2 (mean difference 0·13 [95% CI 0·01-0·25] in the nutrition group; 0·16 [0·05-0·27] in the combined water, sanitation, handwashing, and nutrition group). The individual water, sanitation, and handwashing groups, and combined water, sanitation, and handwashing group had no effect on linear growth.InterpretationBehaviour change messaging combined with technologically simple interventions such as water treatment, household sanitation upgrades from unimproved to improved latrines, and handwashing stations did not reduce childhood diarrhoea or improve growth, even when adherence was at least as high as has been achieved by other programmes. Counselling and supplementation in the nutrition group and combined water, sanitation, handwashing, and nutrition interventions led to small growth benefits, but there was no advantage to integrating water, sanitation, and handwashing with nutrition. The interventions might have been more efficacious with higher adherence or in an environment with lower baseline sanitation coverage, especially in this context of high diarrhoea prevalence.FundingBill & Melinda Gates Foundation, United States Agency for International Development.

Project description:Early childhood development (ECD) parenting interventions can improve child developmental outcomes in low-resource settings, but information about their implementation lags far behind evidence of their effectiveness, hindering their generalizability. This study presents results from an implementation evaluation of Msingi Bora ("Good Foundation" in Swahili), a group-based responsive stimulation and nutrition education intervention recently tested in a cluster randomized controlled trial across 60 villages in rural western Kenya. Msingi Bora successfully improved child cognitive, receptive language, and socioemotional outcomes, as well as parenting practices. We conducted a mixed methods implementation evaluation of the Msingi Bora trial between April 2018 and November 2019 following the Consolidated Advice for Reporting ECD implementation research (CARE) guidelines. We collected qualitative and quantitative data on program inputs, outputs, and outcomes, with a view to examining how aspects of the program's implementation, such as program acceptance and delivery fidelity, related to observed program impacts on parents and children. We found that study areas had initially very low levels of familiarity or knowledge of ECD among parents, community delivery agents, and even supervisory staff from our partner non-governmental organization (NGO). We increased training and supervision in response, and provided a structured manual to enable local delivery agents to successfully lead the sessions. There was a high level of parental compliance, with median attendance of 13 out of 16 fortnightly sessions over 8 months. For delivery agents, all measures of delivery performance and fidelity increased with program experience. Older, more knowledable delivery agents were associated with larger impacts on parental stimulation and child outcomes, and delivery agents with higher fidelity scores were also related to improved parenting practices. We conclude that a group-based parenting intervention delivered by local delivery agents can improve multiple child and parent outcomes. An upfront investment in training local trainers and delivery agents, and regular supervision of delivery of a manualized program, appear key to our documented success. Our results represent a promising avenue for scaling similar interventions in low-resource rural settings to serve families in need of ECD programming. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03548558, June 7, 2018. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03548558.

Project description:BackgroundInterventions to increase physical activity or reduce sedentary behaviour within the workplace setting have shown mixed effects. This cluster randomised controlled trial assessed whether multi-component interventions, focusing on changes at the individual, environmental, and organisational levels, either increased physical activity or reduced sedentary behaviour, compared to a passive control group.MethodsTeams of office-workers from two companies participated in one of two interventions (iPA: targeting physical activity; or iSED: targeting sedentary behaviour), or wait-list control group (C). Exclusion criterion was very high physical activity level (MVPA ≥30 min/day in ≥10 min bouts every day). Randomisation occurred at the level of workplace cluster, and groups were randomly allocated (1:1) with stratification for company and cluster size. Personnel involved in data collection and processing were blinded to group allocation. Both interventions included five sessions of cognitive behavioural therapy counselling for 6 months. iPA included counselling focused on physical activity, access to a gym, and encouragement to exercise, and go for lunch walks. iSED included counselling on sedentary behaviour and encouragement to reduce sitting and increase engagement in standing- and walking-meetings. At baseline and the 6-month mark accelerometers were worn on the hip and thigh for 7 days. The primary outcomes were group differences in time spent in moderate-to-vigorous intensity physical activity (%MVPA) and in sedentary behaviour (%), analysed using Bayesian multilevel modelling for those with complete data.ResultsTwo-hundred and sixty three office workers (73% women, mean age 42 ± 9 years, education 15 ± 2 years) were randomised into 23 cluster teams (iPA n = 84, 8 clusters; iSED n = 87, 7 clusters; C n = 92, 7 clusters). No significant group differences (posterior mean ratios: 95% credible interval) were found after the intervention for %MVPA or for %Sedentary. %MVPA: iPA vs C (0·04: - 0·80-0·82); iSED vs C (0·47: - 0·41-1·32); iPA vs iSED (0·43: - 0·42-1·27). %Sedentary: iPA vs C (1·16: - 1·66-4·02); iSED vs C (- 0·44: - 3·50-2·64); iPA vs iSED (- 1·60: - 4·72-1·47).ConclusionsThe multi-component interventions focusing on either physical activity or sedentary behaviour were unsuccessful at increasing device-measured physical activity or reducing sedentary behaviour compared to a control group.Trial registrationISRCTN, ISRCTN92968402 . Registered 27/2/2018, recruitment started 15/03/2018.

Project description:BackgroundDiarrhoea and growth faltering in early childhood are associated with subsequent adverse outcomes. We aimed to assess whether water quality, sanitation, and handwashing interventions alone or combined with nutrition interventions reduced diarrhoea or growth faltering.MethodsThe WASH Benefits Bangladesh cluster-randomised trial enrolled pregnant women from villages in rural Bangladesh and evaluated outcomes at 1-year and 2-years' follow-up. Pregnant women in geographically adjacent clusters were block-randomised to one of seven clusters: chlorinated drinking water (water); upgraded sanitation (sanitation); promotion of handwashing with soap (handwashing); combined water, sanitation, and handwashing; counselling on appropriate child nutrition plus lipid-based nutrient supplements (nutrition); combined water, sanitation, handwashing, and nutrition; and control (data collection only). Primary outcomes were caregiver-reported diarrhoea in the past 7 days among children who were in utero or younger than 3 years at enrolment and length-for-age Z score among children born to enrolled pregnant women. Masking was not possible for data collection, but analyses were masked. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCC01590095.FindingsBetween May 31, 2012, and July 7, 2013, 5551 pregnant women in 720 clusters were randomly allocated to one of seven groups. 1382 women were assigned to the control group; 698 to water; 696 to sanitation; 688 to handwashing; 702 to water, sanitation, and handwashing; 699 to nutrition; and 686 to water, sanitation, handwashing, and nutrition. 331 (6%) women were lost to follow-up. Data on diarrhoea at year 1 or year 2 (combined) were available for 14 425 children (7331 in year 1, 7094 in year 2) and data on length-for-age Z score in year 2 were available for 4584 children (92% of living children were measured at year 2). All interventions had high adherence. Compared with a prevalence of 5·7% (200 of 3517 child weeks) in the control group, 7-day diarrhoea prevalence was lower among index children and children under 3 years at enrolment who received sanitation (61 [3·5%] of 1760; prevalence ratio 0·61, 95% CI 0·46-0·81), handwashing (62 [3·5%] of 1795; 0·60, 0·45-0·80), combined water, sanitation, and handwashing (74 [3·9%] of 1902; 0·69, 0·53-0·90), nutrition (62 [3·5%] of 1766; 0·64, 0·49-0·85), and combined water, sanitation, handwashing, and nutrition (66 [3·5%] of 1861; 0·62, 0·47-0·81); diarrhoea prevalence was not significantly lower in children receiving water treatment (90 [4·9%] of 1824; 0·89, 0·70-1·13). Compared with control (mean length-for-age Z score -1·79), children were taller by year 2 in the nutrition group (mean difference 0·25 [95% CI 0·15-0·36]) and in the combined water, sanitation, handwashing, and nutrition group (0·13 [0·02-0·24]). The individual water, sanitation, and handwashing groups, and combined water, sanitation, and handwashing group had no effect on linear growth.InterpretationNutrient supplementation and counselling modestly improved linear growth, but there was no benefit to the integration of water, sanitation, and handwashing with nutrition. Adherence was high in all groups and diarrhoea prevalence was reduced in all intervention groups except water treatment. Combined water, sanitation, and handwashing interventions provided no additive benefit over single interventions.FundingBill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Project description:BackgroundAlmost a quarter of the world's undernourished people live in India. We tested the effects of three nutrition-sensitive agriculture (NSA) interventions on maternal and child nutrition in India.MethodsWe did a parallel, four-arm, observer-blind, cluster-randomised trial in Keonjhar district, Odisha, India. A cluster was one or more villages with a combined minimum population of 800 residents. The clusters were allocated 1:1:1:1 to a control group or an intervention group of fortnightly women's groups meetings and household visits over 32 months using: NSA videos (AGRI group); NSA and nutrition-specific videos (AGRI-NUT group); or NSA videos and a nutrition-specific participatory learning and action (PLA) cycle meetings and videos (AGRI-NUT+PLA group). Primary outcomes were the proportion of children aged 6-23 months consuming at least four of seven food groups the previous day and mean maternal body-mass index (BMI). Secondary outcomes were proportion of mothers consuming at least five of ten food groups and child wasting (proportion of children with weight-for-height Z score SD <-2). Outcomes were assessed in children and mothers through cross-sectional surveys at baseline and at endline, 36 months later. Analyses were by intention to treat. Participants and intervention facilitators were not blinded to allocation; the research team were. This trial is registered at ISRCTN, ISRCTN65922679.Findings148 of 162 clusters assessed for eligibility were enrolled and randomly allocated to trial groups (37 clusters per group). Baseline surveys took place from Nov 24, 2016, to Jan 24, 2017; clusters were randomised from December, 2016, to January, 2017; and interventions were implemented from March 20, 2017, to Oct 31, 2019, and endline surveys done from Nov 19, 2019, to Jan 12, 2020, in an average of 32 households per cluster. All clusters were included in the analyses. There was an increase in the proportion of children consuming at least four of seven food groups in the AGRI-NUT (adjusted relative risk [RR] 1·19, 95% CI 1·03 to 1·37, p=0·02) and AGRI-NUT+PLA (1·27, 1·11 to 1·46, p=0·001) groups, but not AGRI (1·06, 0·91 to 1·23, p=0·44), compared with the control group. We found no effects on mean maternal BMI (adjusted mean differences vs control, AGRI -0·05, -0·34 to 0·24; AGRI-NUT 0·04, -0·26 to 0·33; AGRI-NUT+PLA -0·03, -0·3 to 0·23). An increase in the proportion of mothers consuming at least five of ten food groups was seen in the AGRI (adjusted RR 1·21, 1·01 to 1·45) and AGRI-NUT+PLA (1·30, 1·10 to 1·53) groups compared with the control group, but not in AGRI-NUT (1·16, 0·98 to 1·38). We found no effects on child wasting (adjusted RR vs control, AGRI 0·95, 0·73 to 1·24; AGRI-NUT 0·96, 0·72 to 1·29; AGRI-NUT+PLA 0·96, 0·73 to 1·26).InterpretationWomen's groups using combinations of NSA videos, nutrition-specific videos, and PLA cycle meetings improved maternal and child diet quality in rural Odisha, India. These components have been implemented separately in several low-income settings; effects could be increased by scaling up together.FundingBill & Melinda Gates Foundation, UK AID from the UK Government, and US Agency for International Development.