Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Neurobehavioral Intervention Incorporated into a State Early Intervention Program is Associated with Higher Perceived Quality of Care Among Parents of High-Risk Newborns

  • Published:
The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to compare two models of early intervention (EI) service delivery—a neurobehavioral intervention and usual care—on parents' perceived quality of EI service delivery. Families of newborns referred to EI were randomly assigned to a neurobehavioral intervention or usual care group and followed until the infant was 12 weeks corrected gestational age. The intervention group (n = 25) received a weekly neurobehavioral intervention. The usual care group (n = 13) received standard weekly home visits. Mothers completed the Home Visiting Index (HVI) measuring the quality of EI service delivery. Mixed linear regression was used to examine group differences in quality scores. The intervention group reported higher quality of care related to facilitating optimal parent–infant social interaction (mean difference = 2.17, 95% CI: 0.41, 3.92).A neurobehavioral model of service delivery can be successfully integrated into EI programming and appears to be associated with higher parent-reported perceived quality.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. PL 108-446. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, Reauthorization 2004. Available [Cited August 12, 2010] from: http://www.copyright.gov/legislation/pl108-446.pdf.

  2. Aarnoudse-Moens CSA, Weisglas-Kuperus N, van Goudoever JB, et al. Meta-analysis of neurobehavioral outcomes in very preterm and/or very low birth weight children. Pediatrics 2009;124:716-728.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Brooks-GunnJ, DuncanG. The Effects of Poverty on Children.The Future of Children1997; 7:55-71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Decoufle P, Boyle C, Paulozzi L, et al. Increased Risk for Developmental Disabilities in Children Who Have Major Birth Defects: A Population-Based Study. Pediatrics 2001;108:728-734.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Infant and Toddlers Association Part C Implementation: State Challenges and Responses. (Internet) IDEA Infant and Toddler Coordinators Association; December 2009: [Cited July 24, 2010] available From: http://www.ideainfanttoddler.org/pdf/09_Annual_Survey_Report‐State_Challenges.pdf

  6. Carle AC, Simpson LA. Commentary on the IOM's Report on Identifying initial national Priorities for Comparative Effectiveness Research. Academic Pediatrics 2010.

  7. Spiker D, Hebbeler K, Wagner M, et al.A framework for describing variation in state early intervention systems.Topics in Early Childhood Special Education 2000;20:195 –207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Als H. Toward a synactive theory of development: Promise for the assessment and support of infant individuality. Infant Mental Health Journal 1982;3:229–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Nugent JK, Keefer C, Minear S, et al. Understanding newborn behavior and early relationships—The newborn behavioral observations (NBO) system handbook. Baltimore: Paul H. Brooks; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Nugent JK, Blanchard Y, Stewart JS. Supporting parents of premature infants: an infant-focused family-centered approach. In D. Brodsky and M. Ouelette, (Eds.) Primary Care of the Premature Infant. Philadelphia ,PA: Elsevier; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Blanchard Y, Mouradian, L. Integrating neurobehavioral concepts into early intervention eligibility evaluation. Infants and Young Children 2000;13:41-50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. OsofskyJD, Thompson, MD. Adaptive and maladaptive parenting: perspectives on risk and protective factors. In: Shonkoff JP, Meisels, SJ, eds: Handbook of Early Childhood Interventions. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 2000: 54-75.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Ohgi S, Akiyama, T. Supporting parents of at-risk infants. In; Nugent JK, Petrauskas B, Brazelton TB, eds. The Newborn as a Person: enabling healthy infant development worldwide. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley; 2009:51-59.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Kleberg A, Westrup B, Stjernqvist K. Developmental outcome, child behavior and mother-child interaction at 3 years of age following Newborn Individualized Developmental Care and Intervention Program (NIDCAP) intervention.Early Human Development 2000;60:123-135.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. McCormick MC, McCarton C, Tonascia J, Brooks-Gunn J. Early educational intervention for very low birth weight infants: results from the Infant Health and Developmental Program. Journal of Pediatrics 1993;123:527 –33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Campbell F, Ramey C. Effects of Early Intervention on Intellectual Development and Academic Achievement: A Follow-Up Study of Children from Low-Income Families. Child Development 1994;65:884-698.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Spittle A, Orton J, Doyle LW, Boyd R. Early developmental intervention programs post hospital discharge to prevent motor and cognitive impairments in preterm infants. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2007; Issue 2. Art. No.: CD005495. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005495.pub2.

  18. Als H, Gilkerson L, Duffy FH, et al. A three-center, randomized, controlled trial of individualized developmental care for very low birth weight preterm infants: medical, neurodevelopmental, parenting, and caregiving effects. Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics 2003;24:399-408.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Parker S, Zahr LK, Cole JCD, et al. Outcome after developmental intervention in the neonatal intensive care unit for mothers of preterm infants with low socio-economic status. Journal of Pediatrics 1992;120:780-785.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Browne JV, Talmi A. Family-based intervention to enhance infant–parent relationship in the neonatal intensive care unit. Journal of Pediatric Psychology 2005;30:667-677.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Blanchard Y. Using the Newborn Behavioral Observation System with At-Risk Infants and Families: United States. In: Nugent JK, Petrauskas B, Brazelton TB, eds. The Newborn as a Person. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley; 2009:120-128.

    Google Scholar 

  22. McManus BM, Nugent JK. Feasibility study of early intervention provider confidence following a neurobehavioral intervention for high-risk newborns.Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology.2011;29(4):395-403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Nugent JK.Home visiting index. Brazelton Institute, Children's Hospital, Boston; 2003

    Google Scholar 

  24. Devellis RF. Scale Development: Theory and Applications. Applied Social Research Methods Series, Volume 26.Sage Publications; 2003.

  25. Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  26. SAS v9.2, Copyright 2002-2003 by SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA.

  27. Koldewijn K, Wolf MJ, van Wassenaer A, et al. The Infant Behavioral Assessment and Intervention Program to support preterm infants after hospital discharge: a pilot study. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurolology 2005;47:105 –12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. McCormick MC, McManus, BM.Cognitive and Behavioral Interventions. In: Nosarti C, Murray R, Hack M, eds. Preterm Birth: Long-Term Effects on Brain and Behaviours. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK; 2010:237-250.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Rutter M. Psychosocial resilience and protective mechanisms. In: Rolf J, Masten, AS, Cicchetti D, Nuechterlein KH, Weintraub S, eds. Risk and Protective Factors in the Development of Psychopathology. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; 1990:181-214.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  30. Meyer EC, Bigsby R. Family-centered and relationship-based care in the NICU. (2004). In: Vergara E, Bigsby R, eds. Developmental & Therapeutic Interventions in the NICU. Baltimore, MD: Brooks; 2004:165-176.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Sameroff A, Fiese B. Transactional regulation: the developmental ecology of early intervention. In Shonkoff JP, Meisels SJ, eds. Handbook of Early Childhood Intervention 2nd ed.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 2000:135-159.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  32. Iversen M, Shimmel J, Ciacera S, et al. Creating a Family-Centered Approach to Early Intervention Services: Perceptions of Parents and Professionals.Pediatric Physical Therapy 2003:15:23-31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. O'Neil, ME, Palisano RJ, Westcott S.. Relationship of Therapists' Attitudes, Children's Motor Ability, and Parenting Stress to Mothers' Perceptions of Therapists' Behaviors During Early Intervention. Pediatric Physical Therapy 2001;8:1412-1424.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Kang M, Ragan B, Park J. Issues in Outcomes Research: An overview of randomization techniques for clinical trials. Journal of Athletic Training 2008;43(2):215-221.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Currie J. Healthy, wealthy, and wise: socioeconomic status, poor health in childhood, and human capital development. J Econ Lit 2009; 47: 87–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Beth M. McManus acknowledges funding from the Robert Wood Johnson Health and Society Scholars Program at University of Wisconsin-Madison. This study was carried with funding awarded to the second author (JKN) by the Noonan Family Foundation. The authors wish to acknowledge Mei-Chiung Shih, Ph.D. and Clarissa Valim, Sc.D. for their invaluable assistance with data collection and management. The authors are grateful to the staff and families who dedicated their time to participate in this study.

The authors acknowledge their affiliation with the Brazelton Institute (BI), Department of Newborn Medicine at Children's Hospital Boston. Researchers at the BI (including the second author) developed the intervention under study and provided training and certification to clinicians on the intervention tool under study.

Conflict of Interest Statement

Both authors disclose their affiliation with the Brazelton Institute, Department of Newborn Medicine, Children’s Hospital Boston. In the particular, the second author is Director of the Brazelton Institute and assisted in the design of the neurobehavioral intervention under study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Health Systems, Management & Policy, Colorado School of Public Health, University of Colrado, 13001 E. 17th Place, MS B117, Aurora, CO, 80045, USA

    Beth M. McManus PT, MPH, ScD

  2. Brazelton Institute, Division of Developmental Medicine, Children’s Hospital Boston, 1250 Boylston Street, Boston, MA, 02115, USA

    J. Kevin Nugent PhD

  3. University of Massachusetts at Amherst, Amherst, MA, USA

    J. Kevin Nugent PhD

Authors
  1. Beth M. McManus PT, MPH, ScD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J. Kevin Nugent PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Beth M. McManus PT, MPH, ScD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

McManus, B.M., Nugent, J.K. A Neurobehavioral Intervention Incorporated into a State Early Intervention Program is Associated with Higher Perceived Quality of Care Among Parents of High-Risk Newborns. J Behav Health Serv Res 41, 381–389 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11414-012-9283-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11414-012-9283-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation