Healthy Parent Carers programme: mixed methods process evaluation and refinement of a health promotion intervention
dc.contributor.author | Lloyd, J | |
dc.contributor.author | Bjornstad, G | |
dc.contributor.author | Borek, A | |
dc.contributor.author | Cuffe-Fuller, B | |
dc.contributor.author | Fredlund, M | |
dc.contributor.author | McDonald, A | |
dc.contributor.author | Tarrant, M | |
dc.contributor.author | Berry, V | |
dc.contributor.author | Wilkinson, K | |
dc.contributor.author | Mitchell, S | |
dc.contributor.author | Gillett, A | |
dc.contributor.author | Logan, S | |
dc.contributor.author | Morris, C | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-08-31T07:29:35Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2021-08-25 | |
dc.description.abstract | OBJECTIVES: Parent carers of children with special educational needs or disability are at risk of poorer mental and physical health. In response to these needs, we codeveloped the 'Healthy Parent Carers' (HPC) programme. This study examined the views and experiences of participants in the HPC feasibility trial to inform programme refinement. INTERVENTION, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: HPC is a peer-led group-based intervention (supported by online materials) for primary carers of disabled children, encouraging behaviours linked with health and well-being. It was delivered by two lead and six assistant peer facilitators in six community sites (one lead and one assistant per group) in South West England over six or 12 sessions. Control participants had online materials only. The trial involved 47 intervention and 45 control parent carers (97% female and 97% white) and eight facilitators (one male). DESIGN: A preplanned mixed methods process evaluation using questionnaires and checklists (during and after the intervention), qualitative interviews with participants after intervention (n=18) and a focus group with facilitators after trial. RESULTS: HPC was highly acceptable to participants and facilitators and experiences were very positive. Participants reported that the programme increased awareness of what parent carers could and could not change and their self-efficacy to engage in health-promoting behaviours. The intended mechanisms of action (social identification and peer support) matched participants' expectations and experiences. Control participants found the online-only programme flexible but isolating, as there were no opportunities to share ideas and problem solve with peers, the key function of the programme. Areas for improvement were identified for programme content, facilitator training and delivery. CONCLUSION: HPC was acceptable, well received and offers considerable potential to improve the health of parent carers. Under the pandemic, the challenge going forward is how best to maintain reach and fidelity to function while delivering a more virtual programme. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN151144652. | en_GB |
dc.description.sponsorship | National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) | en_GB |
dc.identifier.citation | Vol. 11, article e045570 | en_GB |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045570 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10871/126928 | |
dc.language.iso | en | en_GB |
dc.publisher | BMJ Publishing Group | en_GB |
dc.relation.url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34433591 | en_GB |
dc.rights | © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ. This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. | en_GB |
dc.subject | preventive medicine | en_GB |
dc.subject | qualitative research | en_GB |
dc.subject | statistics & research methods | en_GB |
dc.title | Healthy Parent Carers programme: mixed methods process evaluation and refinement of a health promotion intervention | en_GB |
dc.type | Article | en_GB |
dc.date.available | 2021-08-31T07:29:35Z | |
exeter.place-of-publication | England | en_GB |
dc.description | This is the final version. Available on open access from the BMJ Publishing Group via the DOI in this record | en_GB |
dc.description | Data availability statement; Data are available upon reasonable request. | en_GB |
dc.identifier.eissn | 2044-6055 | |
dc.identifier.journal | BMJ Open | en_GB |
dc.rights.uri | https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ | en_GB |
dcterms.dateAccepted | 2021-08-09 | |
exeter.funder | ::National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) | en_GB |
rioxxterms.version | VoR | en_GB |
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate | 2021-08-25 | |
rioxxterms.type | Journal Article/Review | en_GB |
refterms.dateFCD | 2021-08-31T07:28:06Z | |
refterms.versionFCD | VoR | |
refterms.dateFOA | 2021-08-31T07:31:53Z | |
refterms.panel | A | en_GB |
Files in this item
This item appears in the following Collection(s)
Except where otherwise noted, this item's licence is described as © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.
This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.