Implementation of the Alarm Distress Baby Scale as a universal screening instrument in primary care: feasibility, acceptability, and predictors of professionals’ adherence to guidelines
Section snippets
What is already known about the topic?
- •
Identification of socioemotional problems in infants is often held under informal surveillance, but systematic universal screening using a validated instrument is needed to prevent overlooking children who need further assessment and intervention.
- •
Even when universal screening programs are implemented, they are often not effective, and screening prevalence rates are often low. A growing, but small, body of literature suggests that this is partly due to low adherence to screening guidelines among
What this paper adds
- •
The ADBB has not previously been implemented as a universal screening instrument in a primary care setting, and this study provides a good starting point for policymakers, planners, and managers who intend to undertake quality improvement initiatives aiming at early detection and prevention of socioemotional problems in infancy.
- •
This study extends the growing literature on implementation of routine developmental screening into a busy health visiting practice focusing on feasibility and the
Background
An infant’s ability to engage in social interaction is one of the most important indicators of socioemotional development linked to a range of long-term outcomes such as language development, socioemotional competencies, and behavioral, attachment, and autism-spectrum disorders (e.g., Feldman, 2007, Guedeney et al., 2013, Guedeney et al., 2014). Intervention becomes increasingly more difficult as problems in infancy become more complex and severe with development (e.g., Phillips and Shonkoff,
Setting and recruitment
The present study was part of an ongoing research program, The Copenhagen Infant Mental Health Project (CIMHP) with the overall objective to evaluate methods for early detection and interventions for infants at risk for poor socioemotional outcomes (Væver et al., 2016a, Væver et al., 2016b). CIMPH is a collaboration between the health visitors in the City of Copenhagen and the Center for Early Intervention and Family research, University of Copenhagen. The health visitors in the City of
Sample description
The participating health visitors (N = 79) were all women and had an average of 9.7 years of nursing experience before they started their education as a health visitor (range: 3–23, SD = 4.4) and an average of 13.5 years of experience as health visitors (range: 2–34, SD = 6.82). Table 1 displays the health visitors’ ages, years of experience, and self-reported skills in relation to detecting infants at-risk for adverse socioemotional development. As shown in Table 1, the participants did not differ
Discussion
A prerequisite for any universal screening program to be effective is high screening prevalence rates, i.e. that the professionals adhere to the screening guidelines. Informed by previous implementation studies that have demonstrated that it is often difficult to obtain acceptable screening rates, an essential part of our study was to investigate the practitioners’ experiences and attitudes towards using the ADBB in their daily practice, and to examine whether attitudes toward the ADBB were
Conclusions and implications for practice
By highlighting important factors that may hinder successful implementation, our results provide a good starting point for policymakers, planners, and managers who intend to undertake quality improvement initiatives aiming at early detection and prevention of socioemotional problems in infancy. First, if the practitioner does not perceive the screening instrument as a positive contribution to his/her practice, low screening prevalence rates may occur. Though not surprising, the implications of
Funding
The project is funded by a grant from the charitable foundation Tryg Foundation (Grant ID no 107616).
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank the health visitors and The Children and Youth Administration (Børne- Ungdoms Forvaltningen) in the City of Copenhagen and the CIMHP project group for a fruitful collaboration. The authors also acknowledge the valuable contribution of Rie Krondorf von Wowern to the translation of the ADBB-manual into Danish, the development of the training seminar in collaboration with the first author and training, and to the supervision of the health visitors. Finally, the authors
References (42)
- et al.
Postpartum depression: a comparison of screening and routine clinical evaluation
Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol.
(2000) Developmental screening in the primary care setting: a qualitative integrative review for nurses
J. Pediatr. Nurs.
(2016)- et al.
An update on assessing development in the pediatric office: has anything changed after two policy statements?
Acad. Pediatr.
(2010) - et al.
Infants' social withdrawal and parents' mental health
Infant Behav. Dev.
(2008) Implementing developmental screening
J. Pediatr. Nurs.
(2010)- et al.
Counselling of postnatal depression: a controlled study on a population based Swedish sample
J. Affect. Disord.
(1996) - et al.
Enhancing developmentally oriented primary care: an Illinois initiative to increase developmental screening in medical homes
Pediatrics
(2010) Council on Children with Disabilities. Identifying infants and young children with developmental disorders in the medical home: an algorithm for developmental surveillance and screening
Pediatrics
(2006)- et al.
Developmental and autism screening: a survey across six states
Infants Young Child.
(2012) Developmental screening and assessment: what are we thinking?
J. Dev. Behav. Pediatr.
(2009)