A randomised controlled feasibility trial of an early years language development intervention: results of the ‘outcomes of Talking Together evaluation and results’ (oTTer) project

Pilot and Feasibility Studies

Research

Chloe Storr¹  Rebecca Heald¹  Josie Dickerson²  Rukhsana Rashid²  Dea Nielsen³  Rachael W. Cheung³  Louise Tracey³  Maria Bryant⁴  Claudine Bowyer-Crane⁵  Katrina d’Apice⁶ 

[1] BHT Early Education and Training, Bradford, UK;Bradford Institute of Health Research, Bradford, UK;Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK;Department of Health Sciences/Hull York Medical School, University of York, York, UK;National Institute of Economic and Social Research, London, UK;Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK;

关键词: Early language intervention;    Home learning environment;    Feasibility study;    Early language delay;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s40814-023-01333-y

 received in 2022-10-19, accepted in 2023-06-07,  发布年份 2023

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

BackgroundEarly language difficulties are associated with poor school readiness and can impact lifelong attainment. The quality of the early home language environment is linked to language outcomes. However, few home-based language interventions have sufficient evidence of effectiveness in improving preschool children’s language abilities. This study reports the first stage in the evaluation of a theory-based programme, Talking Together (developed and delivered by BHT Early Education and Training) given over 6 weeks to families in the home setting. We aimed to test the feasibility and acceptability of delivering Talking Together in the Better Start Bradford community prior to a definitive trial, using a two-armed randomised controlled feasibility study.MethodsFamilies from a single site within the Better Start Bradford reach area were randomly allocated (1:1) to the Talking Together intervention or a wait list control group. Child language and parent-level outcome measures were administered before randomisation (baseline), pre-intervention (pre-test), 2 months post-intervention start (post-test), and 6 months post-intervention start (follow-up). Routine monitoring data from families and practitioners were also collected for eligibility, consent, protocol adherence, and attrition rates. Descriptive statistics on the feasibility and reliability of potential outcome measures were analysed alongside qualitative feedback on trial design acceptability. Pre-defined progression-to-trial criteria using a traffic light system were assessed using routine monitoring data.ResultsTwo-hundred and twenty-two families were assessed for eligibility; of these, 164 were eligible. A total of 102 families consented and were randomised (intervention: 52, waitlist control: 50); 68% of families completed outcome measures at 6-month follow-up. Recruitment (eligibility and consent) reached ‘green’ progression criteria; however, adherence reached ‘amber’ and attrition reached ‘red’ criteria. Child- and parent-level data were successfully measured, and the Oxford-CDI was identified as a suitable primary outcome measure for a definitive trial. Qualitative data not only indicated that the procedures were largely acceptable to practitioners and families but also identified areas for improvement in adherence and attrition rates.ConclusionsReferral rates indicate that Talking Together is a much-needed service and was positively received by the community. A full trial is feasible with adaptations to improve adherence and reduce attrition.Trial registrationISRCTN registry ISRCTN13251954. Retrospectively registered 21 February 2019

【 授权许可】

CC BY   
© The Author(s) 2023

【 图 表 】

Fig. 2

Fig. 2

41116_2023_37_Article_IEq37.gif

41116_2023_37_Article_IEq34.gif

41116_2023_37_Article_IEq28.gif

41116_2023_37_Article_IEq18.gif