The experience of the COVID-19 pandemic for families of infants involved with Child Protection Services for maltreatment concerns.

The COVID-19 pandemic and associated physical distancing restrictions have exacerbated social, economic and health disadvantage within our communities. With increases in mental health difficulties and family violence already being seen, there is concern that the risk of child maltreatment risk may also be increased. The current study aimed to explore the experience of the COVID-19 pandemic for families identified to be at risk of child maltreatment in Victoria, Australia. Understanding the experiences of the pandemic for families already at risk is essential in identifying how to best support vulnerable parents and young children during this challenging time. Interviews were conducted with 11 parents currently involved with Child Protection Services, and nine clinicians working within a child and family health services, supporting clients with child protection involvement. Parents and clinicians described a range of pandemic related stressors including employment and financial stress, worry about infection and changes to service access. In addition, parents with children in out of home care discussed decreased access to their children resulting from physical distancing restrictions. Parents and clinicians perceived the pandemic to be having a negative impact on parent mental health, parenting stress and isolation. Although parents raised minimal concerns about the impact of the pandemic on child well-being, clinicians expressed concerns about the rise in risk factors for child maltreatment. Parents discussed a range of coping strategies which they perceived to be helpful during the pandemic, and clinicians and parents described the need for additional mental health support and support to access basic needs. The study highlights the importance of ensuring at risk families have access to parenting and mental health support throughout the pandemic and the importance of ensuring children within at-risk families are sighted and their safety assessed.

A mixed-methods feasibility study of the Home Parenting Education and Support Program for families at risk of child maltreatment and recurrence in Australia.

BACKGROUND: Efforts to prevent child maltreatment and its recurrence in infancy and early childhood are critical to disrupting pathways to poor physical and mental health and interpersonal relationships across the life course. The Home Parenting Education and Support (HoPES) program is an intensive 8-week home-visiting intervention for families of infants and young children (0-4 years) receiving child protection services or welfare services. OBJECTIVE: The aims of this feasibility study were to: (a) explore parents' and clinicians' perceptions of the outcomes related to participation in HoPES, and (b) obtain preliminary data about potential intervention outcomes related to parent-child interactions, parent mental health, and parenting self-efficacy. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: HoPES was delivered to 30 families by a child and family health service. Seven mothers and eight HoPES clinicians also participated in qualitative interviews. METHODS: A mixed-methods evaluation was conducted incorporating qualitative interviews and self-report pre-post intervention data was conducted. RESULTS: Interviews with mothers identified perceived benefits for parent mental health and wellbeing, parenting, and relationships with children. This was further supported by clinician interviews and by the analysis of pre-post assessment data which revealed moderate to large decreases in maternal stress (d = 0.35) and increases in parental self-efficacy (0.76). CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study have important implications for further development of HoPES, and the design of a rigorous evaluation in next stage of evaluation research.

Do commencing nursing and paramedicine students differ in interprofessional learning and practice attitudes: evaluating course, socio-demographic and individual personality effects.

BACKGROUND: Interprofessional education (IPE) requires health students to learn with, from and about each other in order to develop a modern workforce with client-centred care at its core. Despite the client centred focus of IPE, training programs often utilize standard approaches across student cohorts without consideration of discipline, sociodemographic and personality variability that attract students to different health disciplines. Knowing the students who engage in IPE to tailor training may prove as beneficial as knowing the client to delivered individualized client centred care in interprofessional practice (IPP). This research investigates whether students commencing undergraduate nursing and paramedicine degrees ener training with existing demographic and personality differences and, if these are associated with different attitudes towards health care teams and interprofessional education. METHOD: This online study recruited 160 nursing and 50 paramedicine students in their first week of their undergraduate course. Students completed questionnaires regarding their background, personality (General Perceived Self Esteem Scale, International Mini Markers) and the attitudes towards health care teams scale (ATHCTS) and interprofessional education perception scale (IEPS). RESULTS: Results show that commencing nursing and paramedicine students are demographically different on education, gender, speaking a language other than English at home (LOTE) and their own experience with healthcare. The results further demonstrate that LOTE, discipline being studied and personality factors play a role in perceptions regarding interprofessional training whilst discipline being studied impacted on attitudes towards health care teams in the workforce. CONCLUSION: These results highlight a number of existing personal and psychological differences between individuals who choose to train in these selected professions. This suggests a need for tertiary education IPE programs to move towards tailoring their education to value this student diversity in the same client centred manner that students are asked to develop clinically.