Laura Sices1, Lucia Egbert, Mary Beth Mercer. 1. Department of Pediatrics, Division of Child Development, Boston Medical Center/Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts 02118, USA. laura.sices@bmc.org
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The goals were to investigate parents' and early intervention (EI) specialists' beliefs and experiences regarding discussing child development in primary care and to identify communication barriers and opportunities. METHODS: Focus groups were held with (1) mothers of young children with typical development, (2) mothers of young children who received EI services, and (3) EI specialists. Seven groups (N = 46 participants) were conducted in the greater Cleveland, Ohio, area. Meetings were audio-recorded, transcribed, coded, and analyzed, to identify themes. RESULTS: Most mothers reported a preference for a nonalarmist style of communication when developmental delays are suspected. In contrast, some mothers preferred a more direct style, including the use of labels to help them understand their child's development. The importance of preparation to accept information about developmental delays emerged as a theme in all groups. Elements contributing to preparedness included information about expected developmental skills, suggestions for promoting skills, and a specific time frame for follow-up evaluation. Mothers of children with disabilities perceived that early reassurance of normalcy by providers in response to their concerns led to self-doubt and increased difficulty accepting the diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Mothers and EI specialists have clear ideas about factors that promote or impede communication regarding child development. This information can inform primary care providers' approaches to monitoring and screening the development of young children and to communicating with parents regarding suspected developmental delays.
OBJECTIVES: The goals were to investigate parents' and early intervention (EI) specialists' beliefs and experiences regarding discussing child development in primary care and to identify communication barriers and opportunities. METHODS: Focus groups were held with (1) mothers of young children with typical development, (2) mothers of young children who received EI services, and (3) EI specialists. Seven groups (N = 46 participants) were conducted in the greater Cleveland, Ohio, area. Meetings were audio-recorded, transcribed, coded, and analyzed, to identify themes. RESULTS: Most mothers reported a preference for a nonalarmist style of communication when developmental delays are suspected. In contrast, some mothers preferred a more direct style, including the use of labels to help them understand their child's development. The importance of preparation to accept information about developmental delays emerged as a theme in all groups. Elements contributing to preparedness included information about expected developmental skills, suggestions for promoting skills, and a specific time frame for follow-up evaluation. Mothers of children with disabilities perceived that early reassurance of normalcy by providers in response to their concerns led to self-doubt and increased difficulty accepting the diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Mothers and EI specialists have clear ideas about factors that promote or impede communication regarding child development. This information can inform primary care providers' approaches to monitoring and screening the development of young children and to communicating with parents regarding suspected developmental delays.
Authors: Laura Sices; Chris Feudtner; John McLaughlin; Dennis Drotar; Michelle Williams Journal: J Dev Behav Pediatr Date: 2003-12 Impact factor: 2.225
Authors: Laura Sices; Dennis Drotar; Ashley Keilman; H Lester Kirchner; David Roberts; Terry Stancin Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2008-11 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Courtney M Brown; Andrew F Beck; Wendy Steuerwald; Elizabeth Alexander; Zeina M Samaan; Robert S Kahn; Mona Mansour Journal: Clin Pediatr (Phila) Date: 2015-05-20 Impact factor: 1.168
Authors: Leandra Godoy; Alice S Carter; Rebecca B Silver; Susan Dickstein; Ronald Seifer Journal: J Dev Behav Pediatr Date: 2014-06 Impact factor: 2.225
Authors: JoAnna K Leyenaar; Emily R O'Brien; Laurel K Leslie; Peter K Lindenauer; Rita M Mangione-Smith Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2016-12-02 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Melissa Raspa; Denise M Levis; Julia Kish-Doto; Ina Wallace; Catherine Rice; Brian Barger; Katie K Green; Rebecca B Wolf Journal: J Dev Behav Pediatr Date: 2015-10 Impact factor: 2.225
Authors: Ching H Wang; Carsten G Bonnemann; Anne Rutkowski; Thomas Sejersen; Jonathan Bellini; Vanessa Battista; Julaine M Florence; Ulrike Schara; Pamela M Schuler; Karim Wahbi; Annie Aloysius; Robert O Bash; Christophe Béroud; Enrico Bertini; Kate Bushby; Ronald D Cohn; Anne M Connolly; Nicolas Deconinck; Isabelle Desguerre; Michelle Eagle; Brigitte Estournet-Mathiaud; Ana Ferreiro; Albert Fujak; Nathalie Goemans; Susan T Iannaccone; Patricia Jouinot; Marion Main; Paola Melacini; Wolfgang Mueller-Felber; Francesco Muntoni; Leslie L Nelson; Jes Rahbek; Susana Quijano-Roy; Caroline Sewry; Kari Storhaug; Anita Simonds; Brian Tseng; Jiri Vajsar; Andrea Vianello; Reinhard Zeller Journal: J Child Neurol Date: 2010-11-15 Impact factor: 1.987
Authors: Courtney L Scherr; Hannah J Getachew-Smith; Laura Sudec; John J Brooks; Megan Roberts Journal: Soc Sci Med Date: 2020-03-16 Impact factor: 4.634
Authors: Sîan A Williams; Woroud Alzaher; Anna Mackey; Amy Hogan; Malcolm Battin; Alexandra Sorhage; N Susan Stott Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2021-03-31 Impact factor: 4.241