Kalli B Decker1, Emma R Williams2, Gina A Cook3, Makenzie M Fry2. 1. College of Education, Health & Human Development, Montana State University, 115 Herrick Hall, Bozeman, MT, 59717, USA. kalli.decker@montana.edu. 2. Montana State University, Bozeman, MT, 59717, USA. 3. Psychology and Child Development, California State University Stanislaus, One University Circle, Turlock, CA, 95382, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Early intervention (EI) services provide essential support to families of children with delays or disabilities. Children can enter EI via a variety of routes, though all begin with a referral, and for children who require additional services, subsequent referrals are generally warranted. The referral process may be complicated by rurality, but little is known about families' experiences with EI referrals in rural areas. This study focuses on better understanding rural families' perspectives of the EI referral process. METHODS: Families with children in Part C services throughout Montana (N = 30) were interviewed regarding their referral experiences. A layered analysis was used to analyze initial and subsequent referrals, and investigate families' experiences regarding the referral process. RESULTS: Families' reports regarding which professionals provided referrals and who they provided referrals to were diverse. As part of qualitative content analysis three themes emerged: 1) the referral process is both challenging and complex; 2) professionals facilitate connections; and, 3) some professionals may have misconceptions or misunderstandings. Some families discussed how aspects of rurality may have exacerbated the complexities and challenges of the EI referral process. DISCUSSION: Based on families' experiences, professional development related to when, how, and who to refer to EI services, and subsequent support of families during the referral process, may be of utmost importance. Furthermore, families discussed rurality in relationship to turnover rates, limited access to services or specialized knowledge, and travel distance required to receive services, demonstrating the importance of training and retaining rural EI professionals.
INTRODUCTION: Early intervention (EI) services provide essential support to families of children with delays or disabilities. Children can enter EI via a variety of routes, though all begin with a referral, and for children who require additional services, subsequent referrals are generally warranted. The referral process may be complicated by rurality, but little is known about families' experiences with EI referrals in rural areas. This study focuses on better understanding rural families' perspectives of the EI referral process. METHODS: Families with children in Part C services throughout Montana (N = 30) were interviewed regarding their referral experiences. A layered analysis was used to analyze initial and subsequent referrals, and investigate families' experiences regarding the referral process. RESULTS: Families' reports regarding which professionals provided referrals and who they provided referrals to were diverse. As part of qualitative content analysis three themes emerged: 1) the referral process is both challenging and complex; 2) professionals facilitate connections; and, 3) some professionals may have misconceptions or misunderstandings. Some families discussed how aspects of rurality may have exacerbated the complexities and challenges of the EI referral process. DISCUSSION: Based on families' experiences, professional development related to when, how, and who to refer to EI services, and subsequent support of families during the referral process, may be of utmost importance. Furthermore, families discussed rurality in relationship to turnover rates, limited access to services or specialized knowledge, and travel distance required to receive services, demonstrating the importance of training and retaining rural EI professionals.
Entities:
Keywords:
Early intervention; Family experience; Qualitative research; Referral; Rural health
Authors: Matthew L Bush; Bryan Hardin; Christopher Rayle; Cathy Lester; Christina R Studts; Jennifer B Shinn Journal: Otol Neurotol Date: 2015-01 Impact factor: 2.311
Authors: Manuel E Jimenez; Frances K Barg; James P Guevara; Marsha Gerdes; Alexander G Fiks Journal: Acad Pediatr Date: 2012 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 3.107