As a practitioner dedicated to improving child health outcomes, it's crucial to base your decisions on robust, data-driven evidence. The recent systematic review titled "Evidence for investing in parenting interventions aiming to improve child health: a systematic review of economic evaluations" offers valuable insights into the economic effectiveness of various parenting interventions. This blog will distill key findings from this research to help you implement evidence-based practices and encourage further exploration.
The Value of Parenting Interventions
The review synthesized data from 44 studies that evaluated the economic impact of parenting interventions targeting different child health outcomes, including mental health, child abuse, obesity, and general health. The findings revealed that parenting interventions are generally cost-effective, especially in preventing child externalizing and internalizing behaviors.
Mental Health Interventions
High-quality studies showed that interventions like the Incredible Years and Triple P programs are cost-effective for addressing externalizing behaviors such as ADHD and conduct disorder. These programs not only improve child behavior but also offer long-term societal savings. For instance:
- The Incredible Years program showed a benefit-cost ratio of up to $17.18 per dollar invested over the long term.
- The Triple P program had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $778 per DALY averted for group therapy.
Interventions targeting internalizing behaviors, such as anxiety, also demonstrated cost-effectiveness. A group-based preventive intervention for anxiety had an ICER of $6,144 per DALY averted, with a 99% probability of cost-effectiveness.
Child Abuse and Neglect
Home-visiting programs and early education interventions were found to be potentially cost-saving over a lifetime horizon. For example, the Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP) program had a benefit-cost ratio of $7.18 per dollar invested. However, some studies showed conflicting results, highlighting the need for comprehensive cost evaluations that include broader societal costs.
Obesity and General Health
Parenting interventions targeting obesity were generally not cost-effective. Family-based community programs addressing parenting, lifestyle, and social development had high ICERs, making them less favorable for investment. In contrast, some general health interventions, like the Salut Program in Sweden, were cost-saving and yielded higher effects compared to traditional care.
Implications for Practitioners
Based on these findings, practitioners should consider the following when implementing parenting interventions:
- Focus on Evidence-Based Programs: Prioritize interventions with proven cost-effectiveness, such as the Incredible Years and Triple P programs.
- Comprehensive Cost Evaluations: Ensure that economic evaluations include a broad range of societal costs and benefits to capture the full impact of interventions.
- Long-Term Planning: Consider the long-term benefits and savings of interventions, especially for programs targeting child abuse and mental health.
Encouraging Further Research
While the review provides robust evidence, it also highlights gaps that need further exploration. Future research should aim to:
- Include broader societal costs and quality-of-life impacts on both children and their caregivers.
- Use instruments that can capture health-related quality-of-life to facilitate value-for-money estimations.
- Extend time horizons in economic evaluations to capture long-term impacts.
To read the original research paper, please follow this link: Evidence for investing in parenting interventions aiming to improve child health: a systematic review of economic evaluations.
