RT Journal Article SR Electronic T1 Implementing the Maternal Postnatal Attachment Scale (MPAS) in universal services: Qualitative interviews with health visitors JF medRxiv FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press SP 2021.11.30.21267065 DO 10.1101/2021.11.30.21267065 A1 Philippa K Bird A1 Zoe Hindson A1 Abigail Dunn A1 Anna Cronin de Chavez A1 Josie Dickerson A1 Joanna Howes A1 Tracey Bywater YR 2021 UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/11/30/2021.11.30.21267065.abstract AB A secure parent-infant relationship lays the foundations for children’s development, however there are currently no measurement tools recommended for clinical practice. We evaluate the clinical utility of a structured assessment of the parent-infant relationship (the Maternal Postnatal Attachment Scale, MPAS) in a deprived, multi-ethnic urban community in England. This paper answers the question: what are health visitors’ views on the parent-infant relationship, and experiences of piloting the MPAS? It explores the barriers and facilitators to implementation, and complements the paper on psychometric properties and representativeness reported in Dunn et al (submitted).Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 11 health visitors and data were analysed using thematic analysis. Health visitors stressed the importance of the parent-infant relationship and reported benefits of the MPAS, including opening conversation, and identifying and reporting concerns. Challenges included timing, workload, the appropriateness and understanding of the questions and the length of the tool. Suggestions for improvements to the tool were identified.Our findings help to explain results in Dunn et al, and challenges identified would hinder routine assessment of the parent-infant relationship. Further work with health professionals and parents has been undertaken to co-produce an acceptable, feasible and reliable tool for clinical practice.Key findings and points for practitionersHealth visitors saw identification and support of the parent-infant relationship as an important part of their role, however there are currently no recommended tools for this.Health visitors report some benefits to using the MPAS, but also several challenges to using this tool in practice, including the length of time required, the complexity of the language, potential to trigger distress and perceived intrusiveness of some questions.Further work in collaboration with health professionals and parents is needed to develop an acceptable, feasible and reliable tool to assess the parent-infant relationship.Statement of relevance to the field of infant and early childhood mental health A secure parent-infant relationship lays the foundations for children’s development, and identification of concerns and provision of support is a priority in the UK and internationally. However, no tools are currently recommended for assessing the relationship in clinical practice. Our findings on experiences, benefits and challenges of piloting a tool to assess the parent-infant relationship provide important directions for development of a short, clinically relevant and valid tool in clinical practice.Statement explaining how the research reflects an appreciation for diversity and an anti-racist approach This pilot was conducted with a diverse, multi-ethnic community (half of new mothers are from Asian/Asian British Pakistani backgrounds, a quarter White British, and a quarter from other ethnic backgrounds). The health visiting service engages with the whole population in a culturally sensitive way, including ensuring staff speak key community languages and using interpreters. None of the authors spoke community languages, but we purposively selected the health visitors to include experience of using the MPAS in community languages. Our findings reflect experiences implementing the tool with women from different ethnic backgrounds, and we report detailed findings on language. We hope our findings can inform appropriate and equitable implementation of tools in diverse communities.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis study has received funding through a peer review process from the National Lottery Community Fund as part of the A Better Start programme. The funders have not had any involvement in the design or writing of the paper. Authors PKB, ZH, AD, JD and TB were also supported by the NIHR CLAHRC Yorkshire and Humber (www.clahrc-yh.nihr.ac.uk). JD and TB were supported by the NIHR ARC Yorkshire and Humber (https://www.arc-yh.nihr.ac.uk/). The views and opinions expressed are those of the author(s), and not necessarily those of the National Lottery Community Fund, NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The Health Research Authority has confirmed that our service evaluation study does not require review by an NHS Research Ethics Committee (HRA decision 60/88/81). However, we have adhered to all ethical principles in the conduct of this evaluation study and written informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to qualitative interviews being undertaken.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesData is stored securely by Born in Bradford at the Bradford Institute for Health Research (BIHR). Interview participants were informed that data would be stored at BIHR and did not consent to data sharing with other organisations. Therefore, on ethnical grounds the qualitative data are not available to other organisations. The interview guide is provided in supplementary information. For further information about access please contact Born in Bradford (https://borninbradford.nhs.uk/contact-us/).