The efficacy of VIPP-V parenting training for parents of young children with a visual or visual-and-intellectual disability: a randomized controlled trial

Abstract

Video-feedback Intervention to promote positive parenting-visual (VIPP-V) or visual-and-intellectual disability is an attachment-based intervention aimed at enhancing sensitive parenting and promoting positive parent-child relationships. A randomized controlled trial was conducted to assess the efficacy of VIPP-V for parents of children aged 1-5 with visual or visual-and-intellectual disabilities. A total of 37 dyads received only care-as-usual (CAU) and 40 received VIPP-V besides CAU. The parents receiving VIPP-V did not show increased parental sensitivity or parent-child interaction quality, however, their parenting self-efficacy increased. Moreover, the increase in parental self-efficacy predicted the increase in parent-child interaction. In conclusion, VIPP-V does not appear to directly improve the quality of contact between parent and child, but does contribute to the self-efficacy of parents to support and to comfort their child. Moreover, as parents experience their parenting as more positive, this may eventually lead to higher sensitive responsiveness and more positive parent-child interactions.

Interventions to improve functioning, participation, and quality of life in children with visual impairment: a systematic review

“…57,58,70,71 The 66 included studies were published between 1964 and 2018, and 37 (56.1%) of them were published in the last decade (2008e2018) 1e3, 13,15,16,19e21,27,28, 30,32,33,35,39,40,43,46,51,54,62,65,69e71,73e75,78,82,83,85,89,91,96,98,104,110,111,124 ( Table 1). Most of the studies were conducted in the United States, 7,11,12,26,35,44,47,55e58,61,65,66,70e72,78,84,91,93,95,121 1 in Canada, 8 11 in Europe (i.e., United Kingdom, 50,108,119 Germany, 6 the Netherlands, 13,27,51,83,89 and Greece 69,82 ), 28 in Asian countries (i.e., Iran, 54 Turkey, 1,15,16,30,104,110,111,123,124 India, 20,21,28,39,40,43,46,62,74,75,90,96 Jordan, 2 Pakistan, 85 Japan, 97 Taiwan, 19 and Thailand 3,98 ), a...…”

“…46,62,85,98 Group-based programs 32,33,55,65,66,73 and physical activity programs 30,70,95 were used as interventions in studies focusing on psychological outcomes. Studies investigating functioning and development had intensive (home-based) early intervention programs, 6,7,21,83 attention training, 15 creativity training, 2 prescription of low vision devices, 40,43 and admission to a care unit 119 as intervention condition. With respect to reading performance, interventions included (braille) reading training, 47,50,57,58 (training in) the use of optical aids, 26,35,110 and crowded training.…”

“…Two studies had BMI as outcome measure, 16,19 whereas 1 study reported age and height of the participants. 12 Two studies might have used the same instrument to measure parental stress, but Platje and coworkers refer to the instrument as Parenting Stress Index (with references), 83 whereas Behl and coworkers refer to the instrument as Parenting Stress Inventory (without reference) 7 so it is unclear if the same questionnaire was used. Three studies used the Sports Camp Evaluation Instrument, 70,71,84 but no information on validity of this instrument was provided.…”

“…For most studies, the risk of detection bias was rated as unclear because it was not reported whether outcome assessment was done by a blinded assessor. 3,16,19,21,32,33,50,54,56e58,62,66,69,72,98,111,121,124 Eight studies were rated as having low risk of bias on this aspect because the assessor was blinded 7,13,39,47,61,83,85 or outcomes were electronically obtained. 78 Furthermore, 1 study was rated as having high risk of bias because of using an unmasked assessor.…”

“…3,7,13,16,19,32,33,47,50,54,56e58,61,62,66,69,72,78,85,93, 98,111,121,124 The study of Ganapathi and colleagues was rated as having high risk of reporting bias because posttest measures were not performed for the control group, 39 whereas the studies of Platje and colleagues and Christy were rated as low risk of reporting bias because a protocol and/or trial registration was available. 21,79,83 Other sources of bias were often rated as unclear 13,19,21,32,33,39,47,50,54,56e58,62,66,72,93,98,111,121,124 because no information on baseline imbalances were provided, or it was unclear whether baseline imbalances were statistically significant. Seven studies were rated as having low risk of bias on this aspect because baseline differences between groups were not statistically significant or baseline differences were adjusted in the analyses.…”