Abstract
Background
The needs of children in care are a government priority, yet the evidence base for effective interventions to support the emotional wellbeing of children in care is lacking. Research suggests that supporting the carer-child relationship, by promoting the carer’s reflective parenting, may be an effective approach to improving the wellbeing of these children.
Methods
The study comprises a definitive, superiority, two-armed, parallel, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial, with embedded process evaluation and economic evaluation, and an internal pilot, to evaluate the effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness, of the Reflective Fostering Programme. Randomisation is at the individual level using a 1:1 allocation ratio. The study is being conducted in local authority sites across England, and is targeted at foster carers (including kinship carers) looking after children aged 4 to 13. Consenting participants are randomly allocated to the Reflective Fostering Programme (intervention arm) in addition to usual support or usual support alone (control arm). The primary outcome is behavioural and emotional wellbeing of the child 12 months post-baseline, and secondary outcomes include the following: foster carer’s level of stress, quality of life, reflective capacity, compassion fatigue and burnout, placement stability, the quality of the child-carer relationship, child’s capacity for emotional regulation, and achievement of personalised goals set by the carer.
Discussion
A feasibility study has indicated effectiveness of the Programme in improving the child-carer relationship and emotional and behavioural wellbeing of children in care. This study will test the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of implementing the Reflective Fostering Programme as an additional aid to the support already available to local authority foster carers.
Trial registration
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
; Irvine, Karen 2 ; Rider, Beth 2 ; Byford, Sarah 3 ; Cirasola, Antonella 4 ; Ganguli, Poushali 3 ; Katangwe-Chigamba, Thando 5 ; Murdoch, Jamie 5 ; Pond, Martin 5 ; Pursch, Benita 4 ; Redfern, Sheila 4 ; Richards, Zena Louise 1 ; Shepstone, Lee 5 ; Sims, Erika 5 ; Smith, Caroline 6 ; Sprecher, Eva 4 ; Swart, Ann Marie 5 ; Wyatt, Solange 2 ; Wellsted, David 2 1 zUniversity College London, Research Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, London, UK (GRID:grid.83440.3b) (ISNI:0000000121901201)
2 University of Hertfordshire, Centre for Health Services and Clinical Research, Hatfield, UK (GRID:grid.5846.f) (ISNI:0000 0001 2161 9644)
3 Kings College London, London, UK (GRID:grid.13097.3c) (ISNI:0000 0001 2322 6764)
4 Anna Freud National Centre for Children and Families, London, UK (GRID:grid.466510.0) (ISNI:0000 0004 0423 5990)
5 Norwich Clinical Trials Unit, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK (GRID:grid.8273.e) (ISNI:0000 0001 1092 7967)
6 Kent County Council, Maidstone, UK (GRID:grid.450926.c) (ISNI:0000 0001 1261 1544)




