Effectiveness of the Educational Technology "Sophia's Story" in Transitional Care and Stimulation of Preterm Infants.
Jamile Gregorio Morelo, Pamela Brustolini Oliveira Rena, Rayla Amaral Lemos and 2 others
PMID 40862450WHAT IT FOUND
Families given the educational book 'Sophia's Story' at discharge provided more home stimulation for preterm infants than those who were not, scoring higher on environmental assessment.
This was a non-randomized trial, so the result is suggestive, not proven.
Key findings
01The experimental group had significantly higher total scores on the Infant-Toddler Home Environment (IT-HOME) instrument compared to the control group.
02Groups were not randomized; the control group consisted of families whose babies had already been discharged, while the experimental group included families whose babies were hospitalized after May 2018.
03Infants in the control group were significantly older (mean corrected age 3.2 months) than those in the experimental group (1.26 months) at the time of assessment.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study was non-randomized, with groups formed based on discharge date, which introduces selection bias. There was no blinding of researchers or participants, which may have influenced outcomes. The control group infants were significantly older than the experimental group infants at the time of assessment, which confounds the comparison. The sample size was smaller than planned (62 infants vs 80 planned). The study measured home environment scores, not direct infant developmental outcomes.
Declared interests
The study was funded by CAPES and FAPESP. The copies of the educational technology were supported by FAPESP. No commercial conflicts of interest were declared.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume the educational book caused the improvement. The groups were not randomized, and the control group infants were older than the experimental group infants. The age difference could have favored the control group, yet the experimental group scored higher, but without randomization, other unmeasured differences between the families in the two time periods could explain the result.