Maternal Infant Health Outreach Worker (MIHOW)^®

Last updated: 2018

Effects shown in research & outcome measure details

Maternal health

Findings rated high

Lutenbacher, M., Dietrich, M. S., & Elkins, T. (2016). Evaluation of the Maternal Infant Health Outreach Worker (MIHOW) model in a sample of Hispanic women: A collaborative project between Catholic Charities and Vanderbilt University School of Nursing. Report submitted to the Home Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness (HomVEE) Review.

Maternal Infant Health Outreach Worker (MIHOW)^®

Show findings details

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up timing	Sample	Sample size	Intervention group	Comparison group	Group difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Notes
Always receive social and emotional help needed	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	2 months postpartum	Davidson County, Tennessee, MIHOW vs. Educational Materials		Unadjusted proportion = 0.89	Unadjusted proportion = 0.67	Mean difference = 0.22	HomeVEE calculated = 0.82	Statistically significant, p = 0.00	footnote388 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Proportions indicate the percentages of women who selected this response to a closed-ended question on frequency of social and emotional support that included seven possible responses. Authors analyzed all seven responses collectively using a mixed effect linear model; we report a <abbr title="Home Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness">HomVEE</abbr>-calculated effect size and p-value associated with the individual response.
Always receive social and emotional help needed	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	2 weeks postpartum	Davidson County, Tennessee, MIHOW vs. Educational Materials		Unadjusted proportion = 0.97	Unadjusted proportion = 0.67	Mean difference = 0.29	HomeVEE calculated = 1.60	Statistically significant, p = 0.00	footnote388 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Proportions indicate the percentages of women who selected this response to a closed-ended question on frequency of social and emotional support that included seven possible responses. Authors analyzed all seven responses collectively using a mixed effect linear model; we report a <abbr title="Home Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness">HomVEE</abbr>-calculated effect size and p-value associated with the individual response.
Always receive social and emotional help needed	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 months postpartum	Davidson County, Tennessee, MIHOW vs. Educational Materials		Unadjusted proportion = 0.96	Unadjusted proportion = 0.43	Mean difference = 0.53	HomeVEE calculated = 2.04	Statistically significant, p = 0.00	footnote388 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Proportions indicate the percentages of women who selected this response to a closed-ended question on frequency of social and emotional support that included seven possible responses. Authors analyzed all seven responses collectively using a mixed effect linear model; we report a <abbr title="Home Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness">HomVEE</abbr>-calculated effect size and p-value associated with the individual response.
Average number of prenatal visits during pregnancy	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	Not reported	Davidson County, Tennessee, MIHOW vs. Educational Materials		Unadjusted mean = 9.00	Unadjusted mean = 9.20	Mean difference = -0.20	HomeVEE calculated = -0.09	Not statistically significant, p = 0.48	footnote386 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance is based on the authors’ analysis using an independent t-test.
Median Edinburgh Postpartum Depression Scale (EPDS)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	2 months postpartum	Davidson County, Tennessee, MIHOW vs. Educational Materials		Unadjusted median = 0.00	Unadjusted median = 3.00	Median difference = -3.00	Not available	Not reported	footnote387 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance is based on the authors’ analysis using a mixed effect linear model. Negative effect is favorable to the intervention.
Median Edinburgh Postpartum Depression Scale (EPDS)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	2 weeks postpartum	Davidson County, Tennessee, MIHOW vs. Educational Materials		Unadjusted median = 0.00	Unadjusted median = 5.00	Median difference = -5.00	Not available	Not reported	footnote387 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance is based on the authors’ analysis using a mixed effect linear model. Negative effect is favorable to the intervention.
Median Edinburgh Postpartum Depression Scale (EPDS)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 months postpartum	Davidson County, Tennessee, MIHOW vs. Educational Materials		Unadjusted median = 0.00	Unadjusted median = 0.00	Median difference = 0.00	Not available	Not reported	footnote387 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance is based on the authors’ analysis using a mixed effect linear model. Negative effect is favorable to the intervention.
Median Parenting Stress Index (PSI) total stress score	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	2 months postpartum	Davidson County, Tennessee, MIHOW vs. Educational Materials		Unadjusted median = 74.00	Unadjusted median = 76.00	Median difference = -2.00	Not available	Statistically significant, p = 0.00	footnote387 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance is based on the authors’ analysis using a mixed effect linear model. Negative effect is favorable to the intervention.
Median Parenting Stress Index (PSI) total stress score	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	2 weeks postpartum	Davidson County, Tennessee, MIHOW vs. Educational Materials		Unadjusted median = 74.00	Unadjusted median = 76.00	Median difference = -2.00	Not available	Statistically significant, p = 0.00	footnote387 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance is based on the authors’ analysis using a mixed effect linear model. Negative effect is favorable to the intervention.
Median Parenting Stress Index (PSI) total stress score	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 months postpartum	Davidson County, Tennessee, MIHOW vs. Educational Materials		Unadjusted median = 74.00	Unadjusted median = 77.00	Median difference = -3.00	Not available	Statistically significant, p = <0.001	footnote387 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance is based on the authors’ analysis using a mixed effect linear model. Negative effect is favorable to the intervention.
Never receive social and emotional help needed	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	2 months postpartum	Davidson County, Tennessee, MIHOW vs. Educational Materials		Unadjusted proportion = 0.01	Unadjusted proportion = 0.00	Mean difference = 0.01	HomeVEE calculated = 5.62	Statistically significant, p = 0.00	footnote389 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Proportions indicate the percentages of women who selected this response to a closed-ended question on frequency of social and emotional support that included seven possible responses. Authors analyzed all seven responses collectively using a mixed effect linear model; we report a <abbr title="Home Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness">HomVEE</abbr>-calculated effect size and p-value associated with the individual response. Negative effect size is favorable to the intervention.
Never receive social and emotional help needed	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	2 weeks postpartum	Davidson County, Tennessee, MIHOW vs. Educational Materials		Unadjusted proportion = 0.00	Unadjusted proportion = 0.00	Mean difference = 0.00	HomeVEE calculated = 0.00	Not statistically significant, p = 1.00	footnote389 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Proportions indicate the percentages of women who selected this response to a closed-ended question on frequency of social and emotional support that included seven possible responses. Authors analyzed all seven responses collectively using a mixed effect linear model; we report a <abbr title="Home Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness">HomVEE</abbr>-calculated effect size and p-value associated with the individual response. Negative effect size is favorable to the intervention.
Never receive social and emotional help needed	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	6 months postpartum	Davidson County, Tennessee, MIHOW vs. Educational Materials		Unadjusted proportion = 0.00	Unadjusted proportion = 0.00	Mean difference = 0.00	HomeVEE calculated = 0.00	Not statistically significant, p = 1.00	footnote389 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Proportions indicate the percentages of women who selected this response to a closed-ended question on frequency of social and emotional support that included seven possible responses. Authors analyzed all seven responses collectively using a mixed effect linear model; we report a <abbr title="Home Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness">HomVEE</abbr>-calculated effect size and p-value associated with the individual response. Negative effect size is favorable to the intervention.

Show outcome measure summary

Outcome measure	Outcome measure description	Collection method	Properties	Operations links
Always receive social and emotional help needed	Mothers were asked how often they received the social and emotional support needed, with response options being Always, Usually, Sometimes, Rarely, Never, Don't Know, or to refuse to respond.	Mother report	Not reported by author
Average number of prenatal visits during pregnancy	Question developed for the MIHOW Program	Mother report	Not reported by author
Median Parenting Stress Index (PSI) total stress score	The PSI measures parental distress, parent-child dysfunction interaction, and difficult child.	Mother report	Cronbach's alpha of 0.88-0.89
Median score on the Edinburgh Postpartum Depression Scale (EPDS)	The EPDS measures depressive symptoms using a 10-question structured interview guide.	Mother report	Cronbach's alpha of 0.87-0.88
Never receive social and emotional help needed	Mothers were asked how often they received the social and emotional support needed, with response options being Always, Usually, Sometimes, Rarely, Never, Don't Know, or to refuse to respond.	Mother report	Not reported by author

Findings rated moderate

Lutenbacher, M., Dietrich, M. S., & Elkins, T. (2016). Evaluation of the Maternal Infant Health Outreach Worker (MIHOW) model in a sample of Hispanic women: A collaborative project between Catholic Charities and Vanderbilt University School of Nursing. Report submitted to the Home Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness (HomVEE) Review.

Maternal Infant Health Outreach Worker (MIHOW)^®

Show findings details

Outcome measure	Effect	Follow-up timing	Sample	Sample size	Intervention group	Comparison group	Group difference	Effect size	Statistical significance	Notes
Median score on the Edinburgh Postpartum Depression Scale (EPDS)	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	Prenatal, at 35 weeks	Davidson County, Tennessee, MIHOW vs. Educational Materials		Unadjusted median = 0.00	Unadjusted median = 4.00	Median difference = -4.00	Not available	Not reported	footnote387 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance is based on the authors’ analysis using a mixed effect linear model. Negative effect is favorable to the intervention.
Percentage reporting having received prenatal care	FavorableUnfavorable or ambiguousNo Effect	Not reported	Davidson County, Tennessee, MIHOW vs. Educational Materials		Unadjusted mean = 0.99	Unadjusted mean = 0.99	Mean difference = 0.00	HomeVEE calculated = 0.05	Not statistically significant, p = 0.96	footnote390 Submitted by user on Fri, 03/15/2019 - 14:29 Statistical significance is based on the authors’ analysis using a chi-square test of independence.

Show outcome measure summary

Outcome measure	Outcome measure description	Collection method	Properties	Operations links
Median score on the Edinburgh Postpartum Depression Scale (EPDS)	The EPDS measures depressive symptoms using a 10-question structured interview guide.	Mother report	Cronbach’s alpha of 0.87-0.88
Percentage reporting having received prenatal care	Question from the Perinatal Risk Assessment Monitory System Survey	Mother report	Not reported by author

View Revisions