|
Guide
to Effective Programs
for Children and Youth |
Penn Prevention Program (PPP)
OVERVIEW
The Penn Prevention Program (PPP) is a school-based depression prevention program facilitated by school psychologists or nurses. Program session included lessons on topics including: feelings and thoughts, dealing with family conflict, assertion and negotiation, coping skills, social skills training, decisions making, and problem-solving. Schools were randomly assigned. The results of the evaluation show that there were no significant differences between the intervention and control groups at post-intervention or follow-up for symptoms of depression or optimism. Results post evaluation showed that children in the intervention group reported less anxiety and parents in the intervention group were less likely to report internalizing problems and externalizing problems. The impacts for anxiety still existed at follow-up. The impact of the intervention was strongest directly after the program.
The Penn Prevention program is aimed at reducing depressive and anxious symptoms. The program consists of 12 sessions led by a facilitator who has 40 hours of training from the PPP, and a co-facilitator who has 30 hours of training. Program facilitators and co-facilitators are often school psychologists or nurses with bachelor’s degrees in behavioral science. Scripted manuals are used to lead the sessions. Session topics include:
Approach: The thirteen students in each class who scored highest on the Child Depression Inventory were selected and schools were randomly assigned to the treatment or control group. There were 90 children (46 girls) in the intervention group and 99 children (48 girls) in the control group.
In the nine primary schools randomly assigned to receive the program, the children receiving the intervention attended program sessions during school. The students in the nine control schools attended their usual health education classes.
Several measures were used in the evaluation. The Child Depression Inventory (CDI) was used to measure depressive symptoms. Higher scores mean the symptoms were more severe, and a cutoff score of 15 was used in this study to indicate moderate to severe levels of depressive symptoms. The Revised Children’s Manifest Anxiety Scale (RCMAS) was used to measure anxiety. Higher scores for this test also mean more severe symptoms, and a cutoff score of 16 was used to delineate between moderate to severe levels of anxiety. The Children’s Attributional Style Questionnaire (CASQ) assesses explanatory style for positive and negative events. The Matson Evaluation of Social Skills with Youngsters (MESSY) measures social skills and the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) measures levels of internalizing problems such as social withdrawal. A higher score on the checklist points toward more problems.
Results: The results of the study show that there were no significant differences in depressive symptoms between the intervention and control groups at post-intervention or 6-month follow-up. The mean depression scores on the CDI went down for both groups over time. Intervention group children reported fewer symptoms of anxiety than control group children. At post-intervention, the intervention group had a mean score of 7.38 on the RCMAS and the control group had a score of 8.79. At the 6-month follow-up, the intervention group had a mean score of 6.02 and the control group had a score of 7.59. The difference was significant. The evaluators also formed subgroups of children based on their pre-intervention scores and the clinical cutoffs for depression and anxiety. No significant differences were found for the high depression group or the low anxiety group between the intervention and control groups. Significant differences were observed for the low-depression group on depression (intervention=4.80, control=5.88) and anxiety (intervention=5.08, control=6.37) at post-intervention, but not at follow-up. The high anxiety intervention group had significantly lower anxiety scores than the control group (intervention=13.19 control=17.06) at post-intervention, but not at follow-up.
Significant impacts at post-intervention, but not at follow-up, were found for internalizing and externalizing problems. At post-intervention, the intervention group had a mean score of 5.57 for internalizing problems while the control group had a score of 6.03. For externalizing behavior at post-intervention, the intervention group had a score of 7.19 while the while the control group had a score of 7.74. No significant impacts were found for negative explanatory style, because both groups became more positive. There was a significant effect for explaining positive events at post-intervention, with the intervention group reporting more optimistic explanations for positive events than the control group (intervention=15.37 control=13.99). No significant differences between groups were found for appropriate social skills or inappropriate assertiveness.
Kane, R., Thomson, T., Roberts, Clare., Bishop, Brian. (2003). The prevention of depressive symptoms in rural school children: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 71(3). 622-628.
Program categorized in this guide according to the following:
Evaluated participant ages: 11-13 years old
Program age ranges in the Guide: 6-11, 12-14
Program components: counseling/therapy; school-based
Measured outcomes: social/emotional; mental health
Program information last updated 08/11/04.
|
|
© Child Trends 2004 |