Dataset Information

Brief Educational Workshops in Secondary Schools Trial (BESST): a cluster randomised controlled trial. Secondary analysis in those with elevated symptoms of depression.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Depression and anxiety are increasingly prevalent in adolescents. The Brief Educational Workshops in Secondary Schools Trial investigated the effectiveness of a brief self-referral stress workshop programme for sixth-form students aged 16-18 years old.

Objective

This study conducted a secondary analysis on the outcomes of participants with elevated depressive symptoms at baseline.

Methods

This is an England-wide, multicentre, cluster randomised controlled trial to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a brief cognitive-behavioural therapy workshop (DISCOVER) compared with treatment-as-usual (TAU) (1:1). The primary outcome was depression symptoms (Mood and Feelings Questionnaire (MFQ)) at 6-month follow-up, using the intention-to-treat (ITT) population and analysed with a multilevel linear regression estimating a between-group adjusted mean difference (aMD). Cost-effectiveness, taking a National Health Service (NHS) and personal social services perspective, was explored using quality-adjusted life years (QALYs).

Findings

Between 4 October 2021 and 10 November 2022, 900 adolescents at 57 schools were enrolled. 314 students were identified as having elevated symptoms of depression at baseline (>27 on MFQ). In this prespecified subgroup, the DISCOVER arm included 142 participants and TAU included 172. ITT analysis included 298 participants. Primary analysis at 6 months found aMD to be -3.88 (95% CI -6.48, -1.29; Cohen's d=-0.52; p=0.003), with a similar reduction at 3 months (aMD=-4.00; 95% CI -6.58, -1.42; Cohen's d=0.53; p=0.002), indicating a moderate, clinically meaningful effect in the DISCOVER arm. We found an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £5255 per QALY, with a probability of DISCOVER being cost-effective at between 89% and 95% compared with TAU.

Conclusions and clinical implications

DISCOVER is clinically effective and cost-effective in those with elevated depressive symptoms. This intervention could be used as an early school-based intervention by the NHS.

Trial registration number

ISRCTN90912799.

SUBMITTER: Lisk S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC11367360 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Brief Educational Workshops in Secondary Schools Trial (BESST): a cluster randomised controlled trial. Secondary analysis in those with elevated symptoms of depression.

Lisk Stephen S James Kirsty K Shearer James J Byford Sarah S Stallard Paul P Deighton Jessica J Saunders David D Yarrum Jynna J Fonagy Peter P Weaver Timothy T Sclare Irene I Day Crispin C Evans Claire C Carter Ben B Brown June J

BMJ mental health 20240829 1

<h4>Background</h4>Depression and anxiety are increasingly prevalent in adolescents. The Brief Educational Workshops in Secondary Schools Trial investigated the effectiveness of a brief self-referral stress workshop programme for sixth-form students aged 16-18 years old.<h4>Objective</h4>This study conducted a secondary analysis on the outcomes of participants with elevated depressive symptoms at baseline.<h4>Methods</h4>This is an England-wide, multicentre, cluster randomised controlled trial t ...[more]

PMID: 39209761

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesAssess feasibility, acceptability and costs of delivering a physically active lessons (PAL) training programme to secondary school teachers and explore preliminary effectiveness for reducing pupils' sedentary time.Design and settingSecondary schools in East England; one school participated in a pre-post feasibility study, two in a pilot cluster-randomised controlled trial. In the pilot trial, blinding to group assignment was not possible.ParticipantsAcross studies, 321 randomly selected students (51% male; mean age: 12.9 years), 78 teachers (35% male) and 2 assistant head teachers enrolled; 296 (92%) students, 69 (88%) teachers and 2 assistant head teachers completed the studies.InterventionPAL training was delivered to teachers over two after-school sessions. Teachers were made aware of how to integrate movement into lessons; strategies included students collecting data from the environment for class activities and completing activities posted on classroom walls, instead of sitting at desks.Primary and secondary outcomesQuantitative and qualitative data were collected to assess feasibility and acceptability of PAL training and delivery. Outcomes were assessed at baseline and ~8 weeks post-training; measures included accelerometer-assessed activity, self-reported well-being and observations of time-on-task. Process evaluation was conducted at follow-up.ResultsIn the feasibility study, teachers reported good acceptability of PAL training and mixed experiences of delivering PAL. In the pilot study, teachers' acceptability of training was lower and teachers identified aspects of the training in need of review, including the outdoor PAL training and learning challenge of PAL strategies. In both studies, students and assistant head teachers reported good acceptability of the intervention. Preliminary effectiveness for reducing students' sedentary time was not demonstrated in either study.ConclusionsNo evidence of preliminary effectiveness on the primary outcome and mixed reports of teachers' acceptability of PAL training suggest the need to review the training. The results do not support continuation of research with the current intervention.Trial registration numberISRCTN38409550.

Project description:BackgroundSnakebite is a global health problem that predominantly occurs in rural areas. In Sri Lanka, the majority of snakebite patients first present to smaller rural primary hospitals. Improving care delivered at rural hospitals has the potential to reduce morbidity and mortality from snakebites.ObjectiveIn this study, we evaluated whether an educational intervention would increase compliance with national snakebite treatment guidelines in primary hospitals.MethodsThe hospitals were randomized into educational intervention (n = 24) and control groups (n = 20). The intervention hospitals received a brief educational intervention based on Sri Lankan Medical Association (SLMA) guidelines on the management of snakebites. Control hospitals had free access to the guidelines but no additional promotion. Four outcomes were assessed: pre- and post-test knowledge at the completion of a one-day workshop of educational intervention (intervention group only); improvement in the quality of the patient's medical records; appropriateness of transfers to higher hospitals; and quality of overall management graded by a blinded expert. The data was collected over a period of 12 months.ResultsAll case notes of snakebite hospital admissions were reviewed. There were 1021 cases in the intervention group hospitals and 1165 cases in the control hospitals. Four hospitals in the intervention group and three hospitals in the control group did not have snakebite admissions and were excluded from the cluster analysis. The absolute quality of care was high in both groups. Post-test knowledge was improved (p < 0.0001) following the intervention group's educational workshop. There was no statistical difference between the two groups in terms of clinical data documentation in hospital notes (scores, p = 0.58) or transfer appropriateness (p = 0.68)-both of which were significantly different from the guidelines.ConclusionEducation of primary hospital staff improved the immediate knowledge gained but did not improve record-keeping or the appropriateness of inter-hospital patient transfer.Trial registrationThe study was registered with Sri Lanka Medical Associations' clinical trial registry. Reg. No SLCTR -2013-023. Registered: 30/07/2013.

Project description:BackgroundThe use of education alone as a technique to change behavior in interventions is usually insufficient, particularly in health interventions. Behavior change techniques have been shown to be effective in fostering positive changes in health behaviors such as diet and physical activity. The upskilling of health professionals can increase perceived capability and motivation toward eliciting change in clients' behaviors. However, to date, dietitians have received limited training in behavior change and have expressed a need for continuous professional development.ObjectiveThe study objectives are to (1) develop and evaluate the effectiveness and acceptability of two 2-hour behavior change workshops on changing dietitians behavior (ie, range of behavior change techniques used and frequency of use) across 3 time points; (2) determine if participation in these workshops will elicit changes in dietitians' perceived capability, opportunity, and motivation toward using behavior change techniques; and (3) determine the acceptability of the training and its application in practice by dietitians.MethodsWe will recruit registered dietitians (N=140) in Australia to participate in this randomized controlled trial. Participants will be randomly assigned to either the intervention or 3-month waitlist control condition and complete outcome measures at 3 time points: baseline, after the workshop, and follow-up at 3 months. Both groups will complete 2 workshops on behavior change that are guided by the COM-B (Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, and Behavior) Model and embedded with behavior change techniques. The primary outcome is changes in behavior, (ie, the range of behavior change techniques used and their frequency of use). Secondary outcomes include changes in perceived capability, opportunity, motivation, and preparedness as a health professional toward delivering behavior change techniques. The acceptability of the workshops will also be assessed after the workshop through the postworkshop survey and semistructured interviews. A series of 2-way repeated measures ANOVAs and regressions will be used. Qualitative data will be analyzed using thematic analysis.ResultsParticipant recruitment commenced in June 2023. The results of the study are expected to be published in November 2024. The results will allow us to assess comparisons between the intervention and waitlist control groups, as well as changes in perceived capability, opportunity, motivation, and preparedness over a 3-month period. It will also provide an understanding of the acceptability of the training as a form of continuous professional development for dietitians.ConclusionsIf found to be effective, the results of this 2-arm randomized controlled trial will guide future training and continuous professional development for health professionals in changing behavior in practice. Our findings will contribute to our understanding of the application of behavior change techniques in practice with clients and identify components of COM-B where dietitians may need future support.Trial registrationACTRN12623000525684; https://www.anzctr.org.au/ACTRN12623000525684.aspx.International registered report identifier (irrid)PRR1-10.2196/49723.

Project description:BackgroundChildren and adolescents spend a lot of time sitting at school. Implementing standing desks in the classroom is one potential strategy to reduce and break up sitting time. The first aim was to evaluate the effect of implementing standing desks in classrooms in primary and secondary schools on pupils' sitting-related behaviour and determinants. The second aim was to quantitatively and qualitatively evaluate the process of implementing the desks in the classroom.MethodsWe conducted a cluster-randomised controlled trial with a pre-, mid-, and post-test design including 10 intervention schools (5 primary, 5 secondary schools) and 9 control schools (5 primary, 4 secondary schools) across Flanders, Belgium. Three standing desks were placed in one class in each intervention school for 6 months. At pre-, mid- and post-test, all pupils (n = 311; 54.5% girls) completed a questionnaire whilst a subsample of three pupils per class wore an activPAL inclinometer for one school week. Focus groups with pupils and interviews with teachers were conducted at mid-test. Process evaluation questions were added to the mid- and post-test questionnaire for the intervention group. Qualitative data were analysed using NVivo 11. Multilevel regression analyses were conducted in MLwiN 2.31.ResultsFew significant intervention effects were observed, although activPAL data showed favourable intervention effects on primary school pupils' sitting and standing time and bouts. Focus groups and interviews showed a generally positive attitude towards using standing desks in both teachers and pupils, although some barriers and suggestions for future implementation were noted, for example regarding the amount of desks per classroom. Quantitative process evaluation data showed a low individual use of standing desks (between 57 and 83 min per week), which significantly decreased across the school year for primary school pupils only.ConclusionsAlthough pupils and teachers were generally positive about the desks, relatively few intervention effects were found. Future studies should consider how to optimise the use of standing desks in classrooms to impact on sitting time, by for example, determining the most feasible intervention design and by encouraging the continued use of standing desks throughout the school year. Moreover, additional intervention strategies (e.g. educational strategies) might be needed.Trial registrationNCT03163004 . ClinicalTrials.gov. Registered 22 May 2017 (retrospectively registered).

Project description:BackgroundBullying, aggression, and violence among children and young people are some of the most consequential public mental health problems. We tested the Learning Together intervention, which involved students in efforts to modify their school environment using restorative practice and by developing social and emotional skills.MethodsWe did a cluster randomised trial, with economic and process evaluations, of the Learning Together intervention compared with standard practice (controls) over 3 years in secondary schools in south-east England. Learning Together consisted of staff training in restorative practice; convening and facilitating a school action group; and a student social and emotional skills curriculum. Primary outcomes were self-reported experience of bullying victimisation (Gatehouse Bullying Scale; GBS) and perpetration of aggression (Edinburgh Study of Youth Transitions and Crime (ESYTC) school misbehaviour subscale) measured at 36 months. We analysed data using intention-to-treat longitudinal mixed-effects models. This trial was registered with the ISRCTN registry (10751359).FindingsWe included 40 schools (20 in each group); no schools withdrew. 6667 (93·6%) of 7121 students participated at baseline and 5960 (83·3%) of 7154 at 36 months. Mean GBS bullying score at 36 months was 0·34 (SE 0·02) in the control group versus 0·29 (SE 0·02) in the intervention group, with a significant adjusted mean difference (-0·03, 95% CI -0·06 to -0·001; adjusted effect size -0·08). Mean ESYTC score at 36 months was 4·33 (SE 0·20) in the control group versus 4·04 (0·21) in the intervention group, with no evidence of a difference between groups (adjusted difference -0·13, 95% CI -0·43 to 0·18; adjusted effect size -0·03). Costs were an additional £58 per pupil in intervention schools than in control schools.InterpretationLearning Together had small but significant effects on bullying, which could be important for public health, but no effect on aggression. Interventions to promote student health by modifying the whole-school environment are likely to be one of the most feasible and efficient ways of addressing closely related risk and health outcomes in children and young people.FundingNational Institute for Health Research, Educational Endowment Foundation.

Dataset Information

Brief Educational Workshops in Secondary Schools Trial (BESST): a cluster randomised controlled trial. Secondary analysis in those with elevated symptoms of depression.

Background

Objective

Methods

Findings

Conclusions and clinical implications

Trial registration number

Publications

Brief Educational Workshops in Secondary Schools Trial (BESST): a cluster randomised controlled trial. Secondary analysis in those with elevated symptoms of depression.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets