Dataset Information

Codesign and development of a primary school based pathway for child anxiety screening and intervention delivery: a protocol, mixed-methods feasibility study.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Anxiety difficulties are among the most common mental health problems in childhood. Despite this, few children access evidence-based interventions, and school may be an ideal setting to improve children's access to treatment. This article describes the design, methods and expected data collection of the Identifying Child Anxiety Through Schools - Identification to Intervention (iCATS i2i) study, which aims to develop acceptable school-based procedures to identify and support child anxiety difficulties. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: iCATS i2i will use a mixed-methods approach to codesign and deliver a set of procedures-or 'pathway'-to improve access to evidence-based intervention for child anxiety difficulties through primary schools in England. The study will consist of four stages, initially involving in-depth interviews with parents, children, school staff and stakeholders (stage 1) to inform the development of the pathway. The pathway will then be administered in two primary schools, including screening, feedback to parents and the offer of treatment where indicated (stage 2), with participating children, parents and school staff invited to provide feedback on their experience (stages 3 and 4). Data will be analysed using Template Analysis.

Ethics and dissemination

The iCATS i2i study was approved by the University of Oxford's Research Ethics Committee (REF R64620/RE001). It is expected that this codesign study will lead on to a future feasibility study and, if indicated, a randomised controlled trial. The findings will be disseminated in several ways, including via lay summary report, publication in academic journals and presentation at conferences. By providing information on child, parent, school staff and other stakeholder's experiences, we anticipate that the findings will inform the development of an acceptable evidence-based pathway for identification and intervention for children with anxiety difficulties in primary schools and may also inform broader approaches to screening for and treating youth mental health problems outside of clinics.

SUBMITTER: Williamson V

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8061838 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSystematically screening for child anxiety problems, and offering and delivering a brief, evidence-based intervention for children who are identified as likely to benefit would minimise common barriers that families experience in accessing treatment. We have developed a short parent-report child anxiety screening questionnaire, and procedures for administering screening questionnaires, sharing screening outcomes with families, and offering and delivering a brief parent-led online intervention (OSI: Online Support and Intervention for child anxiety) through schools. This trial aims to evaluate clinical and health economic outcomes for (1) children (aged 8-9) who screen positive for anxiety problems at baseline (target population) and (2) the wider population of all children in participating classes (total population) in schools randomly allocated to receive identification-to-intervention procedures and usual school practice ('screening and intervention'), compared to assessment and usual school practice only ('usual school practice'). METHODS: The trial design is a parallel-group, superiority cluster randomised controlled trial, with schools (clusters) randomised to 'screening and intervention' or 'usual school practice' arms in a 1:1 ratio stratified according to the level of deprivation within the school. We will recruit schools and participants in two phases (a pilot phase (Phase 1) and Phase 2), with progression criteria assessed prior to progressing to Phase 2. In total, the trial will recruit 80 primary/junior schools in England, and 398 children (199 per arm) who screen positive for anxiety problems at baseline (target population). In schools allocated to 'screening and intervention': (1) parents/carers will complete a brief parent-report child anxiety screening questionnaire (at baseline) and receive feedback on their child's screening outcomes (after randomisation), (2) classes will receive a lesson on managing fears and worries and staff will be provided with information about the intervention and (3) parents/carers of children who screen positive for anxiety problems (target population) will be offered OSI. OSI will also be available for any other parents/carers of children in participating classes (total population) who request it. We will collect child-, parent- and teacher-report measures for the target population and total population at baseline (before randomisation), 4 months, 12 months and 24 months post-randomisation. The primary outcome will be the proportion of children who screen positive for anxiety problems at baseline (target population) who screen negative for anxiety problems 12 months post-randomisation.DiscussionThis trial will establish if systematic screening for child anxiety problems, sharing screening outcomes with families and delivering a brief parent-led online intervention through schools is effective and cost-effective.Trial registrationISRCTN registry ISRCTN76119074. Prospectively registered on 4.1.2022.

Project description:BackgroundTreatment and prevention guidelines highlight the key role of health information and evidence-based psychosocial interventions for adolescent depression. Digital health technologies and psychoeducational interventions have been recommended to help engage young people and to provide accurate health information, enhance self-management skills, and promote social support. However, few digital psychoeducational interventions for adolescent depression have been robustly developed and evaluated in line with research guidance.ObjectiveWe aimed to evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and potential impact of a theory-informed, co-designed digital intervention program, MoodHwb.MethodsWe used a mixed methods (quantitative and qualitative) approach to evaluate the program and the assessment process. Adolescents with or at elevated risk of depression and their parents and carers were recruited from mental health services, school counselors and nurses, and participants from a previous study. They completed a range of questionnaires before and after the program (related to the feasibility and acceptability of the program and evaluation process, and changes in mood, knowledge, attitudes, and behavior), and their Web usage was monitored. A subsample was also interviewed. A focus group was conducted with professionals from health, education, social, and youth services and charities. Interview and focus group transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis with NVivo 10 (QSR International Pty Ltd).ResultsA total of 44 young people and 31 parents or carers were recruited, of which 36 (82%) young people and 21 (68%) parents or carers completed follow-up questionnaires. In all, 19 young people and 12 parents or carers were interviewed. Overall, 13 professionals from a range of disciplines participated in the focus group. The key themes from the interviews and groups related to the design features, sections and content, and integration and context of the program in the young person's life. Overall, the participants found the intervention engaging, clear, user-friendly, and comprehensive, and stated that it could be integrated into existing services. Young people found the "Self help" section and "Mood monitor" particularly helpful. The findings provided initial support for the intervention program theory, for example, depression literacy improved after using the intervention (difference in mean literacy score: 1.7, 95% CI 0.8 to 2.6; P<.001 for young people; 1.3, 95% CI 0.4 to 2.2; P=.006 for parents and carers).ConclusionsFindings from this early stage evaluation suggest that MoodHwb and the assessment process were feasible and acceptable, and that the intervention has the potential to be helpful for young people, families and carers as an early intervention program in health, education, social, and youth services and charities. A randomized controlled trial is needed to further evaluate the digital program.

Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the feasibility of using a blood pressure (BP) self-measurement kiosk-a solid-cuff sphygmomanometer combined with technology to integrate the BP readings into patient electronic medical records- to improve hypertension detection.DesignA concurrent mixed-methods feasibility study incorporating observational and qualitative interview components.SettingTwo English general practitioner (GP) surgeries.ParticipantsAdult patients registered at participating surgeries. Staff working at these sites.InterventionsBP self-measurement kiosks were placed in the waiting rooms for a 12-month period between 2015 and 2016 and compared with a 12-month control period prior to installation.Outcome measures(1) The number of patients using the kiosk and agreeing to transfer of their data into their electronic medical records; (2) the cost of using a kiosk compared with GP/practice nurse BP screening; (3) qualitative themes regarding use of the equipment.ResultsOut of 15?624 eligible patients, only 186 (1.2%, 95% CI 1.0% to 1.4%) successfully used the kiosk to directly transfer a BP reading into their medical record. For a considerable portion of the intervention period, no readings were transferred, possibly indicating technical problems with the transfer link. A comparison of costs suggests that at least 52.6% of eligible patients would need to self-screen in order to bring costs below that of screening by GPs and practice nurses. Qualitative interviews confirmed that both patients and staff experienced technical difficulties, and used alternative methods to enter BP results into the medical record.ConclusionsWhile interviewees were generally positive about checking BP in the waiting room, the electronic transfer system as tested was neither robust, effective nor likely to be a cost-effective approach, thus may not be appropriate for a primary care environment. Since most of the cost of a kiosk system lies in the transfer mechanism, a solid-cuff sphygmomanometer and manual entry of results may be a suitable alternative.

Project description:IntroductionCodesign is an emerging research method to enhance intervention development by actively engaging non-researchers (eg, people who have had a stroke, caregivers and clinicians) in research. The involvement of non-researchers in research is becoming increasingly popular within health studies as it may produce more relevant and effective findings. The stroke population commonly exhibits challenges such as aphasia and cognitive changes that may limit their participation in codesign. However, the use of codesign within the stroke literature has not been comprehensively reviewed. This scoping review will determine: (1) what is the extent, range and nature of stroke research that has used codesign methods? (2) What codesign methods have been used to develop stroke interventions? (3) What considerations for codesigning interventions with people who have stroke are not captured in the findings?Methods and analysisThis is a protocol for a scoping review to identify the literature relating to stroke, and codesign will be conducted on OVID Medline, OVID Embase, OVID PsychINFO, EBSCO CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, Scopus, PEDro-Physiotherapy Evidence Database and Global Index Medicus. Studies of any design and publication date will be included. Title and abstract and full-text review will be conducted independently by two reviewers. Data will be extracted, collated and then summarised descriptively using quantitative (eg, numerical descriptions) and qualitative (eg, textual descriptions) methods. Numerical summaries will map the extent (eg, number of studies), range (eg, types of studies) and nature (eg, types of interventions developed) of the literature on this topic. A thematic analysis will provide insights into the codesign methods (eg, activities, non-researchers), including heterogeneity across and within studies.Ethics and disseminationThis review protocol does not require ethics approval as data has not been collected/analysed. The findings will highlight opportunities and recommendations to inform future codesign research in stroke and other populations who exhibit similar challenges/disabilities, and they will be disseminated via publications, presentations and stakeholder meetings.Trial registration numberregistrationOpen Science Framework: 10.17605/OSF.IO/NSD2W.

Dataset Information

Codesign and development of a primary school based pathway for child anxiety screening and intervention delivery: a protocol, mixed-methods feasibility study.

Introduction

Ethics and dissemination

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets