Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Bounce Back: randomised trial of a brief, school-based group intervention for children with emergent mental health difficulties

  • Brief Report
  • Published:
European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We report the findings of the first randomised trial of Bounce Back, a brief, school-based group intervention for children with emergent mental health difficulties, whose aim is to improve their understanding of resilience and well-being, support them to build their confidence and friendships, and provide practical skills to make positive behaviour changes. 24 primary schools (N = 326 children) were randomly allocated to deliver the intervention or continue practice as usual in a waitlist design. Children in the intervention arm of the trial worked in groups of up to 15, supported by a trained youth practitioner, over ten weekly sessions that were delivered during the school day for up to an hour. Measures of emotional symptoms, behavioural difficulties, problem-solving, and self-esteem were recorded at baseline and post-intervention follow-up. Routinely collected session attendance data were used as a proxy for intervention compliance. Intent to treat analyses revealed that Bounce Back produced significant reductions in emotional symptoms (d = − 0.21). Furthermore, complier average causal effect analyses established that intervention compliance modified this treatment effect, such that children who attended more sessions accrued greater reductions in symptoms (moderate compliance d = − 0.54; high compliance d = − 0.61). There were no intervention effects for any of the other outcomes. Collectively, these findings provide robust preliminary evidence of the efficacy of Bounce Back.

Trial registration: ISRCTN11162672

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Data availability

Available on request from Elizabeth.Ville@newham.gov.uk.

Code availability

Available on request from the authors.

Notes

  1. Only schools that were participating in the HeadStart programme in Newham were eligible to join the trial because the Bounce Back intervention is funded through the said programme.

  2. Participating schools were each assigned a random seven-digit number created using a random number generator in Microsoft Excel. They were subsequently ordered by the randomly generated numbers from low to high. The first 12 schools in the list were allocated to the intervention arm, and the remaining 12 to the control arm.

References

  1. NatCen Social Research and the National Children’s Bureau Research and Policy Team (2017) Supporting mental health in schools and colleges. Department for Education, London

    Google Scholar 

  2. Cheney G, Schlösser A, Nash P, Glover L (2014) Targeted group-based interventions in schools to promote emotional well-Being: A systematic review. Clin Child Psychol Psychiatry 19:412–438

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Liddle I, Macmillan S (2010) Evaluating the FRIENDS programme in a Scottish setting. Educ Psychol Pract 26:53–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Werner-Seidler A, Perry Y, Calear AL, Newby JM, Christensen H (2017) School-based depression and anxiety prevention programs for young people: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Psychol Rev 51:30–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Durlak J (2015) Studying Program implementation is not easy but it is essential. Prev Sci 16:1123–1127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Peugh JL, Strotman D, McGrady M, Rausch J, Kashikar-Zuck S (2017) Beyond intent to treat (ITT): a complier average causal effect (CACE) estimation primer. J Sch Psychol 60:7–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Panayiotou M, Humphrey N, Hennessey A (2019) Implementation matters: using complier average causal effect estimation to determine the impact of the PATHS curriculum on children’s quality of life. J Educ Psychol 112:236–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hart A, Blincow D, Thomas H (2007) Resilient therapy—working with children and families. Brunner Routledge, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  9. Newham HeadStart (2018) Bounce Back Newham Practitioner Guidance. HeadStart Newham, London

    Google Scholar 

  10. Humphrey N, Wigelsworth M (2016) Making the case for universal school-based mental health screening. Emot Behav Difficulties 21:22–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Troncoso P. Minimum detectable effect size calculator. 2020. Available from: https://patricio-troncoso.shinyapps.io/mdesapp/. Accessed 7 Mar 2019

  12. Deighton J, Humphrey N, Belsky J, Boehnke J, Vostanis P, Patalay P (2018) Longitudinal pathways between mental health difficulties and academic performance during middle childhood and early adolescence. Br J Dev Psychol 36:110–126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Deighton J, Tymms P, Vostanis P, Belsky J, Fonagy P, Brown A et al (2013) The development of a school-based measure of child mental health. J Psychoeduc Assess 21:247–257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Sun J, Stewart D (2007) Development of population-based resilience measures in the primary school setting. Health Educ 107:575–579

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Berg JK, Bradshaw CP, Jo B, Ialongo NS (2017) Using complier average causal effect estimation to determine the impacts of the Good Behavior Game preventive intervention on teacher implementers. Adm Policy Ment Heal Ment Heal Serv Res 44:558–571

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Durlak J (2009) How to select, calculate, and interpret effect sizes. J Pediatr Psychol 34:917–928

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The data used in this study were collected as part of the HeadStart learning program. The authors are therefore grateful for the work of the wider research teams at the Anna Freud Centre and the University of Manchester for their role in coordinating the evaluation, as well as collecting and managing the data. The authors also acknowledge the National Pupil Database from which demographic data were obtained. We are extremely grateful to all students who took part in this study, as well as the schools for their help in recruiting them. Finally, we would like to thank Valdeep Gill, Elizabeth Ville and the Newham HeadStart team for providing us with the data for this evaluation.

Funding

The data used in this study were collected as part of the HeadStart learning program and supported by funding from the National Lottery Community Fund, grant R118420. The funders did not seek to influence any aspect of the secondary analysis reported in this study. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not reflect the views of the National Lottery Community Fund. This research was supported by a grant from the National Lottery Community Fund, using data from the HeadStart Evaluation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Neil Humphrey.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Ethics approval

The study was approved by the University College London ethics committee (reference 6299/004) and performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Humphrey, N., Panayiotou, M. Bounce Back: randomised trial of a brief, school-based group intervention for children with emergent mental health difficulties. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry 31, 205–210 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-020-01612-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-020-01612-6

Keywords

Navigation