Search

Many young people with mental disorders are not identified until some years after the first onset of symptoms and then frequently do not receive professional intervention. One promising strategy to better identify these young people is mental health screening in schools. Despite a growing literature on the benefits of school-based screening, it remains a relatively uncommon practice and little is known about the practices of those schools that do screen. Moreover, the barriers that prevent schools from screening are not well understood. This study reports on the perceptions of school psychologists about universal mental health screening in schools regarding the prevalence of screening; the practices within schools that do screen; and the perceived barriers to implementing screening. Results indicated that screening remains uncommon, with only 14.8% of school psychologists working in schools that screened in the previous 12 months. The most significant barriers to screening related to being adequately resourced to implement programs, and particularly concerns about how to follow-up students identified as being at-risk. Despite this, school psychologists endorse the potential benefit of screening and report being likely to run screening programs if perceived barriers could be reduced.

The objectives of this study are to assess the association between childhood bullying and preference-based health-related quality of life (QoL) in Australian school children and their parents and estimate quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) associated with bullying chronicity. Children aged 8–10 years completed the child health utilities (CHU-9D), while parents completed the Australian quality of life (AQoL-8D). Children were grouped into four categories of bullying involvement (no bullying, victim, perpetrator, or both perpetrator and victim) based on the Revised Olweus Bully/Victim Questionnaire. Parental data were compared across two bullying involvement groups (bullying vs. no bullying). QALYs were calculated for children over two years and comparisons made based on the number of assessments where bullying was reported (baseline, 1- and 2-year follow up). Children who were involved in bullying (victims and/or perpetrators) reported statistically significantly lower mean utility scores compared to children who were not involved in bullying. Parents whose child was involved in bullying had significantly lower mean utility scores compared to parents of children not involved with bullying. There appeared to be a dose–response relationship, with higher QALY losses associated with increasing frequency of reported bullying. Bullying among Australian school children was associated with significantly lower preference-based QoL for themselves and their parents. This study also confirmed the significant burden of disease for bullying among children measured by an incremental decrease in QALY with an increasing chronicity of bullying over time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Public health advocates have highlighted internalising problems as a leading cause of global burden of disease. Internalising problems (anxiety/depression) affect up to 20% of school‐age children and can impact peer relations, school engagement and later employment and mortality. This translational trial aimed to determine whether a selective/indicated parenting group programme to prevent internalising distress in shy/inhibited preschool children had sustained effects in middle childhood. Translational design aspects were a brief parent‐report screening tool for child inhibition offered universally across the population via preschools in the year before school, followed by an invitation to parents of all inhibited children to attend the parenting programme at venues in their local community. Methods: Design of the study was a randomised controlled trial. The setting was 307 preschool services across eight socioeconomically diverse government areas in Melbourne, Australia. Participants were 545 parents of inhibited four‐year‐old children of which 456 (84%) were retained during middle childhood (age of seven to 10 years). Early intervention was the Cool Little Kids parenting group programme, and control was 'usual care' access to available support services in the community. Primary outcomes were child anxiety and depression symptoms (parent and child report) and DSM‐IV anxiety disorders (assessor masked). Secondary outcomes were parenting practices and parent mental health. Results: There was no significant difference in anxiety disorders between the intervention and control group during the three annual follow‐ups of the cohort in middle childhood (2015 43% vs. 41%, 2016 40% vs. 36%, 2017 27% vs. 30%, respectively; p's >.05). There were also no significant differences in child anxiety or depression symptoms (by child or parent report), parenting practices or parent mental health, between the intervention and control group during middle childhood. However, a priori interaction tests suggested that for children with anxious parents, early intervention attenuated risk for middle childhood internalising problems. Conclusions: An issue for population translation is low levels of parent engagement in preventive interventions. Initial effects of the Cool Little Kids parenting group programme in reducing shy/inhibited preschool children's internalising distress at school entry dissipated over time, perhaps due to low engagement. Future translational research on early prevention of internalising problems could benefit from screening preschool children in the population at higher risk (combining temperamental inhibition and parent distress) and incorporating motivational techniques to facilitate family engagement. Trial registration ISRCTN30996662 http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN30996662. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]