A Creative and Movement-Based Blended Intervention for Children in Outpatient Residential Care: A Mixed-Method, Multi-Center, Single-Arm Feasibility Trial

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic led to psychological distress among children and adolescents. Due to multiple psychosocial burdens, the youth in residential care were especially exposed to an increased risk of mental health problems during the pandemic. In a multi-center, single-arm feasibility trial, N = 45 children and adolescents aged 7–14 years were allocated to a 6-week blended care intervention, conducted in six outpatient residential child welfare facilities. The intervention covered a once weekly face-to-face group session for guided creative (art therapy, drama therapy) and movement-oriented (children’s yoga, nature therapy) activities. This was accompanied by a resilience-oriented mental-health app. Feasibility and acceptance analyses covered app usage data and qualitative data. Effectiveness was determined by pre-post comparisons in quantitative data on psychological symptoms and resources. Further, subgroups for poorer treatment outcome were explored. The intervention and app were considered to be feasible and were accepted by residential staff and the children. No significant pre-post changes were found across quantitative outcomes. However, being female, being in current psychosocial crisis, a migration background, or a mentally ill parent were correlated with change in score of outcomes from baseline. These preliminary findings pave the way for future research on blended care interventions among at-risk children and adolescents.

Children and Young People’s Perception of the Active Ingredients of Dramatherapy When Used as a Treatment for Symptoms of Emotional Disorders: A Meta-synthesis

“…For example, just three studies, (Godfrey & Haythorne, 2013;Mackay et al, 1987;Moore, 2019) contained a statement which located the researcher culturally or theoretically and only one (Burch et al, 2019) acknowledged the influence of the researcher on the research. Similarly, statements regarding ethical approval were present in only three studies (Birnkammer & Calvano, 2023;Burch et al, 2019;Moula, 2021). Overall, the studies involved in this synthesis were deemed to be methodologically strong; more clarity regarding the conduct of studies and regarding researcher influence was also welcome.…”