Marte Meo and Coordination Meetings (MAC): A Systemic School-Based Video Feedback Intervention—A Randomised Controlled Trial

Abstract

Children displaying early disruptive behaviour problems (DBP) in school are at risk for severe long-term problems. This study evaluated and compared a systemic school-based intervention, Marte Meo and Coordination meetings (MAC) with service as usual (SAU) in a randomised controlled trial. The teachers' and parents' ratings were collected before and after intervention. Target group were children aged 3-12 years that displayed DBPs in school (N = 99). MAC programme was more effective than SAU in reducing DBPs among school children based on teachers' reports (d ppc2 .30-.38), whereas the effect was equal according to parents' reports. It is possible to achieve changes in children's DBPs in a school setting. Advantages of MAC might be explained by a clear target for change enhancing children's development in school, but might also be explained by shortcomings in SAU, which seems to generate more services and personnel.

A mixed methods research study on the video‐based counselling method Marte Meo

“…The analysis also showed two studies that examined caregiver–child interaction in a home institution (Bünder, 2011a) and in adoptive families (Osterman et al., 2010). One study took a combined approach and used Marte Meo in interactions with both parents and teachers in preschools and primary schools (Balldin et al., 2018). Target groups were, with regard to the child in the interaction, children (3–12 years) with behavioural problems (Axberg et al., 2006; Balldin et al., 2018; Kristensen, 2005) and infants (Gill et al, 2019; Kristensen et al., 2017).…”

“…One study took a combined approach and used Marte Meo in interactions with both parents and teachers in preschools and primary schools (Balldin et al., 2018). Target groups were, with regard to the child in the interaction, children (3–12 years) with behavioural problems (Axberg et al., 2006; Balldin et al., 2018; Kristensen, 2005) and infants (Gill et al, 2019; Kristensen et al., 2017). Regarding the reference person, some studies targeted divorced fathers (DeGarmo et al., 2019) and burdened mothers of indigenous Australian origin (Lee et al., 2010) and mothers with postnatal depression (Vik & Braten, 2009; Vik & Hafting, 2009; Vik & Rohde, 2014).…”

“…The rest of the studies did not include a control group (DeGarmo et al., 2019; Kristensen, 2005), so the influence of elementary interference variables cannot be excluded. Furthermore, in only two of the publications were the study conditions controlled by randomisation of the choice of test subjects (DeGarmo et al., 2019) or group membership (Balldin et al., 2018). The representativeness of the studies can be rated as low to medium: the number of test subjects ranges from 11 (DeGarmo et al., 2019) to 278 (Kristensen, Simonsen, et al, 2017).…”

“…The representativeness of the studies can be rated as low to medium: the number of test subjects ranges from 11 (DeGarmo et al., 2019) to 278 (Kristensen, Simonsen, et al, 2017). The test subjects were recruited voluntarily and relatively nationwide, for example in schools via a selection of teachers (Axberg et al., 2006; Balldin et al., 2018) or via a national health promotion programme for newborns (Kristensen, Simonsen, et al, 2017; Kristensen, Trillingsgaard, et al, 2017). In order to control the direction of causality, mainly pre‐ and post‐measurements were used over a period of one (e.g.…”

“…Kristensen, Simonsen, et al, 2017) to three years (e.g. Balldin et al., 2018). Almost all studies reported effect sizes and thus made the effects investigated empirically transparent.…”