| Literature DB >> 22630607 |
Divya Rajaraman1, Sandra Travasso, Achira Chatterjee, Bhargav Bhat, Gracy Andrew, Suraj Parab, Vikram Patel.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Studies in resource-limited settings have shown that there are constraints to the use of teachers, peers or health professionals to deliver school health promotion interventions. School health programmes delivered by trained lay health counsellors could offer a cost-effective alternative. This paper presents a case study of a multi-component school health promotion intervention in India that was delivered by lay school health counsellors, who possessed neither formal educational nor health provider qualifications.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22630607 PMCID: PMC3461450 DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-12-127
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Health Serv Res ISSN: 1472-6963 Impact factor: 2.655
The Health Promoting Schools Intervention delivered by Lay School Health Counsellors
| Mapping to assess the infrastructure, health environment and health resources available. A structured questionnaire was administered to school management, teachers, students and parents to identify health and wellbeing priorities. This information was used to tailor the intervention for each school’s needs. | |
| A letter box mounted on a wall in an easily accessible area in which school members could make anonymous submissions on any health, social or other school related concern. The SHC reviewed submissions on a weekly basis and followed these up as appropriate. | |
| Visual Screening and BMI Assessments. SHCs were trained to take weight and height measurements and to conduct visual screening to identify possible refractory errors and colour blindness. Body Mass Index was estimated, and students identified with possible nutrition or visual problems were given appropriate advice/referral. | |
| The Life Skills classroom programme was developed using international and national resources. The programme was delivered over one period (35–40 minutes) per class per week. The sessions were designed to be interactive and activity based. They covered physiological and sexual and reproductive health; psycho-social issues/mental health; and, effective learning techniques. | |
| Face to face counselling for students who were self-referred or referred by a teacher or principal. In the first year, a clinical psychologist conducted the counselling sessions in the presence of the SHC. In the second year, the SHC provided counselling to the students, with ongoing supervision and support from the NGO staff. | |
*In addition to the activities detailed in the table, the SHC coordinated a number of workshops for the different stakeholder groups. These included nutrition, parenting, teaching methods, and development of healthy school policies. The workshops were delivered by the NGO and partners.
Evaluation framework for the SHAPE intervention
| Was it possible to deliver the programme as planned? | Proportion of target activities (SHPAB meetings, health camps, and life skills sessions) delivered | Programme coordinator, SHC, school management, teacher and student perceptions of barriers and facilitators | |
| What were the major barriers and facilitators? | |||
| Were the services thought to be adding value? | number of submissions to the Speak Out Box | School management, teacher, student, and parent perceptions of need for and appropriateness of programme, and of adequacy of SHC skills | |
| Were the services used? | number of students accessing individual counselling | ||
| Was the SHC considered capable of delivering the services? | |||
| In what ways did the programme improve the health and wellbeing of the students and influence the overall environment of the school? | Number of students who attended health camps, were identified as having problems, and sought follow up care | Qualitative evidence of impact from interviews with all stakeholders |
Semi-structured interview sample
| Male student (member of SHPAB) | 9 | 4 | 13 |
| Male student (from those who attended counselling sessions) | 9 | 4 | 13 |
| Female student (member of SHPAB) | 9 | 4 | 13 |
| Female student (from those who attended counselling sessions) | 9 | 4 | 13 |
| Teacher (Teaching staff list) | 9 | - | 9 |
| Teacher (member of SHPAB) | 9 | 4 | 13 |
| Parent (member of SHPAB) | 4 | 4 | |
| Principal (all) | 9 | 4 | 13 |
| SHC (all) | 9 | 4 | 13 |
| Intervention coordinator (all) | 2 | 2 | |
| Clinical Supervisors (all) | 3 | ||
Coverage of the intervention activities in all schools 2009-11
| | ||||||
| | ||||||
| No. of SHPAB meetings | 27 | 27 | 30 | 30 | ||
| | ||||||
| | ||||||
| Visual Assessment | 9 | 9 | 10 | 10 | ||
| BMI | 9 | 9 | 10 | 10 | ||
| | ||||||
| | ||||||
| Physiological | 428 | 326 | 433 | 394 | ||
| Psychosocial | 735 | 661 | 711 | 651 | ||
| Effective learning techniques | 350 | 324 | 331 | 315 | ||
| 1513 | 1311 | 1475 | 1360 | |||
| | | | | |||
| | ||||||
| Number of cases | 122 | | | 128 | | |
| % Students who accessed counselling) | 6.2% | | | 6.3% | | |
| School Range (% Students who accessed counselling) | (1.8–13.1%) | | | (2.3–11.1%) | | |
| Number of follow ups | 251 | | | 323 | | |
| % Sessions led by SHC2 | 18.5% | | | 55% | | |
| School Range (Sessions led by SHC) | (1.8–41.2%) | (30–92.8%) | ||||
Coverage defined as percentage of target achieved. Targets were set a priori by the intervention coordinators.
Other sessions were led by a clinical psychologist in the presence of the SHC.