Recruitment
The local coordinators were responsible for recruiting participants and two volunteer instructors for each course. In this section, we present the findings on recruitment of participants and instructors separately.
Recruitment of participants
We asked the coordinators about their experiences with recruitment of participants in a survey and qualitative interviews with coordinators and participants. In the survey, 41% (n=16) of coordinators responded that recruiting participants was challenging to a very high degree/high degree, whereas 32% (n=12) responded to some degree and 27% (n=11) to a low/very low degree. In general, the coordinators in the qualitative interview study explained that it always takes time to create awareness about a new service. The interviews also showed that the coordinators used many different channels, such as local newspapers and Facebook, as well as general practitioner and local libraries. Most importantly, many coordinators established networks with professionals in other municipal departments, such as employment agencies, social services, and schools.
‘A lot of my work consists of getting out there and telling people that we are starting up a new thing here – and to try to figure out who the stakeholders are in this municipality and among non-for-profit organisations’ (Coordinator, C2).
Targeting recruitment efforts to other professionals seemed to be a productive strategy. Many participants explained that they heard of the programme via others, such as family members or professionals. This also concurs with the coordinator’s experiences. However, several participants highlighted that recruitment efforts could focus more on other social media, such as Instagram and Twitter:
‘I think that all young people are on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter […], a lot of young people think it is a taboo to ask for help. It´s not, but you don’t think that when you’re unwell, because you feel weak. But if it was more widely distributed via social media, then more young people would think that it is OK not to be OK’ (Participant, C3).
The interviews with the participants showed they had been motivated by different aspects of the programme. While some were attracted by the group format, others had been more attracted by the self-management concept. Several participants highlighted that the programme was free of charge and that they experienced a lack of service for people in their situation:
‘I felt like I missed that someone would take care of me and my problems after I turned 18. I didn’t really know where to start or who to turn to, so it was obviously a good opportunity, and it was free’ (Participant, C3).
Recruitment of instructors
The peer-to-peer concept – a core element in the programme – entails that instructors must have first-hand experiences with symptoms of anxiety and/or depression. In this study, we also found that recruitment of instructors was a challenge, and about 54% (n=21) of the coordinators responded that recruiting instructors was challenging to a very high/high degree; 19% (n=7) responded to some degree and 27% (n=11) to a low/very low degree. The coordinators in the qualitative study explained that finding instructors who had first-hand experiences with symptoms of anxiety and/or depression and, at the same time, had surplus energy to act as instructor, was particularly challenging.
‘It has been really, really hard to recruit instructors, because you need to have experience with anxiety and depression, but you also need to be very strong to be able to teach and have the surplus energy to show up every time, and many [instructors] have a job at the same time.’ (Coordinator, C4)
The recruitment of instructors was very essential because the programme could not run without instructors:
‘I think the most difficult part of the programme has been recruitment of instructors, because it is so vulnerable, it all depends on it.’ (Coordinator, C2)
The coordinators explained that they typically recruited instructors via external partners, such as volunteer organisations. Moreover, coordinators from municipalities which already offered the programme for adults over 18 years recruited instructors among the participants.
In an initial pilot test prior to this study, instructors also had to be the same age as the participants, but this demand was eventually withdrawn, because an evaluation of the pilot test showed that recruitment of instructors was particularly challenging and that the age of the instructors was not important for the participants.
Although the instructors did not have to be the same age as participants in this study, we found that several coordinators explained that they primarily looked for young instructors. However, because recruitment was often challenging, some coordinators chose to participate together with a volunteer peer-to-peer instructor or to mix a younger and an older instructor. In the section on satisfaction, we present the findings regarding the participants assessment of the instructors and the importance of age.
Reach
In this section, we present the characteristics of participants and participation rates. This project aimed to implement two programmes, with 12-14 participants in each programme, in 25 municipalities. In total, 39 municipalities participated; 29 successfully implemented both programmes, whereas 10 implemented one programme. During a first wave of implementing the programme, 44% of the coordinators reported that they enrolled 12 or more participants, but only 18% enrolled 12 or more participants during a second wave of implementation. The decrease in participants per programme reflected challenges with recruitment.
In total, 478 participated in the programme and in the evaluation. As shown in Table 2, most participants were women (71%) with a mean age of 20 years. About 24% were under 18 years and 55% were between 18 and 22 years. About half were still enrolled in education, while 8% were working and 35% were unemployed. Among those enrolled in education, 21 % attended elementary school, 35% high school and 16% vocational training. At baseline, 17% had high depression and anxiety; 5% minimal depression and anxiety and about 19% had not received medical help.
Table 2
Characteristics of participants at baseline (n=483)
Age, year, mean (SD)
|
20 (3)
|
Gender, n (%)
|
|
Women
|
346 (72)
|
Men
|
136 (28)
|
Missing
|
1 (0.2)
|
Labour market status, n (%)
|
|
Enrolled in education
|
257 (53)
|
Working
|
39 (8)
|
Unemployed
|
169 (35)
|
Missing
|
18 (4)
|
Enrolled in education (n=257), n (%)
|
|
Elementary school
|
55 (21)
|
High school
|
91 (35)
|
Vocational training
|
40 (16)
|
Higher education
|
36 (9)
|
Missing
|
35 (14)
|
Cohabitation, n (%)
|
|
Living alone
|
82 (17)
|
Living with family
|
276 (57)
|
Living with friends
|
10 (2)
|
Living with partner/spouse
|
78 (16)
|
Other
|
27 (6)
|
Missing
|
10 (2)
|
Support for managing anxiety and depression, n (%)
|
|
Psychiatric support
|
138 (29)
|
Medical treatment
|
147 (30)
|
Support from psychologist
|
233 (48)
|
Other
|
91 (19)
|
No support
|
92 (19)
|
Drug use, n (%)
|
|
Yes
|
206 (43)
|
No
|
262 (54)
|
Missing
|
15 (3)
|
Depression score (BDI), mean (SD) (n=401)
|
27 (11)
|
Anxiety score (STAI), mean (SD) (n=436)
|
52 (12)
|
Symptom burden (BDI-II & STAI combined), n (%)
|
|
Minimal depression AND low anxiety
|
24 (5)
|
Moderate anxiety (or lower) OR mild/moderate depression
|
148 (31)
|
Moderate anxiety AND moderate depression
|
73 (15)
|
Major depression OR high anxiety
|
145 (30)
|
Major depression AND high anxiety
|
80 (17)
|
Missing
|
13 (3)
|
One fourth (27%) of participants reported that they attended all seven modules, whereas 50% reported to be absent between one and two times, and 11% three or more times (Table 2). Participants and coordinators in the qualitative study reported that tiredness and seediness was the main reason for absence. To increase participation, most local coordinators sent reminders and follow-ups by text message, phone call or email, and some coordinators arranged that someone would accompany the participants. The participants responded favourably to these measures highlighting that it was nice ‘that someone was thinking of them’. In the quote below, one of the participants explains how the coordinator sends text messages prior to each module to encourage participation:
“´Bring your umbrella´ and things like that. It’s a cool message, because it gives a little spark, because you might not get out of the door when it’s raining” (Participant, C5).
Dose-delivered
Dose-delivered refers to the extent to which the programme was actual provided/delivered. All seven modules were executed as planned, i.e., dose-delivered was 100%.
Satisfaction (dose received)
We assessed participants’ satisfaction with: (1) the screening session, (2) the programme, (3) the instructors and (4) the group format, respectively
Coordinators and participants´ satisfaction with the screening session
Before entering the programme, participants met with the coordinator to assess their eligibility. Both participants and coordinators felt that the screening session contributed to a sense of security, because the session gave the participants a better understanding of what to expect and prepared them emotionally for the programme.
‘Instead of just entering a room filled with all sorts of people that you never talked to be before, it was nice to talk to xxx (the coordinator) first. You never know exactly what to expect when you haven’t tried it before, but she could kind of explain what it was all about and what to expect. I really liked that’ (Participant, C4).
The manual for the coordinators stressed the importance of acknowledging participants’ viewpoints and to respect their perspectives. The interviews with the participants showed that participants in general felt that the coordinators received them in a positive and respectful manner.
‘I was afraid you had to argue why you need help, like in other parts of the system. Like, really convince them that you need to participate in this programme. But I didn’t experience that at all. It was more like, when I was there, I got the feeling that they just wanted to make sure that you came to the right place, and that they really wanted to help you’ (Participant, C2).
According to the coordinators, exclusion was always based on a mutual understanding and that the main reasons for exclusion was lack of motivation or severe cognitive challenges (as outlined in the section on content and structure of the programme).
‘It’s typically a mutual decision (…). I haven’t experienced that someone really wanted to participate and seemed really motivated, and I found myself saying no. But I have experienced that we, jointly, agreed that it was not right for them. Sometimes it simply comes down to that they are starting a lot of other things as well, for instance at school, at work or that they are starting some type of treatment or therapy, and that I could feel that they were a little bit stressed about all the things that were happening’ (Coordinator, C2).
While participants could bring a parent, social worker or friend to the screening session, coordinators generally had poor experiences with their presence and preferred that they waited outside, because they sometimes dominated the conversation too much.
‘Clearly it is different if they come alone or bring a parent. I think that the conversation is easier if they come alone, because the parents have a different perspective, and they come with expectations and hopes or sometimes they are more critical’ (Coordinator, C2).
Satisfaction with the programme
About 76% of participants responded that they were very satisfied/satisfied with the programme, and 54% found the programme useful (to a very high/high degree), as shown in Table 3. In the qualitative study, the participants highlighted the relaxation exercises and action plans as particularly useful.
The action plan was a self-management tool to help participants set goals and make plans for how and when to achieve these goals. Each week, the participants completed an action plan for the following week:
‘Those action plans have been really good, because you have something you can focus on, because when you have something to focus on and something to strive for, and when you have reached a milestone, then you feel that, well, it’s very cool, because you have actually achieved something, despite everything’ (Participant, C4).
A few of the participants felt that the action plans increased their beliefs in their ability to start an education; however, the coordinators and the instructors were generally more sceptical about the effect on education and labour market attainment, because most of the participants were already in school or at work.
While some of the participants found that the relaxation exercises were difficult, they generally felt that they were useful and something they could use after the programme as well:
‘I became quite fond of the relaxation exercises; I completely relax. In really think my body appreciates that it can just sink into a calm state and not be alert all the time. That’s something that I will take with me´ (Participant, C1).
Group dynamics
In the survey, 62% of participants reported that they could recognise the other participants’ problems and experiences, and that the other participants understood them (a lot/to a high degree) (see Table 3). The participants in the qualitative study highlighted the social aspect of being part of a group of people with the same challenges. Thus, the group format allowed the participants to share their experiences. Although some participants were still in elementary schools and others were working and no longer lived with their parents, participants were able to relate in a meaningful way. Meeting others with a depression and anxiety induced a feeling of ‘being normal’, because many participants realised, they were not alone with their problems, which one participant explained as being able to ‘put a face on the disorder’. Although participants did not necessarily form friendships outside of the programme, they felt less lonely, because they realised that they were not alone with their problems.
‘It has been extremely good for me, because I don’t really know anyone with anxiety – besides this group. So, it’s very cool to find out that I am not abnormal; that I’m just a person with anxiety’ (Participant, C6)
Table 3
Participation and satisfaction (post-intervention questionnaire)
|
N
|
%
|
How many times were you absent from the seven course workshops?
|
|
|
0
|
88
|
27
|
1-2
|
162
|
50
|
3 or more
|
35
|
11
|
Missing
|
40
|
12
|
The workshop leaders communicated the course material in an understandable and pedagogical manner
|
|
|
Strongly agree / Agree
|
247
|
76
|
Neither agree nor disagree
|
17
|
5
|
Disagree / Strongly disagree
|
33
|
10
|
Missing
|
28
|
9
|
It was an advantage that the workshop leaders had experience with anxiety and depression
|
Strongly agree / Agree
|
243
|
78
|
Neither agree nor disagree
|
12
|
4
|
Disagree / Atrongly disagree
|
35
|
10
|
Missing
|
25
|
8
|
Workshop leaders were skilled and well-prepared
|
Strongly agree / Agree
|
246
|
76
|
Neither agree nor disagree
|
20
|
6
|
Disagree / Strongly disagree
|
34
|
10
|
Missing
|
25
|
8
|
To what degree was the course useful?
|
|
|
Not at all / To some degree
|
126
|
39
|
To a high degree / To a very large degree
|
173
|
53
|
Missing
|
26
|
8
|
Altogether, how satisfied were you with the course?
|
|
|
Very dissatisfied / Dissatisfied
|
10
|
3
|
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
|
42
|
13
|
Satisfied / Very satisfied
|
246
|
76
|
Missing
|
27
|
8
|
To what degree did you recognise the other participants’ problems and experiences?
|
|
|
Not at all / A little
|
31
|
10
|
To some degree
|
69
|
21
|
A lot / To a large degree
|
201
|
62
|
Missing
|
24
|
7
|
To what degree did the other participants understand you?
|
|
|
Not at all / A little
|
39
|
12
|
To some degree
|
65
|
20
|
A lot / To a large degree
|
195
|
60
|
Missing
|
26
|
8
|
The peer-to-peer concept and satisfaction with instructors
In the survey, 76% of the participants agreed that the instructors communicated the programme material in an understandable and pedagogical manner, and that the instructors were skilled and well-prepared (agree/strongly agree). Furthermore, 78% of participants agreed that it was an advantage that the instructors had personal experience with anxiety and/or depression (agree/strongly agree). The qualitive interviews with instructors and participants revealed that the instructors functioned as role models, and that their first-hand experiences increased their credibility.
‘They [participants] clearly take example from us […] it’s not because we attended some fancy school that we say these things; it’s because we have actually lived with it. To be that kind of role model is a tool I use, and that experience is super. It means that they [participants] listen and that they trust us’ (Instructor, C6).
The participants had mixed feelings about the importance of the of the age of the instructors. Some preferred instructors who were about their age, whereas others preferred someone who was older, as exemplified in the two quotations below. Rather, the most important aspect of the peer-to-peer concept seemed to be personal experiences with anxiety and depression.
‘That they know our lives, I mean, for instance that they know that young people can feel a lot of pressure in school and all that stuff with social media and so on. Perhaps someone over 40 would not know about that the same way’ (Participants, C1).
‘I think it would be odd if it was someone our age, because there are people the same age – that’s the whole idea with the groups, so I think it’s OK that the instructors aren’t the same age as us, it makes good sense’ (Participant, C1).
Contextual barriers and facilitators for implementation
We identified several contextual barriers and facilitators for the recruitment, retainment and satisfaction with the programme. We divided the facilitators and barriers into three main themes: coordinator support, physical context, and organisational and geographical context.
The importance of Coordinator support for retainment and satisfaction
Some coordinators chose to stay in a room close to the programme venue to provide social support for participants and instructors. If any of the participants felt overwhelmed and left the programme, the coordinators were able to talk to them. The coordinators and instructors reported that the presence of the coordinator could prevent drop-out and provided participants and instructors with a sense of security.
‘I think it has ensured serenity and security that she [the coordinator] has been here. When some of the participants have dealt with anxiety, she has been able to meet with them instead of just leaving. I am quite sure our participants would have left, if it wasn’t for her’ (Instructor, C6).
Pleasant physical area
The interviews with coordinators, instructors and participants showed that it was important to pay attention to the physical properties of the venue for the programme. In general, participants expressed satisfaction with the venues, which were easily accessible by public transportation or car. Moreover, ensuring that the venue had a roomy feel with sofas and serving snacks or food facilitated more informal interactions among the participants and contributed positively to the group.
‘We’ve made an extra effort to strengthen the sense of community. They get something to eat here, I mean, we try to make it cosy, and we have gone the extra mile, and the thing about eating together is nothing to sneeze at, because many of them live on their own and think it’s great to score dinner here. It sounds trivial, but I think … I mean it’s something you do together with someone who has the same challenges’ (Coordinator, C6).
In a similar vein, some of the participants explained how they experienced the atmosphere:
‘There’s always someone to greet you when you arrive and there’s always fruit available. So, you feel welcome.
Yes, they try to make it cosy, and the atmosphere is nice.
It doesn’t have a clinical feeling’ (Participants, C1).
The coordinators explained that they preferred that the programme was conducted in the same facility, because it felt safer for the participants. Moreover, this also allowed the coordinators to show the facilities to the participants at the screening session.
‘It means a lot that you can show them that this is where you are going to sit; you can choose where you want to sit because I will make a place card, so if they want to sit in the back at the right side of the room, then I will put the place card there’ (Coordinator, C6).
The influence of organisational and geographical context on recruitment
The analysis shows that the organisational and geographical context seemed to have an impact on recruitment of participants. Firstly, the size of the municipality influenced the number of young people with symptoms of anxiety or depression and thus the size of the recruitment base. Secondly, the anchoring of the programme also played a role for the recruitment. While the majority (n=25) of the municipalities anchored the programme in a health or health promotion department, others anchored the programme in an employment or education guidance department (n=8), a social psychiatric unit (n=5) or in a volunteer organisation (n=1). It appeared to be a disadvantage to anchor the programme in a health and health promotion department because coordinators in these departments typically do not have direct access to and contact with young people. Consequently, they had to rely more on cooperating with external partners who did have such access than did coordinators in employment and education guidance departments.