As national attention begins to focus on racial disparities
in health care (U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services, 2000), the Surgeon General has raised concerns about access to mental health services for ethnic minor- ity children (U.S. Public Health Service, 2000). One growing population in the United States at particular risk for not receiving specialty mental health care is Latino children (Kataoka et al., 2002). Latinos have been found to be less likely than others to receive health care services because of such factors as disproportionate numbers with- out health insurance, parental preferences and help- seeking patterns, and an unrecognized need for services (Flores and Vega, 1998; Guarnaccia, 1997; McMiller and Weisz, 1996; Organista, 2000). Although this under- served group has been found to consistently underutilize mental health care (Bui and Takeuchi, 1992; McCabe et al., 1999; Vega et al., 1999), there has been little effort in developing and evaluating accessible and evidence- based interventions specically for Latino children. Delivering mental health services through the school system can address key nancial and structural barriers that often prevent Latinos from receiving needed services (Garrison et al., 1999). Schools have long been identi- ed as an ideal entry point for improving access to men- tal health services for children (Allensworth et al., 1997). However, few programs have been rigorously evaluated in the real-world setting of schools (Hoagwood and Erwin, 1997), and even fewer are designed specically for eth- nic minority children. One signicant mental health concern of schools and communities has been the effects of violence on children. A School-Based Mental Health Program for Traumatized Latino Immigrant Children SHERYL H. KATAOKA, M.D., BRADLEY D. STEIN, M.D., LISA H. JAYCOX, PH.D., MARLEEN WONG, M.S.W., PIA ESCUDERO, M.S.W., WENLI TU, M.S., CATALINA ZARAGOZA, M.S.W., AND ARLENE FINK, PH.D. ABSTRACT Objective: To pilot-test a school mental health program for Latino immigrant students who have been exposed to com- munity violence. Method: In this quasi-experimental study conducted from January through June 2000, 198 students in third through eighth grade with trauma-related depression and/or posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms were com- pared after receiving an intervention or being on a waitlist. The intervention consisted of a manual-based, eight-session, group cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) delivered in Spanish by bilingual, bicultural school social workers. Parents and teachers were eligible to receive psychoeducation and support services. Results: Students in the intervention group (n = 152) had significantly greater improvement in posttraumatic stress disorder and depressive symptoms compared with those on the waitlist (n = 47) at 3-month follow-up, adjusting for relevant covariates. Conclusions: A collaborative research team of school clinicians, educators, and researchers developed this trauma-focused CBT program for Latino immigrant students and their families. This pilot test demonstrated that this program for traumatized youths, designed for delivery on school campuses by school clinicians, can be implemented and evaluated in the school setting and is associated with a modest decline in trauma-related mental health problems. J. Am. Acad. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry, 2003, 42(3):311318. Key Words: posttraumatic stress disorder, treatment, cognitive-behavioral therapy, Latinos, trauma, violence. J . AM. ACAD. CHI LD ADOLESC. PSYCHI ATRY, 42: 3, MARCH 2003 311 Accepted October 29, 2002. Drs. Kataoka and Fink are with the University of California, Los Angeles; Dr. Stein is with the University of California, Los Angeles, and RAND; Dr. Jaycox and Ms. Tu are with RAND; Ms. Wong, Ms. Escudero, and Ms. Zaragoza are with the Los Angeles Unied School District. This work was supported by the Los Angeles Unified School District, the Emergency Immigrant Education Program, the UCLA Center for Health Services Research, the NIMH Faculty Scholars Program, the Robert Wood Johnson Clinical Scholars Program, and NIMH grant MH54623. The authors thank Ken Wells, Naihua Duan, and Jeanne Miranda for their consultation. Correspondence to Dr. Kataoka, UCLA Health Services Research Center, 10920 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 300, Los Angeles, CA 90024-6505; e-mail: skataoka@ucla.edu. For information about the CBITS treatment manual, contact Dr. Jaycox at jaycox@rand.org. 0890-8567/03/420303112003 by the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. DOI: 10.1097/01.CHI.0000037038.04952.8E Although the prevalence of trauma-related mental health problems in Latino children remains unclear, youths who have been exposed to violence have been found to be more likely to develop psychological problems and have poor functioning at home and school (Cohen, 1998; Pynoos et al., 1995; Richters and Martinez, 1993). Recent studies have shown that about one third of children exposed to community violence develop posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (Berman et al., 1996; Fitzpatrick and Boldizar, 1993). Youths exposed to trauma also can develop depression, other anxiety disorders, substance abuse, and problems with school performance (Brent et al., 1995; Clarke et al., 1995; Saigh et al., 1997; Singer et al., 1995; Weine et al., 1995). In an earlier study, we found that 49% of predomi- nantly poor immigrant students in our school sample reported violent victimization in the previous year and 32% had clinical levels of PTSD symptoms, with symp- toms being predicted by level of violence exposure (Jaycox et al., 2002). Given this high level of exposure to violence and subsequent trauma-related mental health problems, the Los Angeles Unied School District (LAUSD) developed the Mental Health for Immigrants Program (MHIP), a trauma-focused and culturally sensitive pro- gram for the Districts large immigrant student body. In developing this program, a collaborative partnership was formed between clinicians from the School Mental Health Unit, educational specialists from the Emergency Immigrant Education Program (EIEP), and research clinicians at local academic institutions (Stein et al., 2002). We chose an intervention that uses cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), as recommended for the treatment of youth PTSD (Cohen, 1998) and depression (Brent et al., 1997; Kaslow and Thompson, 1998; Lewinsohn et al., 1990). Such ther- apies have been shown to be effective for children with a history of sexual abuse (Deblinger and Hein, 1996; King et al., 2000) and single-incident trauma (March et al., 1998). In addition to child-focused trauma treatment, psychoeducation for parents about their childs PTSD symptoms has also been recommended (Rigamer, 1986) and thus incorporated into the MHIP intervention. This article will describe the development and pre- liminary results of this program. Although the MHIP was offered to a multiethnic group, this report will focus on the Latino children, who comprised the majority of the participants. METHOD Mental Health for Immigrants Program The MHIP was developed in the context of an ecological framework (Belsky, 1980; Cicchetti and Lynch, 1993; Trickett and Birman, 1989), specic to both cultural and school ecologies. As part of the wide vari- ety of supportive services offered to newly immigrant children in LAUSD through the EIEP (orientation classes, medical and dental screening, language classes, and tutoring), the MHIP addressed some of the men- tal health needs of the traumatized immigrant students. The MHIP child intervention was an eight-session CBT group based on the Cognitive-Behavioral Intervention for Trauma in Schools (L.H. Jaycox, Ph.D., unpublished, 2000), which was designed for use in an inner-city school mental health clinic with a multicultural student pop- ulation (Table 1). The CBITS incorporates standard CBT skills in a group format (ve to eight students per group) to address PTSD, anx- iety, and depression symptoms related to community violence expo- sure. Generally, in each session a new set of techniques was introduced by a mixture of didactic presentation, use of age-appropriate cartoons and games to solidify concepts, and individual work on worksheets in session and between sessions. This program emphasized generalization of techniques, and homework assignments were collaboratively devel- oped between child and clinician in each session and reviewed at the beginning of the next session. Although clinicians followed a treatment manual for consistency of administration, they had some exibility to meet the specic needs of children in the group. Techniques in the CBITS are similar to those used in other CBT groups for individuals with PTSD (March et al., 1998). The CBITS was pilot-tested for fea- sibility and acceptability, but this particular manual and format was untested prior to this study. KATAOKA ET AL. 312 J . AM. ACAD. CHI LD ADOLESC. PSYCHI ATRY, 42: 3, MARCH 2003 TABLE 1 Cognitive-Behavioral Intervention for Trauma in Schools Session Session Content 1 Introduction of group members, condentiality, and group procedures Explanation of treatment using stories Discussion of reasons for participation (types of trauma) 2 Education about common reactions to trauma Relaxation training to combat anxiety 3 Thoughts and Feelings (introduction to cognitive therapy) Fear Thermometer Linkage between thoughts and feelings Introduction of idea of combating erroneous negative thoughts 4 Avoidance and coping (introduction to in vivo exposure) Construction of fear hierarchy Individual Imaginal exposure to traumatic event session 5 Social problem-solving (Stop, Think, Whats Your Goal? 6 Exposure to trauma memory through drawing/ writing 7 Exposure to trauma memory through drawing/ writing 8 Relapse prevention and graduation ceremony As has been noted in other adult and child studies (Cohen, 1998; Foa and Rothbaum, 1998), psychoeducation was an integral part of the MHIP. The CBT intervention included relaxation training, cog- nitive therapy, exposure, and social problem-solving. Based on work by March and colleagues (1998), imaginal exposure occurred rst in a private individual session with the clinician and then through draw- ings and descriptions of the event in the group. When appropriate, this was followed by in vivo exposure. All exposures were paced accord- ing to the needs of the individual child, to avoid making children feel overwhelmed or overly upset when they worked on this exercise. For parents, the MHIP included four 2-hour optional multifam- ily group sessions designed to complement the child treatment. Parents and clinicians discussed the effects of trauma on children and the types of techniques that the children would be learning, which is sim- ilar to psychoeducation described by others (Cohen, 1998). Based on our clinical experience with Latino immigrant families and descrip- tions by others (Azocar et al., 1996), the parent sessions included sup- port around common experiences of loss and separation that many had experienced during the immigration process. Finally, these ses- sions also included parenting techniques, a commonly requested topic. Clinicians offered all teachers at the participating schools an in- service training on the effects of trauma on children and what symp- toms can be related to emotional problems warranting further evaluation. In addition, the clinicians developed relationships with key adminis- trators and liaison staff at the schools. Clinicians minimized missed class time by offering a brief intervention lasting 8 weeks on average, with each session duration the equivalent of one school period. Sessions were given at exible times during the school day, depending on the schools preference. The program was also designed to be consistent with the school culture, which incorporated CBT lessons and home- work assignments, helping to demystify this mental health program for school staff. Neither the parent nor teacher MHIP components have been evaluated for effectiveness. The MHIP clinicians were masters-level school psychiatric social workers and employees of the school district. They received 16 hours of initial training on the MHIP intervention and 2 hours per week of ongoing supervision by a psychologist (L.H.J.). In addition, they received 1 hour per week of general school social work supervision by their on-site clinical supervisor (C.Z.). They used a detailed treat- ment manual and could refer to a videotape of the initial training. Participants and Procedures Eleven public elementary and middle schools with high immigrant enrollment and involvement in the EIEP were invited to participate in the MHIP. Nine schools agreed to participate. Administrators at the two nonparticipating schools expressed concern that students would be missing class to attend the group. Eligibility criteria for the MHIP screening included being in the third to eighth grade, attending one of the nine participating schools, being foreign-born and having immigrated to the United States within the past 3 years (an eligibility criterion for the EIEP), and speaking Spanish. MHIP staff presented information about the screening process to all eligible students during meetings for new immigrant students. They were told that a questionnaire would be given to them to determine whether they would qualify to be in a program for immigrant students with stress related to violence. Students were informed that the survey was completely voluntary and would be kept condential. A letter with similar information was sent to their parents with instructions on how to decline participation. Approximately 970 students were eligible for the screening, and although we did not systematically track refusals or the reasons for refusal (since this was a naturalistic study and screening was conducted by school staff as part of their program), they repre- sented fewer than 10% of those eligible for screening. A total of 879 students completed a self-report questionnaire regard- ing exposure to violence and symptoms. The questionnaire was admin- istered in groups of 20 to 30 students. Students sat sufficiently far apart from one another to allow privacy within the constraints of the group setting. Of those students screened, 276 (31%) reported exposure to vio- lence and clinically signicant symptoms of PTSD and/or depression and were recruited for participation in the MHIP; 229 (83%) gave informed written parental consent and child assent. We found no sig- nicant differences between those who consented to participate and those who did not in terms of sociodemographic characteristics (age, gender, grade, school location, country of origin), level of violence exposure, or symptoms (depression or PTSD symptom levels). We asked that the parent or guardian most knowledgeable about the child complete a self-report questionnaire. Seventy-two percent of those eligible to participate in the program (n = 198) were available to complete the follow-up evaluation at 3 months. Those who completed the program did not differ from those who did not complete the program in baseline levels of depression or PTSD symptoms, level of violence exposure, gender, or ethnicity. However, noncompleters were older than those who completed the program (mean age of completers = 11.3 years, SD = 1.7; noncom- pleters = 12.5 years, SD = 1.4; t = 3.8, p < .001). Early in the school year, eligible students were randomly assigned to either the intervention or a waitlist comparison group. For those assigned to waitlist, clinicians gave parents specic Spanish-language referrals to community mental health agencies in their neighborhoods and gave them the option of being placed on the waitlist for the MHIP. Of the 198 who completed the program, 67 youths received the intervention immediately and 46 students were randomized to the waitlist group during the randomization period. When possible, chil- dren were randomized at the individual level. At year-round schools, children are assigned at random by the school district to one of three tracks. At these schools, program participants were randomized by track to either immediate treatment or waitlist. Late in the school year, to ensure that all eligible students would have the opportunity to receive the MHIP treatment before the end of the school year, 85 eligible students were assigned to the intervention condition. The ran- domized and nonrandomized children did not differ at baseline on violence exposure, symptom levels, or sociodemographic character- istics except for a signicant difference in parental education (parental education in the randomized group was 3.7 years compared with 6.1 years in the nonrandomized group, t = 4.9, p < .001). The main analy- sis reported in this article includes all 152 intervention and 46 wait- list children. All parents of children in the intervention group were offered the parent groups; 37% of parents attended at least one group. At the end of the intervention period, all teachers at each school were offered the educational teacher session. This voluntary activity was not part of the randomized design. Measures We measured exposure to community violence with a modified version of the Life Events Scale (Singer et al., 1995, 1999), a 34-item measure that asks the frequency of several types of violence (threats, slapping/hitting/punching, beatings, knife attacks, and shootings) in multiple locations over the past year and lifetime. These items include violence that was directed toward the respondent or directly witnessed. Exposure to media or other indirect violence was specically excluded. For example, students were asked about violence directed toward them in such questions as, How often over the past year have you been beaten up at school? Students were also asked whether they had been SCHOOL-BASED TRAUMA PROGRAM FOR LATINOS J . AM. ACAD. CHI LD ADOLESC. PSYCHI ATRY, 42: 3, MARCH 2003 313 beaten up in their neighborhood or anywhere else. One of the items that elicited witnessed violence was the following: How often over the past year have you seen someone else getting beaten up at school? A 4-point Likert scale ranging from 0 to 3 points (never to almost every day) was used; a total violence score was calculated by summing the lifetime and current violence exposure scores for a total possible score of 102. The Life Events Scale has been shown to have acceptable reliability in elementary school, middle school, and high school in mul- ticultural inner-city populations (Singer et al., 1995, 1999). Program eligibility criteria for violence exposure was met if the summed score was greater than 6 (consistent with exposure to greater than three or more violent events) or if the child reported being a victim of or wit- ness to any violence involving a knife or gun. We also dened weapon- related violence as any violence involving a knife or a gun; non weapon-related violence as any violence involving threats, slapping, hitting, punching, or beating; and threats as any violence involving threats directed toward or witnessed by the subject. Symptoms of PTSD in the past month were measured with the Child PTSD Symptom Scale (CPSS), the child version of the Posttraumatic Diagnostic Scale for Adults (Foa et al., 2001). This measure has been used in school-age children as young as 8 and has shown good convergent and discriminant validity and high reliabil- ity (Foa et al., 2001). In this sample, scale internal consistency was high (Cronbach = .89). A cutoff score of 11 was used to determine eligibility for participation in the intervention, consistent with mod- erate clinical levels of PTSD symptoms. The Childrens Depression Inventory (CDI) (Kovacs, 1992) was used to measure depressive symptoms in the past 2 weeks. The CDI is a widely used measure with good test-retest reliability and validity in clinical and community-based samples. The school mental health staff chose to not include the suicidal ideation item. A cutoff score of 18 was used to determine eligibility for participation in the interven- tion, which corresponds to clinically signicant depressive symptoms. The cutoff score was not adjusted to account for the dropped suicide item. In this sample, scale reliability was high (Cronbach = .82). The parent-report questionnaire consisted of sociodemographic questions such as age, ethnicity, number of years of education, mar- ital status, and employment status. All measures were translated from English to Spanish by the school districts Translation Unit, and translations were reviewed by multiple bilingual/bicultural clinicians to verify accuracy and appropriateness of the translation. Measures were pretested in a similar population of Latino immigrant children, and cognitive interviews were conducted to test the respondents comprehension and interpretation of the ques- tions. Minor modications were made to the measures in response to this feedback. Despite careful work to ensure that the measures were comprehensible to Spanish-speaking children, we note that these scales have not been validated in Latino immigrant child populations. Analysis The data were analyzed for all 198 subjects for whom there was baseline and 3-month follow-up information available. Child age, baseline PTSD and depression scores, baseline total violence score, and parent education were analyzed as continuous variables. The fol- lowing were analyzed as categorical variables: group indicator (treat- ment versus waitlist), child gender, school (total of nine schools), child country of origin (Mexico, El Salvador, Guatemala, and other Latin American countries), parent marital status (married versus other), and parent employment status (employed versus nonemployed). All these variables were considered as clinically relevant covariates in predic- tion of follow-up PTSD and depression scores. We performed comparisons of continuous data between baseline and follow-up scores and between the treatment and waitlist groups using a two-tailed Student t test. We compared categorical data by using the 2 statistic. A p value of .05 or less indicated statistical sig- nicance. Bivariate and multivariate relationships of outcome vari- ables (follow-up CPSS score for PTSD and CDI score for depression) were examined with linear regression. We chose covariates for each multivariate regression model based on their clinical signicance and relationship to the outcome variable in bivariate regression analysis (at p < .2). To obtain robust estimates of the standard errors, we adjusted for clustering to account for the different assignment strate- gies and analyzed them by strata. By doing so, we were able to take into account potential school effects as well as any systematic differ- ences in school demographics. We examined the impact of the intervention for the entire group (those with symptoms of all severity), and again in the subset of chil- dren with symptoms in the clinical range on the symptom measures, to ensure that inclusion of the less symptomatic children did not wash out real intervention effects. Statistical analyses were conducted with STATA, version 7.0 (Stata Corp, 2001). RESULTS Sample Characteristics Table 2 describes the sample characteristics for stu- dents by treatment assignment. Participants had a mean age of 11 years, with two thirds of the students in mid- dle school (n = 156, 68%). Half of the students were female (n = 114, 50%), and more than half were born in Mexico (n = 131, 57%). The mean parental education level was less than 5 years, and the majority of parents were married (162, 71%). There were no signicant dif- ferences in demographic characteristics between those who received the immediate intervention compared with waitlist, with the exception of parental education (lower in the waitlist group, t = 3.04, p < .01). Almost all children in the program had clinical levels of PTSD symptoms (n = 207, 90%); one third of youths had comorbid PTSD and depressive symptoms in the clinical range (n = 73, 32%), and 10% (n = 22) of stu- dents had clinical levels of depression only. Exposure to weapon-related violence involving a knife or gun was common, with two thirds of children reporting exposure to this type of life-threatening violence (n = 157, 69%). The mean score on the Life Events Scale was 18, which represents a high frequency of multiple violent events; for example, a score of 18 could represent six types of vio- lent experiences occurring almost every day. Immediate intervention and waitlist groups did not differ by vio- lence exposure or clinical characteristics. KATAOKA ET AL. 314 J . AM. ACAD. CHI LD ADOLESC. PSYCHI ATRY, 42: 3, MARCH 2003 Intervention Outcomes Table 3 shows the mean baseline and follow-up scores for depression and PTSD symptoms in the intervention and waitlist groups. Depressive symptoms in the inter- vention group decreased from a mean CDI score of 16 to 14 (t = 5.1, p < .001) but remained 16 in the waitlist group (t = 0.1, p > .05). The CPSS mean scores for PTSD symptoms decreased from 19 to 13 in the intervention group (t = 7.5, p < .001) and 18 to 16 in the waitlist (t = 1.3, p > .05). In bivariate regression analyses, adjusting for baseline scores, intervention participants had signicantly lower follow-up CDI scores than those in the waitlist ( = 2.7, SE = 1.1, p < .05). In a similar analysis for PTSD symp- toms, we found a nonsignicant trend for CPSS mean scores improving more in the intervention than waitlist group ( = 2.86, SE = 1.5, p = .06). Because the sample included children with a broad range of symptom severity, we examined the subset of children with scores in the clinical range on symptom SCHOOL-BASED TRAUMA PROGRAM FOR LATINOS J . AM. ACAD. CHI LD ADOLESC. PSYCHI ATRY, 42: 3, MARCH 2003 315 TABLE 2 Demographic Characteristics of MHIP Participants by Intervention and Waitlist (n = 229), 19992000 Total (n = 229) Intervention (n = 182) Waitlist (n = 47) Mean (SD) n (%) Mean (SD) n (%) Mean (SD) n (%) Child demographics Age, years 11.4 (1.7) 11.5 (1.8) 11.2 (1.5) Female 114 (50) 92 (51) 22 (47) School type Elementary 73 (32) 55 (30) 18 (38) Middle school 156 (68) 127 (70) 29 (62) Country of origin Mexico 131 (57) 108 (59) 23 (49) El Salvador 42 (18) 34 (19) 8 (17) Guatemala 26 (11) 19 (10) 7 (15) Other 30 (13) 21 (12) 9 (19) Parent demographics Parental education, years 5.0 (3.8) 5.4 (3.8) 3.4 (3.3)* Married 162 (71) 134 (74) 28 (60) Employed 146 (64) 112 (62) 34 (72) Child symptoms a PTSD b 207 (90) 164 (90) 43 (91) Depression c 95 (41) 76 (42) 19 (40) Violence exposure Total violence score d 18 (10) 18 (10) 18 (12) Weapon-related violence e 157 (69) 125 (69) 32 (68) Nonweapon-related violence f 227 (99) 180 (99) 47 (100) Threats g 210 (92) 169 (93) 41 (87) a Symptom eligibility was clinical symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and/or depression. b Child PTSD Symptom Scale score > 11. c Childrens Depression Inventory score 18. d Total violence score: mean score on modied Life Events Scale (score 6 for eligibility in program). e Weapon-related violence: number of children who witnessed or were threatened or attacked themselves with a knife or gun. f Nonweapon-related violence: number of children who witnessed or were threatened or attacked themselves by being slapped, hit, punched, or beaten. g Threat: number of children who witnessed or were victims of a threat. * p < .01. TABLE 3 Within-Group Comparisons Between Baseline and Follow-up (n = 198), 19992000 Baseline Follow-up a Mean SD Mean SD t Test p Value Intervention (n = 152) CDI b 16.3 6.9 13.5 7.5 5.1 <.001 CPSS c 18.8 7.7 13.0 7.6 7.5 <.001 Waitlist (n = 46) CDI b 16.3 7.7 16.2 9.9 0.1 NS d CPSS c 18.1 8.0 15.7 13.2 1.3 NS d a Approximately 3 months after baseline. b CDI = Childrens Depression Inventory (Kovacs, 1992). c CPSS = Child PTSD Symptom Scale (Foa et al., 2001). d NS = not signicant. measures to examine the intervention effect more care- fully. In subsample analyses, we evaluated only those chil- dren who had baseline symptoms in the clinical range for depression and PTSD. Of the 83 students who had clin- ical levels of depressive symptoms (CDI 18) at base- line, mean CDI scores in the intervention group decreased from 23 to 18 compared with 24 to 23 in the waitlist group ( = 4.9, SE = 2.1, p < .05). One hundred eighty children had clinically significant PTSD symptoms at baseline (CPSS > 11), with mean scores declining from 20 to 13 in the treatment group and 19 to 16 in the wait- list ( = 3.2, SE = 1.5, p < .05). Of the 47 children on the waitlist, 5 (11%) received traditional mental health services and another 14 (30%) reported seeking help from a spiritual leader, healer, or friend or family. Multivariate Analyses We conducted multivariate regression analyses, with relevant covariates for each of the two main outcome vari- ables, CDI and CPSS follow-up scores. Table 4 shows that the intervention group had lower follow-up CDI scores compared with the waitlist group ( = 3.1, SE = 1.1, p < .01), controlling for baseline CDI score, age, gen- der, country of origin, parent education level, and par- ent marital status (F 9,66 = 26.2, p < .001, R 2 = 0.43). In addition to the main effect, boys, those from other Latin American countries compared with Mexico, and those with nonmarried parents had lower follow-up CDI scores than their peers, controlling for other covariates. In evaluating follow-up PTSD symptoms (Table 5), we found that the intervention group had a lower CPSS score than did the waitlist group ( = 3.9, SE = 1.6, p < .05), controlling for baseline CPSS score, age, gender, baseline total violence score, country of origin, and par- ent employment status (F 9,68 = 9.36, p < .001, R 2 = 0.22). In addition, boys, those from El Salvador compared with Mexico, those from other Latin American countries compared with Mexico, and those with lower baseline violence exposure had lower follow-up CPSS scores when controlling for other covariates. DISCUSSION These results provide evidence that this school-based, trauma-focused, CBT intervention for Latino immigrant students is associated with modest reduction in symp- toms of PTSD and depression. Further investigation is needed to determine whether symptoms continue to diminish to nonclinical ranges over time. Nonetheless, these results are encouraging and suggest that CBT can be effectively delivered by school clinicians to treat chil- dren exposed to a wide range of community violence. The translation of guideline-based trauma care to com- munity settings such as schools has signicant implica- tions for decreasing the high level of unmet need for mental health care that exists, especially for underserved populations such as Latino immigrant children. Because this program was developed in the context of existing school services that support immigrants, students and parents identied the MHIP as an extension of this support structure. Anecdotal comments from participants suggest that stigma usually associated with mental health services was minimized in this program. However, qual- itative studies that investigate immigrant Latino student and family perceptions and attitudes toward school-based mental health services are needed to further improve pro- grams such as this one. For example, we found differ- KATAOKA ET AL. 316 J . AM. ACAD. CHI LD ADOLESC. PSYCHI ATRY, 42: 3, MARCH 2003 TABLE 4 Multivariate Linear Regression for Predicting Follow-up CDI Score Variable Coefcient SE t p Value Intervention group 3.06 1.1 2.77 <.01 Baseline CDI 0.61 0.06 10.25 <.001 Age 0.00 0.32 0.01 NS Female 1.98 0.75 2.65 .01 El Salvador 1.77 1.39 1.27 NS Guatemala 0.81 1.0 0.81 NS Other 3.9 1.24 3.15 <.01 Parent education 0.21 0.11 2.00 NS Parent married 2.09 0.68 3.08 <.01 Note: CDI = Childrens Depression Inventory; NS = not significant. TABLE 5 Multivariate Linear Regression for Predicting Follow-up CPSS Score Variable Coefcient SE t p Value Intervention group 3.87 1.6 2.39 <.05 Baseline CPSS score 0.14 0.07 1.93 NS Age 0.52 0.39 1.35 NS Female 3.90 1.13 3.47 .001 El Salvador 3.33 1.64 2.02 <.05 Guatemala 0.83 1.6 0.52 NS Other 7.07 1.47 4.81 <.001 Total violence score 0.12 0.06 2.07 <.05 Parent employed 2.08 1.22 1.71 NS Note: CPSS = Child PTSD Symptom Scale; NS = not signicant. ences across Latino subgroups in follow-up symptom scores controlling for treatment condition and other covariates, which suggests that treatment may need to be tailored for specific ethnic groups, as has been recom- mended by others (Lopez and Guarnaccia, 2000; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2001). In addition to certain ethnic groups having higher symp- tom levels, we also found that girls appear to have greater PTSD and depression symptoms than boys at follow-up, irrespective of treatment condition and after adjusting for covariates. In an earlier study examining symptomatology of this sample at baseline, we found that PTSD symptoms were not predicted by gender when we controlled for depres- sive symptoms, but gender did predict depressive symp- toms (Jaycox et al., 2002). However, even when we control for depressive symptoms in the present study, girls con- tinue to have greater PTSD symptoms at follow-up than boys ( = 3.4, SE = 1.1, p < .001; not shown). Others have hypothesized that female coping strategies in response to stressful events may inuence treatment for depression in women (Gillespie and Eisler, 1992). Whether gender-spe- cic strategies should be incorporated into interventions for youths exposed to community violence needs further exploration. Limitations Several limitations of this study are worth noting. Symptom changes were modest and on average remained in the clinical range at short-term follow-up. Further research is needed to determine whether modications to the inter- vention such as a longer treatment period or booster ses- sions improve outcomes. Given that this is a vulnerable population that rarely receives services, there were design compromises made during this program to ensure that all children who wanted to receive the intervention could do so in a timely manner. Therefore, we randomized only a portion of the participants. The differential attrition across treatment groups makes comparison between groups more tenuous, although we found no important differences in dropouts compared with completers of the study. By using a waitlist comparison group, the program was compared with usual care (of which most subjects did not follow up with the mental health referrals); future studies could com- pare this program with an alternative active treatment. In addition, we found that students who dropped out were older than those who remained in the program. However, some of the older students had also been offered the MHIP after school (to accommodate the request of administra- tors), and clinicians reported that this time period con- icted with after-school activities of students. Therefore, more research on this topic is needed, given that it is unclear from our data whether the dropout rate of older students is due to the format of the program or to the age of stu- dents. Of note, clinicians reported that older students appeared to understand the CBT concepts better and par- ticipated more in group than did the younger students. Finally, although the CBT groups for students were con- sidered to be the primary treatment component to the MHIP, we are unable to determine how each of the mul- tiple components of this program (student and parent groups, teacher education) contributed to its success. Clinical Implications It has been documented that the majority of mental health care for children is delivered in schools (Burns et al., 1995), yet little is known about how to deliver effec- tive care in this setting. One recommendation from the Surgeon Generals Conference on Childrens Mental Health is to improve the quality of mental health services in various sectors of care such as schools (U.S. Public Health Service, 2000). The MHIP provides one exam- ple of how treatment for trauma-related emotional prob- lems can be developed, implemented, and evaluated in the context of schools. Further research is needed to deter- mine how schools can replicate and sustain such pro- grams as the MHIP in ways that not only meet the clinical needs of students but also use the resources available at schools and in neighboring communities. Collaborations between nontraditional mental health delivery settings such as schools and mental health services researchers can result in programs that are evidence-based, effective, and utilized by ethnic minority children and their families. REFERENCES Allensworth D, Lawson E, Nicholson L, Wyche J (1997), Schools and Health: Our Nations Investment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press Azocar F, Miranda J, Dwyer EV (1996), Treatment of depression in disad- vantaged women. Women Ther 18:91105 Belsky J (1980), Child maltreatment: an ecological integration. Am Psychol 35:320335 Berman SL, Kurtines WM, Silverman WK, Serani LT (1996), The impact of exposure to crime and violence on urban youth. Am J Orthopsychiatry 66:329336 Brent DA, Holder D, Kolko D et al. (1997), A clinical psychotherapy trial for adolescent depression comparing cognitive, family, and supportive ther- apy. Arch Gen Psychiatry 54:877885 Brent DA, Perper JA, Moritz G et al. (1995), Posttraumatic stress disorder in peers of adolescent suicide victims: predisposing factors and phenome- nology. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 34:209215 Bui KV, Takeuchi DT (1992), Ethnic minority adolescents and the use of com- munity mental health care services. Am J Community Psychol 20:403417 SCHOOL-BASED TRAUMA PROGRAM FOR LATINOS J . AM. ACAD. CHI LD ADOLESC. PSYCHI ATRY, 42: 3, MARCH 2003 317 Burns BJ, Costello EJ, Angold A et al. (1995), Childrens mental health ser- vice use across service sectors. Health Aff (Millwood) 14:147159 Cicchetti D, Lynch M (1993), Toward an ecological/transactional model of community violence and child maltreatment: consequences for childrens development. Psychiatry 56:96118 (special issue: Children and Violence) Clarke GN, Hawkins W, Murphy M, Sheeber LB, Lewinsohn PM, Seeley JR (1995), Targeted prevention of unipolar depressive disorder in an at-risk sample of high school adolescents: a randomized trial of a group cogni- tive intervention. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 34:312321 Cohen JA (1998), Practice parameters for the assessment and treatment of children and adolescents with posttraumatic stress disorder. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 37:4S26S Deblinger E, Hein AH (1996), Treating Sexually Abused Children and Their Nonoffending Parents: A Cognitive Behavioral Approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Fitzpatrick KM, Boldizar JP (1993), The prevalence and consequences of expo- sure to violence among African-American youth. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 32:424430 Flores G, Vega LR (1998), Barriers to health care access for Latino children: a review. Fam Med 30:196205 Foa EB, Johnson KM, Feeny NC, Treadwell KR (2001), The Child PTSD Symptom Scale: a preliminary examination of its psychometric proper- ties. J Clin Child Psychol 30:376384 Foa EB, Rothbaum BO (1998), Treating the Trauma of Rape: Cognitive- Behavioral Therapy for PTSD. New York: Guilford Garrison EG, Roy IS, Azar V (1999), Responding to the mental health needs of Latino children and families through school-based services. Clin Psychol Rev 19:199219 Gillespie BL, Eisler RM (1992), Development of the feminine gender role stress scale: a cognitive-behavioral measure of stress, appraisal, and cop- ing for women. Behav Modif 16:426438 Guarnaccia PJ (1997), Social stress and psychological distress among Latinos in the United States. In: Ethnicity, Immigration, and Psychopathology. New York: Plenum, pp 7194 Hoagwood K, Erwin HD (1997), Effectiveness of school-based mental health services for children: a 10-year research review. J Child Fam Stud 6:435451 Jaycox LH, Stein BD, Kataoka S et al. (2002), Violence exposure, PTSD, and depressive symptoms among recent immigrant school children. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 41:11041110 Kaslow NJ, Thompson MP (1998), Applying the criteria for empirically sup- ported treatments to studies of psychosocial interventions for child and adolescent depression. J Clin Child Psychol 27:146155 Kataoka SH, Zhang L, Wells KB (2002), Unmet need for mental health care among US children: variation by ethnicity and insurance status. Am J Psychiatry 159:15481555 King NJ, Tonge BJ, Mullen P et al. (2000), Treating sexually abused children with posttraumatic stress symptoms: a randomized clinical trial. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 39:13471355 Kovacs M (1992), Childrens Depression Inventory. New York: Multi-Health Systems Lewinsohn PM, Clarke GN, Hops H, Andrews JA (1990), Cognitive-behavioral treatment for depressed adolescents. Behav Ther 21:385401 Lopez SR, Guarnaccia PJJ (2000), Cultural psychopathology: uncovering the social world of mental illness. Annu Rev Psychol 51:571598 March JS, Amaya-Jackson L, Murray MC, Schulte A (1998), Cognitive-behavioral psychotherapy for children and adolescents with posttraumatic stress dis- order after a single-incident stressor. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 37:585593 McCabe K, Yeh M, Hough RL et al. (1999), Racial/ethnic representation across ve public sectors of care for youth. J Emotional Behav Disord 7:7282 McMiller WP, Weisz JR (1996), Help-seeking preceding mental health clinic intake among African-American, Latino, and Caucasian youths. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 35:10861094 Organista KC (2000), Latinos. In: Cognitive-Behavioral Group Therapy: For Specic Problems and Populations. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, pp 281303 Pynoos RS, Steinberg AM, Wraith R (1995), A developmental model of child- hood traumatic stress. In: Developmental Psychopathology, Vol 2: Risk, Disorder, and Adaptation. New York: Wiley, pp 7295 Richters JE, Martinez PE (1993), Violent communities, family choices, and childrens chances: an algorithm for improving the odds. Dev Psychopathol 5:609627 (special issue: Milestones in the Development of Resilience) Rigamer EF (1986), Psychological management of children in a national cri- sis. J Am Acad Child Psychiatry 25:364369 Saigh PA, Mroueh M, Bremner JD (1997), Scholastic impairments among traumatized adolescents. Behav Res Ther 35:429436 Singer MI, Anglin TM, Song Ly, Lunghofer L (1995), Adolescents exposure to violence and associated symptoms of psychological trauma. JAMA 273:477482 Singer MI, Miller DB, Guo S, Flannery DJ, Frierson T, Slovak K (1999), Contributors to violent behavior among elementary and middle school children. Pediatrics 104:878884 Stata Corp (2001), Stata Statistical Software: Release 7.0. College Station, TX: Stata Corporation Stein BD, Kataoka S, Jaycox LH et al. (2002), Theoretical basis and program design of a school based mental health intervention for traumatized immi- grant children: a collaborative research partnership. J Behav Health Serv Res 29:318326 Trickett EJ, Birman D (1989), Taking ecology seriously: a community devel- opment approach to individually based preventive interventions in schools. In: Primary Prevention and Promotion in the Schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp 361390 US Department of Health and Human Services (2000), Healthy People 2010, 2nd ed: With Understanding and Improving Health and Objectives for Improving Health. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Ofce (2 vols) US Department of Health and Human Services (2001), Mental Health: Culture, Race, and Ethnicity, A Supplement to Mental Health: A Report of the Surgeon General. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Center for Mental Health Services, National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Mental Health US Public Health Service (2000), Report of the Surgeon Generals Conference on Childrens Mental Health: A National Action Agenda. Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services Vega WA, Kolody B, Aguilar-Gaxiola S, Catalano R (1999), Gaps in service utilization by Mexican Americans with mental health problems. Am J Psychiatry 156:928934 Weine SM, Becker DF, McGlashan TH et al. (1995), Psychiatric consequences of ethnic cleansing: clinical assessments and trauma testimonies of newly resettled Bosnian refugees. Am J Psychiatry 152:536542 KATAOKA ET AL. 318 J . AM. ACAD. CHI LD ADOLESC. PSYCHI ATRY, 42: 3, MARCH 2003