Saturday, 15 January 2005 - 12:00 PMThis presentation is part of: Poster Session IIAssessing the Impacts of Natural Disasters on Children: Lessons from the FieldJohn J. Stretch, PhD, Saint Louis University and Larry W. Kreuger, PhD, University of Missouri-Columbia.Research Question: Investigated were the relationships between emotional distress and risk factors indicating service needs in children following a major natural disaster. Data were obtained from 18 schools with a population of 2719 children in grades 4-12 who were screened on-site using two standardized measures of distress, the Revised Children's Manifest Anxiety Scale (RCMAS), and the Children's Depression Inventory (CDI). Additional items included self-reported disaster impact, amount of harm to self and family, and family recovery. Findings: Of 2719 screened, 1950 (72%) measured within normal limits for both anxiety and depression. Of those 769 children (28%) with elevated scores, 570 (74%) had elevated anxiety, 41 (5%) had elevated depression, and the remaining 158 (21%) had both. The perception of harm to self (x2 = 23.95, p<.001); self reported illnesses, (x2 = 18.93, p<001); and evacuation of residence (x2 = 17.10, p<.001), were related to elevated anxiety and/or depression scores. Additional analysis suggests a disaster recovery model with five levels. Using these data, 2253 (83%) of those screened would classified in low risk magnitude 1; 170 (6.3%) would be in (slight risk) level 2; 152 (5.6%) would be in (moderate risk) level 3; and the remaining 144 (5.3%) would be classified in the level 4 group (highest risk, evacuated residence). No children were in level 0 (no risk), as participating schools were selected from parishes where at least minimal disaster impacts had occurred. Relevance: Policy questions for human service providers include how often and at what points children exposed to a natural disaster should be assessed and how long they might need to be monitored for counseling and other interventions. Schools involved in this project offered excellent (although perhaps not broad) potential for risk screening and intervention.
See more of Poster Session II |