Enhancing Resilience in an Operational Unit

Abstract

Objectives—The purpose of this review was to evaluate whether the Penn Resiliency Program (PRP), a group cognitive-behavioral intervention, is effective in targeting depressive symptoms in youth. Data sources—We identified 17 controlled evaluations of PRP (N = 2498) measuring depressive symptoms via an online search of PsycInfo, Medline, ERIC, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, and by requesting data from PRP researchers. Review methods—We combined effect sizes (ESs; Glass's d), using random effects models at post-intervention and two follow-up assessments. Results—PRP participants reported fewer depressive symptoms at post-intervention and both follow-up assessments compared to youth receiving no intervention, with ESs ranging from 0.11 to 0.21. Limited data show no evidence that PRP is superior to active control conditions. Subgroup analyses showed that PRP's effects were significant at 1 or more follow-up assessments among studies using both targeted and universal approaches, when group leaders were research team members and community providers, among participants with both low and elevated baseline symptoms, and among boys and girls. Preliminary analyses suggest that PRP's effects on depressive disorders may be smaller than those reported in a larger meta-analysis of depression prevention programs for older adolescents and adults. Conclusion—We found evidence that PRP significantly reduces depressive symptoms through at least 1 year post-intervention. Future PRP research should examine whether PRP's effects on depressive symptoms lead to clinically meaningful benefits for its participants, whether the program is cost-effective, whether CBT skills mediate program effects, and whether PRP is effective when delivered under real-world conditions.