学校心理健康教育结合家庭干预对中学生心理健康的影响

赵献梓; 王剑彪

doi:10.16835/j.cnki.1000-9817.2021.03.022

学校心理健康教育结合家庭干预对中学生心理健康的影响

doi: 10.16835/j.cnki.1000-9817.2021.03.022

赵献梓¹,
王剑彪²

1.
河北师范大学教育学院，石家庄 050024
2.
河北经贸大学教学评估与教师教学发展中心

基金项目:

河北省高等学校人文社会科学研究项目 SQ171151

详细信息

作者简介:
赵献梓(1978-)，女，河北邯郸人，硕士，副教授，主要研究方向为学生发展与教育

中图分类号: G 627.9 G 444
计量
- 文章访问数: 630
- HTML全文浏览量: 351
- PDF下载量: 58
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2020-09-22
- 修回日期: 2020-11-10
- 网络出版日期: 2021-04-20
- 刊出日期: 2021-03-25

Influence of school mental health education combined with family intervention on the mental health of middle school students

ZHAO Xianzi¹,
WANG Jianbiao²

1.
College of Education, Hebei Normal University, Shijiazhuang(050024), China

摘要

摘要: 目的探讨学校心理健康教育结合家庭干预对中学生心理健康的影响，为促进中学生的心理健康提供参考。方法方便选取河北师范大学附属实验中学6个班级的280名学生作为研究对象，将每个年级所选取的2个班级分别纳入实验组(145名)和对照组(135名)。实验组采用学校心理健康教育并配合家庭干预，对照组仅行学校心理健康教育。对比两组学生干预前后的一般健康问卷(GHQ)评分、症状自评量表(SCL-90)评分及常见心理卫生问题的变化。结果实验组干预后的GHQ-12总评分为(5.06±1.33)分，干预前为(15.62±3.84)分，干预后的GHQ-12总评分较干预前降低，且低于对照组干预后(t值分别为13.65，8.39，P值均 < 0.05)。干预后实验组的SCL-90躯体化、焦虑、抑郁、偏执、人际关系敏感、强迫症状、敌对、偏执、精神病性评分均低于对照组(t=-13.21~-6.71，P值均 < 0.05)。实验组干预后人际关系好、亲子关系好、课余爱好很多者占比分别为68.28%，66.21%，84.14%，均高于对照组(35.56%，40.74%，51.85%)，没有知心朋友、有早恋、无课余爱好者占比分别为9.66%，9.66%，4.14%，均低于对照组(20.74%，24.44%，21.48%)(P值均 < 0.05)。结论学校心理健康教育配合家庭干预可有效提高中学生的心理卫生水平，改善人际关系，促进心理健康。
- 精神卫生 /
- 健康教育 /
- 家庭 /
- 干预性研究 /
- 学生
Abstract: Objective To explore the influence of school mental health education combined with family intervention on the mental and physical health of middle school students. Methods A total of 280 students in six classes of the experimental middle school attached to Hebei Normal University were convenient selected as participants, and two classes in each grade were included in the experimental group and the control group. The experimental group received school mental health education and family intervention, while the control group only received school mental health education. The changes in GHQ, SCL-90 and common mental health problems were compared before and after intervention. Results The total score of GHQ-12 was (5.06±1.33) in the experimental group after intervention and (15.62±3.84) before intervention. The total score of GHQ-12 in the experimental group after intervention was significantly lower than that before intervention, and significantly lower than that in the control group(t=13.65, 8.39, P < 0.05). The scores for somatization, anxiety, depression, paranoia, interpersonal sensitivity, obsessive-compulsive symptoms, hostility, paranoia and psychosis in the experimental group were significantly lower than those in the control group(t=-13.21--6.71, P < 0.05). After the intervention, the proportions of good interpersonal relationships, good parent-child relationships and after-school hobbies in the experimental group were 68.28%, 66.21% and 84.14%, respectively, which were significantly higher than those in the control group(35.56%, 40.74% and 51.85%, respectively), the proportions of people without intimate friends, early love and love after school were 9.66%, 9.66% and 4.14%, respectively, which were significantly lower than those in the control group(20.74%, 24.44%, 21.48%)(P < 0.05). Conclusion School mental health education and family intervention can effectively improve the mental health of middle school students, improve their interpersonal relationships and promote their mental and physical health.
- Mental health /
- Health education /
- Family /
- Intervention studies /
- Students

HTML全文

表 1 干预前后不同组别中学生SCL-90评分比较(x±s)

Table 1. Comparison of SCL-90 scores of middle school students in different groups before and after intervention(x±s)

干预前后	组别	人数	统计值	躯体化	抑郁	焦虑	偏执	人际关系敏感	强迫症状	敌对	偏执	精神病性	其他
干预前	实验组	145		23.05±2.14	25.57±3.02	18.76±2.31	11.04±2.19	16.62±2.65	19.90±3.75	12.32±3.01	11.98±2.79	18.94±2.36	10.20±3.35
	对照组	135		22.97±3.54	24.92±2.65	19.24±3.27	10.98±1.65	16.05±3.14	18.74±4.08	11.35±2.17	11.55±3.13	19.25±3.34	9.87±4.47
			t值	0.54	0.35	-0.07	1.25	0.39	0.74	1.10	0.82	-0.71	1.10
			P值	0.25	0.41	1.03	0.09	0.50	0.24	0.10	0.23	0.41	0.08
干预后	实验组	145		17.25±2.20	15.36±1.87	10.25±2.33	6.02±1.47	9.78±3.36	11.35±4.08	8.78±1.84	8.24±2.04	12.35±2.01	9.83±1.21
	对照组	135		20.04±3.52	20.05±3.36	15.35±2.18	8.87±2.74	12.98±2.25	16.88±4.31	9.34±3.54	10.96±3.24	15.32±2.45	9.97±3.62
			t值	-13.21	-9.54	-7.25	-6.95	-8.33	-6.71	-7.33	-10.24	-9.62	-0.24
			P值	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.66

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 干预前后不同组别学生常见心理卫生指标分布比较

Table 2. Comparison of the distribution of common mental health indicators in different groups of middle school students before and after intervention

干预前后	组别	人数	人际关系						知心朋友						早恋
干预前后	组别	人数	好	一般	差	χ²值	P值		没有	1~3个	> 3个	χ²值	P值		有	无	χ²值	P值
干预前	实验组	145	61(42.07)	73(50.34)	11(7.59)	1.07	0.59		29(20.00)	68(46.90)	48(33.10)	0.83	0.66		35(24.14)	110(75.86)	0.69	0.40
	对照组	135	51(37.78)	76(56.30)	8(5.93)				30(22.22)	67(49.63)	38(28.15)				27(20.00)	108(80.00)
干预后	实验组	145	99(68.28)	42(28.97)	4(2.76)	30.24	0.00		14(9.66)	79(54.48)	52(35.86)	9.19	0.01		14(9.66)	131(90.34)	10.95	0.00
	对照组	135	48(35.56)	77(57.04)	10(7.41)				28(20.74)	75(55.56)	32(23.70)				33(24.44)	102(75.56)

干预前后	组别	人数	亲子关系								课余爱好
干预前后	组别	人数	好		一般	不好		χ²值	P值		无	很少		很多		χ²值		P值
干预前	实验组	145	62(42.76)		66(45.52)	17(11.72)		0.49	0.78		22(15.17)	33(22.76)		90(62.07)		1.99		0.37
	对照组	135	54(40.00)		67(49.63)	14(10.37)					27(20.00)	35(25.93)		73(54.07)
干预后	实验组	145	96(66.21)		52(35.86)	3(2.07)		15.80	0.00		6(4.14)	17(11.72)		122(84.14)		35.70		0.00
	对照组	135	55(40.74)		65(48.15)	15(11.11)					29(21.48)	36(26.67)		70(51.85)
注： ()内数字为构成比/%。

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(15)

[1]	雍那, 任玉玲, 王春元, 等. 南充市中学生心理健康状况调查[J]. 中国健康心理学杂志, 2018, 26(10): 1592-1597. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-JKXL201810040.htm YONG N, REN Y L, WANG C Y, et al. Mental health status of middle school students in Nanchong[J]. Chin J Health Psychol, 2018, 26(10): 1592-1597. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-JKXL201810040.htm
[2]	HAAVIK L, JOA I, HATLOY K, et al. Help seeking for mental health problems in an adolescent population: the effect of gender[J]. J Ment Health, 2019, 28(5): 467-474. doi: 10.1080/09638237.2017.1340630
[3]	徐宁, 张伟波, 杨美霞, 等. 上海市初中生抑郁情绪与生活事件的相关性[J]. 中国学校卫生, 2019, 40(6): 882-884. doi: 10.16835/j.cnki.1000-9817.2019.06.025 XU N, ZHANG W B, YANG M X, et al. Correlation analysis of depression and life events among junior middle school students in Shanghai[J]. Chin J Sch Health, 2019, 40(6): 882-884. doi: 10.16835/j.cnki.1000-9817.2019.06.025
[4]	王建, 刘洁, 黄梅, 等. 一般健康问卷(GHQ-12)的修订: 基于项目表述效应的信效度分析[C]//中国心理学会. 第二十一届全国心理学学术会议摘要集, 2018: 1030-1031. WANG J, LIU J, HUANG M, et al. Revision of General Health Questionnaire(GHQ-12): reliability and validity analysis based on item expression effect[C]//Chinese Psychological Society. Abstracts of the 21st national psychological conference, 2018: 1030-1031.
[5]	肖黎. 中文版90项症状自评量表在中学生中使用的信效度分析[J]. 中国学校卫生, 2012, 33(3): 346-347. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XIWS201203046.htm XIAO L. Reliability and validity of Chinese version of 90 item SCL-90 in middle school students[J]. Chin J Sch Health, 2012, 33(3): 346-347. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XIWS201203046.htm
[6]	杨蓉, 李丹琳, 万宇辉, 等. 中学生健康素养和手机使用依赖与发生心理病理症状的关联[J]. 中华预防医学杂志, 2019, 53(3): 279-283. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XLYK202020028.htm YANG R, LI D L, WAN Y H, et al. Correlation of health literacy and mobile phone use dependence with psychopathological symptoms in middle school students[J]. Chin J Prev Med, 2019, 53(3): 279-283. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XLYK202020028.htm
[7]	SIGNORINI G, SINGH S P, BORICEVIC-MARSANIC V, et al. Architecture and functioning of child and adolescent mental health services: a 28-country survey in Europe[J]. Lancet Psychiatr, 2017, 4(9): 715-724. doi: 10.1016/S2215-0366(17)30127-X
[8]	刘旺发, 黄俊玲, 周隽. 心理干预对初中生心理卫生知识知晓率的影响[J]. 中国校医, 2017, 31(6): 413-414. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XIYI201706007.htm LIU W F, HUANG J L, ZHOU J. Effect of psychological intervention on the awareness rate of mental health knowledge of junior middle school students[J]. Chin J Sch Doct, 2017, 31(6): 413-414. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XIYI201706007.htm
[9]	王红瑞. 陕西省44所中等职业学校心理健康教育工作现状调查与对策分析[J]. 中国健康教育, 2017, 33(11): 1035-1037. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZGJK201711019.htm WANG H R. Analysis on psychological health education situation and measure of 44 secondary vocational school in Shaanxi Province[J]. Chin J Health Educ, 2017, 33 (11): 1035-1037. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZGJK201711019.htm
[10]	李悦阁, 朱青青, 李露露. 心理干预对中学生行为问题的影响研究[J]. 实用预防医学, 2019, 26(5): 608-610. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SYYY201905029.htm LI Y G, ZHU Q Q, LI L L. The effect of psychological intervention on behavior problems of middle school students[J]. Pract Prev Med, 2019, 26(5): 608-610. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SYYY201905029.htm
[11]	崔向清, 陈昱良, 高天艾, 等. 浅论家校协同模式对大学生心理健康干预的作用[J]. 中医教育, 2019, 38(3): 83-85. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZYJI201903028.htm CUI X Q, CHEN Y L, GAO TA, et al. On the effect of family school cooperation model on mental health intervention of college students[J]. Educ Trad Chin Med, 2019, 38(3): 83-85. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZYJI201903028.htm
[12]	宋秋云. 对高校心理危机事件中家校沟通的几点思考[J]. 湖南科技学院学报, 2019, 40(3): 54-55. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-JMLK201903019.htm SONG Q Y. Reflections on home school communication in college psychological crisis[J]. J Hunan Univ Sci Technol, 2019, 40(3): 54-55. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-JMLK201903019.htm
[13]	李冰寒, 张辉. 家校合作构建大学生心理健康[J]. 中国医药导报, 2019, 16(22): 73-76. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YYCY201922018.htm LI B H, ZHANG H. Home-school cooperation to build mental health of college students[J]. China Med Herald, 2019, 16(22): 73-76. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YYCY201922018.htm
[14]	陈艳, 刘岩, 谢凯, 等. 中职院校开展青春期心理教育的具体措施[J]. 职业与健康, 2019, 35(10): 1422-1425. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZYJK201910032.htm CHEN Y, LIU Y, XIE K, et al. Specific measures for adolescent psychological education in secondary vocational schools[J]. Occup Health, 2019, 35(10): 1422-1425. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZYJK201910032.htm
[15]	张红英, 王军, 李新影, 等. 我国留守青少年积极心理品质对抑郁症状的影响[J]. 中国健康教育, 2017, 33(5): 387-391. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZGJK201705002.htm ZHANG H Y, WANG J, LI X Y, et al. The influence of left-behind adolescents' character strengths on depressive symptoms in China[J]. Chin J Health Educ, 2017, 33(5): 387-391. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZGJK201705002.htm