# 36 young people completed 6 weeks of surf therapy and reported less depression and anxiety, but the gains had faded 6 weeks after the program ended

> A pilot randomised controlled trial followed 36 Australian children and teenagers who were already seeking help for mental health concerns. The six-week program paired surfing with mentor support and the researchers saw lower depression and anxiety scores when the program ended. Six...

Canonical URL: https://www.argo.net/36-young-people-completed-6-weeks-of-surf-therapy-and-reported-less-depression-and-anxiety-but-the-gains-had-faded-6-weeks-after-the-program-ended/
Byline: ARGO.net Editorial Team
Published: 2026-08-02T18:35:02+00:00
Categories: Explainer, Health

![A young surfer riding a gentle ocean wave](https://www.argo.net/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/young_surfer_ocean_wave.jpg)

A [pilot randomised controlled trial](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1469029222002175) followed 36 Australian children and teenagers who were already seeking help for mental health concerns. The six-week program paired surfing with mentor support and the researchers saw lower depression and anxiety scores when the program ended. Six weeks later, the same paper reported that those early improvements were no longer sustained.

The result is easy to overread because the setting is vivid. Surfboards, waves and beach mentors make the program memorable, yet the strongest finding is narrower: a small, carefully screened group showed a short-term improvement signal during an intervention that looked feasible and acceptable to run. The study does not show that surfing alone can treat depression and it does not show that the benefit lasted after the sessions stopped.

Mental health support for young people remains a large need. The [World Health Organization](https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/adolescent-mental-health) says anxiety and depression are among the leading causes of illness and disability in adolescents. Programs that can attract participation matter because many families struggle to keep children engaged in care long enough to see a benefit.

## What the pilot trial actually tested

The research team designed the project as a **pilot randomised controlled trial**, which means feasibility came first. They wanted to know whether children and adolescents would join, attend and complete a mentor-supported surfing program and whether the study procedures were practical enough to support a larger trial later. The paper treated symptom change as a secondary outcome rather than final proof of effectiveness.

Participants were 8 to 18 years old, with an average age a little above 11 years. All were already **help-seeking** for mental health issues. Young people who were actively suicidal or going through a psychotic episode were excluded, which is an important caution when thinking about who the findings can and cannot describe.

Half of the group entered the six-week intervention first and half went into a **wait list control group**. Researchers collecting the assessments were blinded to group allocation, even though the participants themselves knew whether they were in the surf program. That design reduces some bias, but it cannot remove the expectancy effects that often surround a novel activity.

Attendance and program completion mattered as much as the symptom scores. The paper says four of five feasibility criteria tied to the intervention were fully met, along with four of six criteria tied to the study design. For a pilot study, those operational details are one of the main products, because they show whether a bigger trial is realistic.

## What improved by the end of six weeks

By the end of the program, the intervention group reported lower symptoms of depression and anxiety than at baseline. The study measured those changes with the **Revised Children's Anxiety and Depression Scale-Short Form** and the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. It also reported improvement signals for emotional problems, peer problems, hyperactivity or inattention and overall difficulties.

The size of those changes was moderate rather than dramatic. Depression showed an **effect size** of 0.57, anxiety 0.43, emotional problems 0.79, peer problems 0.56, hyperactivity or inattention 0.28 and overall difficulties 0.64. In plain language, the scores moved in a helpful direction, though the sample was small enough that any estimate should be treated as provisional.

One reason the findings draw attention is that the intervention combined physical challenge, outdoor time and close adult support. A child who struggles to sit through a clinic visit may respond differently to a structured beach session with a board, a wetsuit and a trusted mentor. The study cannot separate those ingredients cleanly, so it leaves open which parts carried the most weight.

Clinical context still matters more than novelty. The [National Institute of Mental Health](https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/child-and-adolescent-mental-health) describes child and adolescent mental health care as a broad system that can include evaluation, psychotherapy, family support, school coordination and medication when appropriate. The surf program sat inside that larger care landscape rather than replacing it.

## Why the promising signal weakened after the sessions stopped

The most important line in the paper comes after the upbeat mid-study results. Six weeks after the intervention ended, the reductions in symptoms were **not sustained**. That outcome changes the story from a simple success narrative into a more useful question: what helps young people keep the gains once the weekly structure, mentor contact and shared activity disappear?

Several explanations are plausible and the study was not built to rank them. A six-week program may simply be too short for children with active mental health symptoms. Some participants may have benefited from the **mentor-supported sessions** as much as from the surfing itself. Others may have struggled to maintain routines once the scheduled meetings stopped and daily stress returned.

The same paper also leaves open whether booster sessions, family follow-up, or parallel clinical treatment could have extended the benefit. For anxiety, especially, symptoms can ease in a supportive setting and rise again when ordinary pressures return. The [WHO anxiety disorders fact sheet](https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/anxiety-disorders) notes that anxiety often begins in childhood or adolescence, which helps explain why short-term relief can be real without becoming stable recovery.

Viewed carefully, the fade-out result is a strength of the report rather than a weakness hidden in small print. The authors did not stop measurement at the most flattering moment. They checked again, saw the decline in effect and reported it directly. That makes the paper more useful for program designers who want to build something that lasts longer than one active block of sessions.

## Why surfing may still work as a hook into care

Even with the fading follow-up scores, surfing may be valuable as an entry point. Many young people do not walk willingly into formal treatment, especially when they expect stigma, boredom, or another adult-controlled setting. A beach-based program offers movement, visible progress and a peer setting that can lower the barrier to showing up in the first place.

The water environment may also change how distress is experienced in the moment. Learning to paddle, stand, or recover after a fall gives a child repeated chances to practice attention and persistence while doing something concrete. Success is immediate and physical. For some participants, that may create enough trust to support later work in school, family, or clinic settings.

Engagement is a clinical asset even when it is not a complete treatment. The [WHO depression fact sheet](https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/depression) emphasizes that depression can affect mood, interest, sleep, concentration and daily function, which means treatment often needs more than a single tool. A program that reliably gets young people to participate can still play a useful supporting role inside broader care.

The strongest practical case for **surf therapy** is therefore modest and specific. It may help some children feel better in the short term, it appears acceptable to many families and it can attract participation from young people who might resist more conventional formats. None of those points erase the need for sustained follow-up when symptoms are serious or persistent.

## What a stronger next study would need to show

A larger trial would need more participants, a longer follow-up window and a clearer map of what care participants were receiving outside the program. Researchers would also want to know whether the same pattern holds for different ages, symptom levels and settings. An 11-year-old with mild anxiety may respond very differently from an older teenager carrying depression plus school refusal or trauma.

Future studies could also test maintenance strategies instead of ending the program cleanly at six weeks. A stepped design with booster sessions, parent check-ins, or links back to community clinicians might show whether the early benefit can be extended. That question matters more than whether surfing looks exciting on paper, because lasting improvement is the real clinical target.

Researchers should also separate the program's active ingredients more carefully. The waves may matter, yet so might exercise, routine, group belonging, exposure to supportive adults, or the sense of mastery that comes from learning a difficult skill. A better powered study could compare **follow-up support** models and activity formats to see whether the beach setting is essential or one strong delivery vehicle among several.

For now, the pilot offers a grounded conclusion. A short surf program produced a **short-term gains** signal in depression and anxiety for a small group of young people, then those gains faded by the six-week follow-up. That is a meaningful finding for clinicians, families and program builders, because it points toward engagement potential on the front end and a clear durability problem on the back end.