Reducing Secondary Distress in Violence Researchers: a Randomised Trial of the Effectiveness of Group Debriefings.

March 19, 2015 updated by: Heidi Grundlingh, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
The objectives of the study were: To (1) describe the epidemiology of emotional distress experienced by Ugandan violence researchers; to (2) assess the effectiveness of group debriefings in mitigating secondary distress; to (3) assess risk and protective factors. Eligible participants were 59 Ugandan researchers employed by the Good Schools Study (GSS, NCT01678846) to interview children and adults who experienced violence. Recruited participants were randomly assigned to group debriefings (intervention) or film viewing (control). The primary outcome was change in levels of emotional distress.

Study Overview

Detailed Description

Background: Secondary distress including emotional distress, vicarious trauma (VT) and secondary traumatic stress (STS) due to exposure to primary trauma victims have been described in helping professionals and in violence researchers. To our knowledge, there are few prevalence studies, and no tailored interventions have been tested to reduce secondary distress in violence researchers.

Objective: To (1) describe the epidemiology of emotional distress experienced by Ugandan violence researchers; to (2) assess the effectiveness of group debriefings in mitigating secondary distress; to (3) assess risk and protective factors.

Methods: An unblinded, individually randomised trial with parallel assignment was conducted. Eligible participants were 59 Ugandan researchers employed by the Good Schools Study (GSS, NCT01678846) to interview children and adults who experienced violence in the district of Luwero, Uganda. 53 researchers agreed to participate and were randomly allocated. The intervention group (n=26) participated in three group debriefings and the control group (n=27) participated in three leisure sessions (film viewing).The primary outcome was change in levels of emotional distress (SRQ-20); secondary outcomes were levels of VT and STS at end-line.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

53

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Child
  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Eligible participants were all 59 Ugandan researchers who had been employed by the GSS.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • none

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Debrief Group
The debrief group participated in 3 consecutive face-to-face group debriefing sessions lasting 1.5-2 hrs each. Each session started with a fun ice-breaker to create a relaxed atmosphere and group cohesion. Session 1 focused on encouraging group participation, discussing primary trauma encountered and emotional reactions to these stories. Session 2 connected current experiences with the group members' own trauma histories and life experiences. The last session focussed on societal and community responses to violence, and employing personal agency to find constructive ways to address violence in communities.
Group Debriefing involves story-telling, identifying emotional responses to these stories, psycho-education and practical information to normalize group member reactions to a distressing event.
Placebo Comparator: Control Group
The control group was assigned to a leisure activity (film showing), for every session of debriefing undergone by the intervention group. The films were chosen for their light-hearted uplifting content and presented as a fun and relaxing activity.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change from baseline Self-Report Questionnaire-20 (SRQ-20) score at 5 weeks
Time Frame: 5 weeks
The SRQ-20 is a 20 item measure which require simple 'yes' or 'no' responses and was designed as a screening tool for psychological symptoms/emotional distress. It has been widely used and validated in low and middle-income countries as a measure of mental health and wellbeing. The SRQ-20 was modelled as a continuous variable but also a binary variable were the top 33% of the overall distribution was deemed as having a 'high' score indicative of probable emotional distress, consistent with previous research.
5 weeks

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Vicarious Trauma Scale (VTS) at 5 weeks
Time Frame: 5 weeks
The Vicarious Trauma Scale (VTS), an 8 item measure with a 7 point Likert-type scale, has recently been developed and shown to have good psychometric properties for use as a screening tool for vicarious trauma in low resource settings. It is the only publically available screening measure of VT.
5 weeks
Impact of Events Scale-Revised (IES-R) at 5 weeks
Time Frame: 5 weeks
The Impact of Events Scale-Revised (IES-R)consists of 22 items with a 4 point Likert-type scale widely validated and used to screen for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). It has been used by several studies to measure STS as the theoretical symptomology is similar.
5 weeks
Professional Quality of Life Scale (ProQOL) at 5 weeks
Time Frame: 5 weeks
The Professional Quality of Life Scale (ProQOL) was developed to screen mental health and other professionals who may experience positive or negative impacts as they help others. Versions of the screening tool have good construct validity with over 200 published papers and it is widely used in research as a measure for STS and related constructs.
5 weeks

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Heidi Grundlingh, MPH, LSHTM

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

June 1, 2014

Primary Completion (Actual)

July 1, 2014

Study Completion (Actual)

July 1, 2014

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

March 11, 2015

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

March 17, 2015

First Posted (Estimate)

March 18, 2015

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

March 20, 2015

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

March 19, 2015

Last Verified

March 1, 2015

More Information

Terms related to this study

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Emotional Distress

Clinical Trials on Group Debriefing

3
Subscribe