Effectiveness of a Nursing Intervention for Nurses Have Experienced Trauma: a Study Based on Swanson's Caring Theory

January 27, 2022 updated by: Yonsei University

This study aimed to (1) develop an internet-based psychiatric nursing intervention, based on Swanson's theory of caring, and (2) examine its effects on functional health, resilience, social support, post-traumatic stress, depression, and anxiety.

This study was a randomized clinical trial(RCT) study with repeated measures to identify the effectiveness of an internet-based psychiatric nursing intervention. Participants were evaluated at the following time points: pre-test (pre), post-test (post-test 1, immediately after intervention), and follow-up (post-test 2, one month after the intervention) to assess the sustainability of the internet-based psychiatric nursing intervention.

Of the 112 women who enrolled in the study, 10 dropped out before post-test 1, resulting in 102 participants who completed all interventions and surveys.

Study Overview

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

112

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

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

23 years to 40 years (Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  1. nurse aged from 23 to 40 years
  2. a PTS score of 64 or lower on the PTSD checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5) developed by Weathers et al., revised by Weathers et al., and translated into Korean by Kim et al.,
  3. nurse who can access the program through a computer or mobile
  4. nurse who understand the purpose of the research and voluntarily agree to participate in the research.

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. presence of psychiatric conditions with hallucinations and delusions
  2. diagnosis of an intellectual disability that would make understanding the intervention procedure difficult. Although a standard cut-off was not present in the PCL-5, women who exceeded 80% (64 points) of the total score were excluded to rule out high-risk women with severe trauma.

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: Other
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Single

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Nursing intervention
Nurses randomly assigned by applying a random selection method
The trauma recovery nursing intervention program was for adults who had experienced trauma and consisted of eight sessions, each lasting 30 min. It included a spoken audio track that was accompanied by visual prompts to provide knowledge on traumatic stress and introduce trauma recovery methods. Its online format made it convenient and widely accessible, and allowed for a low-intensity, cost-effective educational program. The program focused on providing self-help guidelines for clients to develop their mental and physical well-being.
No Intervention: No intervention
Nurses randomly assigned by applying a random selection method

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
functional health
Time Frame: one month after the intervention
The Functional Health Pattern Assessment Screening Tool (FHPAST) was developed by Jones (2002) and adapted by Keum and Kim (2012). The FHPAST is a self-report scale consisting of 58 items, each with a 4-point scale (1 to 4). Sixteen questions (43-58) are reverse scored. Mean scores of three or higher indicate that the physiological-spiritual function is at a healthy level and the individual is ready for health promotion. In the Jones study (2002), the reliability was Cronbach's α = .70 and .90.
one month after the intervention
resilience
Time Frame: one month after the intervention
Resilience was assessed using the Korean version of the Resilience Scale (K-CD-RISC) developed by Connor and Davidson (2003) and standardized by Baek, Lee, Joo, Lee, and Choi (2010). This selfreported instrument consists of 25 items scored on a 5-point scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 4 (almost always). The scale comprises five factors: hardiness, persistence, optimism, support, and spirituality. Scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating higher levels of resilience. The Cronbach's α was 0.89 in a previous study (Connor & Davidson, 2003).
one month after the intervention
social support
Time Frame: one month after the intervention
Social support was measured using the Social Provisions Scale (SPS), developed by Cutrona and Russell (1987) and translated into Korean by Yoo and Lee (2006). The instrument comprises 24 items, rated using a four-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree). It has six subscales assessing attachment, social integration, the opportunity for nurturance, reassurance of worth, reliable alliance, and guidance. Each subscale comprises four items. The total score on social support was calculated by adding the scores of all items and ranged from 24 to 96. Higher scores indicated higher levels of perceived social support. Cronbach's alpha coefficients for the Social support were 0.92 in a prior study (Cutrona & Russell, 1987), 0.94 among Korean male adults (Je, 2014).
one month after the intervention
post-traumatic stress
Time Frame: one month after the intervention
PTS was measured using the PCL-5, which was developed by Weathers et al. (2013), revised by Weathers et al. (1993) as per the revised PTSD definition in the DSM-5, and translated into Korean by Kim et al. (2017). The Korean version of the PCL for the DSM-5 (PCL-5-K) contained 20 items, and each scored from 0 (not at all) to 4 (extremely). The score depended on the severity of the symptom caused by stress related to traumatic events during the past month. Possible scores ranged from 0 to 80, with a score of 37 or above indicating a PTSD diagnosis, and higher scores suggesting severe PTSD symptoms (2013). Cronbach's alpha coefficient for the PCL-5-K was .97 among Korean veterans of the Vietnam War (2017).
one month after the intervention
depression
Time Frame: one month after the intervention
Depression was assessed using the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D), developed by Radloff (1997) and translated into Korean by Chon and Rhee (1992). The Korean version of the CES-D contained 20 items rated on a 4-point Likert scale (0 = rarely or never; 3 = all the time), according to how respondents felt during the past week. Possible scores ranged from 0 to 60, with a score of 16 or above indicating depressive symptoms, and higher scores indicating higher levels of depression (1977). Cronbach's alpha coefficient for the Korean CES-D was .89 among Korean adults (1992).
one month after the intervention
anxiety
Time Frame: one month after the intervention
Anxiety was measured using the Korean version of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI; J. T. Kim & Shin, 1978), originally developed by Spielberger et al. (1970). The STAI comprises 20 items measuring state anxiety, indicating the current degree of anxiety. It has 20 items assessing trait anxiety, indicating the degree of generally feeling anxious. The responses are rated on a four-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (almost never) to 4 (almost always), with the possible range of scores for each type of anxiety being 20-80. Higher scores indicate greater state and trait anxiety. Cronbach's alpha coefficients were 0.87 for state anxiety and 0.86 for trait anxiety in a prior study (S. S. Kim, 2003).
one month after the intervention

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this 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 (Actual)

May 7, 2020

Primary Completion (Actual)

December 20, 2020

Study Completion (Actual)

December 20, 2020

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

July 26, 2021

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

July 26, 2021

First Posted (Actual)

August 4, 2021

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

January 31, 2022

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

January 27, 2022

Last Verified

January 1, 2022

More Information

Terms related to this study

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

  • Y-2019-0083

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

No

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

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 Nurses Who Have Experienced Trauma

Clinical Trials on The trauma recovery nursing intervention program

Subscribe