Resilience, PsychologicalBRAWNCT05130879
Building Resilience @ Work Training Among Healthcare Workers
A study testing BRAW in people with Resilience, Psychological, run by National University of Singapore at 1 site in Singapore.
Trial summary
Background Given that the challenges in adjusting to shifting work, physical workload and high-strung nature, healthcare workers often encounter high stress, emotional exhaustion, low empathy, fatigue and burnout, which, in turn, result in sickness, absence, and high turnover. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 21 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Resilience, Psychological
- What is being tested?
- BRAW
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 500 participants
- Where
- 1 siteSingapore
- Study dates
- 15 Nov 2021to 24 Dec 2024
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 21 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Healthcare workers aged 21 years or older
- Can read English
- Own and regularly use smartphone, tablet, laptop or desktop
- Can access the internet
Who cannot join
- Previous diagnosis of psychosis, severe depression, personality disorder and substance abuse at any point in their life
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Evaluation of Building Resilience at Work (BRAW) Training Among Healthcare Workers: A Sequential Mixed Methods Design
Background Given that the challenges in adjusting to shifting work, physical workload and high-strung nature, healthcare workers often encounter high stress, emotional exhaustion, low empathy, fatigue and burnout, which, in turn, result in sickness, absence, and high turnover. Hence, building resilience for future adversity among healthcare workers in the workplace is necessary.
Objectives To evaluate the effectiveness of the Building Resilience at Work (BRAW) on resilience, job engagement, intention to leave, employability, and work performance To explore healthcare workers' experience of the BRAW intervention.
Read more
Methods This study will evaluate the effectiveness of BRAW using a sequential mixed methods design in two phases. In phase I, a two-armed randomized controlled trial will be conducted to compare resilience, work engagement, coping skills, job satisfaction and life satisfaction with a waiting list control condition among 410 healthcare workers.
In phase II, the investigators will conduct a virtual individual interview to explore experiences on usability and acceptability after receiving the BRAW intervention using a sample of 33 healthcare workers.
Significance of research Considering the multifactorial and complexity of resilience at work in an increasingly dynamic healthcare environment, the content of resilience training can promote resilience, work engagement, coping skills, job satisfaction and life satisfaction among healthcare workers in order to reduce the turnover rate among healthcare workers in Singapore.
- Conditions
- Resilience, Psychological
- Being tested
- BRAW
- Keywords
- Resilience training, Healthcare Workers
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
BRAWBehavioural
Sessions
- Happiness and positivity Understanding strengths and resilience and positive attitude
- Cognitive restructuring Identification dysfunctional automatic thoughts in problematic and emotional arousing situations Usage of cognitive -behavioural techniques to evaluate and modify dysfunctional thoughts and beliefs
- Behavioural activation Initiation and utilization of behavioural activation techniques for positive change by increasing pleasant events Healthy interpersonal relationships Importance of peer support
- Emotion regulation Preventing and managing conflict Emotion regulation abilities
- Positive work climate Building supportive work environment Development of supportive collegial relationships Promotion of coworker support
- Problem solving Problem-solving work-life problems Work-life balance Bringing it together
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| BRAW intervention group | Experimental | BRAW is designed as an online intervention comprising of six sessions over six weeks. The six sessions are: (1) happiness and positivity, (2) cognitive restructuring, (3) behavioural activation, (4) emotion regulation, (5) positive work climate and (6) problem solving. Receives: Behavioral: BRAW |
| Waitlist control group | No intervention | Participants will receive the intervention after the follow-up assessment. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Resilience
A 6-item Brief Resilience Scale (BRS) is used to assess the ability to recover from stress. Items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The total score ranges from 6 to 30, with higher scores signifying greater bounce-back resilience. BRS has demonstrated good reliability and validity.
Measured: Baseline
Resilience
A 6-item Brief Resilience Scale (BRS) is used to assess the ability to recover from stress. Items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The total score ranges from 6 to 30, with higher scores signifying greater bounce-back resilience. BRS has demonstrated good reliability and validity.
Measured: at 6 weeks
Resilience
A 6-item Brief Resilience Scale (BRS) is used to assess the ability to recover from stress. Items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The total score ranges from 6 to 30, with higher scores signifying greater bounce-back resilience. BRS has demonstrated good reliability and validity.
Measured: 12 weeks after training completes
Secondary outcomes (13)
Work engagement
A 9-item Utrecht Working Engagement Scale short version (UWES-9) is used to measure the participant's feelings in the context of work. Participant rate how often they experience these feelings on a 4-point Likert scale from 1 (never) to 4 (always). The total score ranges from 9 to 36 and higher scoring on UWES-9 indicates more work engagement. UWES-9 has confirmed satisfactory validity and reliability.
Measured: Baseline
Work engagement
A 9-item Utrecht Working Engagement Scale short version (UWES-9) is used to measure the participant's feelings in the context of work. Participant rate how often they experience these feelings on a 4-point Likert scale from 1 (never) to 4 (always). The total score ranges from 9 to 36 and higher scoring on UWES-9 indicates more work engagement. UWES-9 has confirmed satisfactory validity and reliability.
Measured: at 6 weeks
Work engagement
A 9-item Utrecht Working Engagement Scale short version (UWES-9) is used to measure the participant's feelings in the context of work. Participant rate how often they experience these feelings on a 4-point Likert scale from 1 (never) to 4 (always). The total score ranges from 9 to 36 and higher scoring on UWES-9 indicates more work engagement. UWES-9 has confirmed satisfactory validity and reliability.
Measured: 12 weeks after training completes
Intention to leave
12-item Anticipated Turnover Scale (ATS)49 is used to measure intention to leave. Questions are related to one's anticipated length of time before leaving and certainty of leaving the job. Items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The total score ranges from 12 to 60, with higher scores reflecting higher degree of turnover. CVI was 0.80-0.95 for items. Cronbach's alphas were 0.85-0.94 in several researches. Test-retest reliability coefficient was 0.84 in 2 weeks' interval.
Measured: Baseline
Intention to leave
12-item Anticipated Turnover Scale (ATS)49 is used to measure intention to leave. Questions are related to one's anticipated length of time before leaving and certainty of leaving the job. Items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The total score ranges from 12 to 60, with higher scores reflecting higher degree of turnover. CVI was 0.80-0.95 for items. Cronbach's alphas were 0.85-0.94 in several researches. Test-retest reliability coefficient was 0.84 in 2 weeks' interval.
Measured: at 6 weeks
Intention to leave
12-item Anticipated Turnover Scale (ATS)49 is used to measure intention to leave. Questions are related to one's anticipated length of time before leaving and certainty of leaving the job. Items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The total score ranges from 12 to 60, with higher scores reflecting higher degree of turnover. CVI was 0.80-0.95 for items. Cronbach's alphas were 0.85-0.94 in several researches. Test-retest reliability coefficient was 0.84 in 2 weeks' interval.
Measured: 12 weeks after training completes
Employability
A 11-item Self-perceived Employability Scale (SPE) is used to assess employability. Participants are required to state their agreement with the items by selecting a number on a 5-point scale, from 1 (strong disagreement) to 5 (strong agreement). The total score ranges from 11 to 55, with higher score indicating perceived better employability. SPE has reported good internal consistency
Measured: Baseline
Employability
A 11-item Self-perceived Employability Scale (SPE) is used to assess employability. Participants are required to state their agreement with the items by selecting a number on a 5-point scale, from 1 (strong disagreement) to 5 (strong agreement). The total score ranges from 11 to 55, with higher score indicating perceived better employability. SPE has reported good internal consistency
Measured: at 6 weeks
Employability
A 11-item Self-perceived Employability Scale (SPE) is used to assess employability. Participants are required to state their agreement with the items by selecting a number on a 5-point scale, from 1 (strong disagreement) to 5 (strong agreement). The total score ranges from 11 to 55, with higher score indicating perceived better employability. SPE has reported good internal consistency
Measured: 12 weeks after training completes
Work performance
A 18-item Individual Work Performance Questionnaire (IWPQ) is used to measure individual work performance. The IWPQ has a recall period of 3 months and a rating scale from 0 (seldom/never) to 4 (always/often) for task, contextual performance and counterproductive work behaviour. A mean score is calculated by adding the item scores, and dividing their sum by the number of items that range between 0 and 4, with higher scores reflecting higher individual work performance. The psychometric properties of the IWPQ indicated excellent internal consistency and good validity.
Measured: Baseline
Work performance
A 18-item Individual Work Performance Questionnaire (IWPQ) is used to measure individual work performance. The IWPQ has a recall period of 3 months and a rating scale from 0 (seldom/never) to 4 (always/often) for task, contextual performance and counterproductive work behaviour. A mean score is calculated by adding the item scores, and dividing their sum by the number of items that range between 0 and 4, with higher scores reflecting higher individual work performance. The psychometric properties of the IWPQ indicated excellent internal consistency and good validity.
Measured: at 6 weeks
Work performance
A 18-item Individual Work Performance Questionnaire (IWPQ) is used to measure individual work performance. The IWPQ has a recall period of 3 months and a rating scale from 0 (seldom/never) to 4 (always/often) for task, contextual performance and counterproductive work behaviour. A mean score is calculated by adding the item scores, and dividing their sum by the number of items that range between 0 and 4, with higher scores reflecting higher individual work performance. The psychometric properties of the IWPQ indicated excellent internal consistency and good validity.
Measured: 12 weeks after training completes
Usage and satisfaction of training
Usage is defined as an encompassing engagement, i.e., the time (in minutes) spent browsing the website and practicing the assigned homework in the previous weeks. Computer-generated indicators include the following: (1) session completion, (2) number of website visits, and (3) time spent on the website. At the end of the six-week program, attitude toward and satisfaction with the online training will be assessed using the self-developed eight-item usage and satisfaction of training. Each item is rated on a 4-point Likert scale from 1 to 4, and response options differed for the various items. The total score ranges from 8 to 32, and a high score represents better satisfaction of training. In addition, we have four open questions to obtain suggestions for improvement.
Measured: at 6 weeks
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted23 Nov 2021
- Study start15 Nov 2021
- Primary completion27 Jul 2023
- Study completion24 Dec 2024
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (2)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Resilience, PsychologicalStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by National University of SingaporeThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- 1:1
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Care provider, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 500 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- National University of Singapore
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Lau Ying, Chinese University of Hong Kong
- Investigators
- Ying Lau, PhD, Principal investigator, Chinese University of Hong Kong
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05130879
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- WF19-14
- Acronym
- BRAW
- Status last verified
- Dec 2024
- First submitted
- 10 Nov 2021
- Last updated
- 30 Dec 2024
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided
Publications
Lau Y, Choi KC, Wong SH, Ang WW, Ang WHD, Lau ST. A randomized controlled trial investigating digital resilience training for healthcare professionals. Sci Rep. 2025 Dec 24;15(1):44514. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-28028-z.
PubMed 41444278Ang WHD, Lim ZQG, Lau ST, Dong J, Lau Y. Unpacking the Experiences of Health Care Professionals About the Web-Based Building Resilience At Work Program During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Framework Analysis. JMIR Med Educ. 2024 Jan 31;10:e49551. doi: 10.2196/49551.
PubMed 38294866
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 30 Dec 2024. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Evaluation of Building Resilience at Work (BRAW) Training Among Healthcare Workers: A Sequential Mixed Methods Design
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05130879
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- BRAW / WF19-14
- Conditions
- Resilience, Psychological
- Keywords
- Resilience training, Healthcare Workers
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 500 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- National University of SingaporeUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 15 Nov 2021 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 27 Jul 2023 (actual)
- Study completion
- 24 Dec 2024 (actual)
- First posted
- 23 Nov 2021 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Background Given that the challenges in adjusting to shifting work, physical workload and high-strung nature, healthcare workers often encounter high stress, emotional exhaustion, low empathy, fatigue and burnout, which, in turn, result in sickness, absence, and high turnover. Hence, building resilience for future adversity among healthcare workers in the workplace is necessary.
Objectives To evaluate the effectiveness of the Building Resilience at Work (BRAW) on resilience, job engagement, intention to leave, employability, and work performance To explore healthcare workers' experience of the BRAW intervention.
Methods This study will evaluate the effectiveness of BRAW using a sequential mixed methods design in two phases. In phase I, a two-armed randomized controlled trial will be conducted to compare resilience, work engagement, coping skills, job satisfaction and life satisfaction with a waiting list control condition among 410 healthcare workers.
In phase II, the investigators will conduct a virtual individual interview to explore experiences on usability and acceptability after receiving the BRAW intervention using a sample of 33 healthcare workers.
Significance of research Considering the multifactorial and complexity of resilience at work in an increasingly dynamic healthcare environment, the content of resilience training can promote resilience, work engagement, coping skills, job satisfaction and life satisfaction among healthcare workers in order to reduce the turnover rate among healthcare workers in Singapore.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (care provider, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- 1:1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| BRAW intervention group | Experimental | Behavioral: BRAWBRAW is designed as an online intervention comprising of six sessions over six weeks. The six sessions are: (1) happiness and positivity, (2) cognitive restructuring, (3) behavioural activation, (4) emotion regulation, (5) positive work climate and (6) problem solving. |
| Waitlist control group | No intervention | –Participants will receive the intervention after the follow-up assessment. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 21 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Healthcare workers aged 21 years or older
- Can read English
- Own and regularly use smartphone, tablet, laptop or desktop
- Can access the internet
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Previous diagnosis of psychosis, severe depression, personality disorder and substance abuse at any point in their life
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| BRAWSessions 1. Happiness and positivity Understanding strengths and resilience and positive attitude 2. Cognitive restructuring Identification dysfunctional automatic thoughts in problematic and emotional arousing situations Usage of cognitive -behavioural techniques to evaluate and modify dysfunctional thoughts and beliefs 3. Behavioural activation Initiation and utilization of behavioural activation techniques for positive change by increasing pleasant events Healthy interpersonal relationships Importance of peer support 4. Emotion regulation Preventing and managing conflict Emotion regulation abilities 5. Positive work climate Building supportive work environment Development of supportive collegial relationships Promotion of coworker support 6. Problem solving Problem-solving work-life problems Work-life balance Bringing it together | Behavioural | BRAW intervention group |
Primary outcome
Resilience
Time frame: Baseline
A 6-item Brief Resilience Scale (BRS) is used to assess the ability to recover from stress. Items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The total score ranges from 6 to 30, with higher scores signifying greater bounce-back resilience. BRS has demonstrated good reliability and validity.
Resilience
Time frame: at 6 weeks
A 6-item Brief Resilience Scale (BRS) is used to assess the ability to recover from stress. Items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The total score ranges from 6 to 30, with higher scores signifying greater bounce-back resilience. BRS has demonstrated good reliability and validity.
Resilience
Time frame: 12 weeks after training completes
A 6-item Brief Resilience Scale (BRS) is used to assess the ability to recover from stress. Items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The total score ranges from 6 to 30, with higher scores signifying greater bounce-back resilience. BRS has demonstrated good reliability and validity.
13 secondary outcomes
Work engagement
Time frame: Baseline
Work engagement
Time frame: at 6 weeks
Work engagement
Time frame: 12 weeks after training completes
Intention to leave
Time frame: Baseline
Intention to leave
Time frame: at 6 weeks
Intention to leave
Time frame: 12 weeks after training completes
Employability
Time frame: Baseline
Employability
Time frame: at 6 weeks
Employability
Time frame: 12 weeks after training completes
Work performance
Time frame: Baseline
Work performance
Time frame: at 6 weeks
Work performance
Time frame: 12 weeks after training completes
Usage and satisfaction of training
Time frame: at 6 weeks
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 30 Dec 2024.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 41444278Lau Y, Choi KC, Wong SH, Ang WW, Ang WHD, Lau ST. A randomized controlled trial investigating digital resilience training for healthcare professionals. Sci Rep. 2025 Dec 24;15(1):44514. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-28028-z.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 38294866Ang WHD, Lim ZQG, Lau ST, Dong J, Lau Y. Unpacking the Experiences of Health Care Professionals About the Web-Based Building Resilience At Work Program During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Framework Analysis. JMIR Med Educ. 2024 Jan 31;10:e49551. doi: 10.2196/49551.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided
Related trials for Resilience, Psychological
Not yet recruiting
The Effect of Happiness Workshops on Nursing Students' Levels of Psychological Resilience
Psychological Resilience, Nursing Students
Recruiting
A Study Of Resilience And Mental Well-Being Through Breathing Practice For Clinical Care Professionals
Burnout, Healthcare Workers, Breathing Exercises
Not yet recruiting
Effects of Art-Based Group Reminiscence Therapy on Resilience and Joy of Living in Older Adults
Resilience, Psychological, Joy of Living
Active, not recruiting
Emotional Well-being and Measures of Healthy Aging
Aging, Aging, Healthy
Active, not recruiting
Future School of Comprehensive Well-Being
Learning, Comprehensive Wellbeing
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Ying Lau, PhD principal investigator
Chinese University of Hong Kong
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing BRAW in people with Resilience, Psychological, run by National University of Singapore at 1 site in Singapore.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 30 Dec 2024. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Singapore. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Resilience (time frame: Baseline). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT05130879, which also lists 2 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 30 Dec 2024.