Mental HealthNCT05621603
Workforce Mental Health Emergency Preparedness
A study testing Training in people with Mental Health and Burnout, Psychological, run by Colorado School of Public Health at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
School leaders, staff, and teachers are tasked with keeping children safe from acts of violence, natural hazards and other emergencies while encouraging learning. Disaster plans are often developed without teacher involvement, resulting in limited knowledge of emergency preparedness, undermining buy-in and limited… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Mental Health, Burnout, Psychological
- What is being tested?
- Training
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 519 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 2 Nov 2022to 1 Jun 2023
- 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 18 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Pre-K-12 schools, including school leadership, teacher, and staff
Who cannot join
- Schools other than Pre-K-12
- Only adults are enrolled in this workforce-focused study
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus
Aurora, Colorado, 80045
About this study
Official title: Adapting and Testing an Intervention to Integrate Workforce Mental Health Into Pre-K-8 School Emergency Preparedness Via Shared Leadership and Peer Support
School leaders, staff, and teachers are tasked with keeping children safe from acts of violence, natural hazards and other emergencies while encouraging learning. Disaster plans are often developed without teacher involvement, resulting in limited knowledge of emergency preparedness, undermining buy-in and limited motivation to comply with safety protocols, including disaster drills. The lack of initial consultation and limited decision-making authority can also be sources of stress for teachers. Teachers and staff may experience anxiety about their roles and responsibilities in a crisis. This research project proposes that the key to enhancing emergency preparedness in this population is to incorporate 'psychological preparedness' within a disaster management framework. In other words, to provide the school workforce with awareness of their likely psychological response to threat and coping skills/strategies for management of that response. Importantly, workforce-focused mental health integrated approaches to emergency preparedness are likely to work best if implemented via peer support and shared leadership frameworks. This project involves adaptation and implementation of an integrated workforce mental health intervention into Pre-K-12 school emergency preparedness via shared leadership and peer support. This includes co-creating training curriculum with Pre-K-12 schools, labor organizations, and district officials, implementing and evaluating the impact of the intervention. A matched waitlist control comparison research design will be used with six Pre-K-12 schools. The hypothesized outcomes of the intervention are increases in H1: emergency preparedness climate; emergency preparedness specific H2: shared leadership; H3: peer support and social cohesion; H4: confidence (in emergency preparedness); and H5: psychological preparedness. The project also anticipates H6: increases in overall mental health and well-being, and H7: a reduction in emergency preparedness-specific burnout.
Read the detailed description
The burden of poor physical and mental health is high in the Pre-K-8 school workforce. While school employees had lower than average non-fatal occupational injury and illness rates overall in 2019, they had significantly higher rates of injury due to violence (35.5 per 10,000 FTEs vs overall 4.4 per 10,000 FTEs; R100).In addition, mental health needs are higher among teachers than the general population and are a contributing factor to burnout and teacher/staff turnover. Recent estimates of the burden of the COVID-19 pandemic has shed light on the impact that an emergency can have on the education sector workforce, with teachers feeling ill-equipped to adapt to increased expectations associated with safety protocols, online learning and student mental health. Thus, there is an urgent need to enhance emergency preparedness amongst the schools' workforce and a specific need to ensure that they can respond to the needs of others while maintaining their own mental health.
Nearly all public schools have emergency preparedness plans in place. However, disaster plans are often developed at the district level without teacher and staff involvement. This can result in limited knowledge of emergency preparedness and can undermine buy-in and decrease motivation to comply with safety protocols, including disaster drills. Furthermore, the lack of initial consultation and limited decision making authority can be a source of stress among teachers. Teachers and staff may experience anxiety about their roles and responsibilities in a crisis, including keeping themselves and children safe and managing expectations from parents and other stakeholders. It is reasonable to expect some teachers and staff to have strong reactions to drills for active shooter events, weather emergencies and/or disease outbreaks. Staff with a history of trauma exposure, at the school of elsewhere, may be especially vulnerable. Investigators propose that the key to enhancing emergency preparedness in this population is to incorporate 'psychological preparedness' within a disaster management framework. In other words, to provide the school workforce with awareness of their likely psychological response to threat and coping skills/strategies for management of that response. Importantly, such workforce-focused mental health integrated approaches to emergency preparedness are likely to work best if implemented via peer support and shared leadership frameworks. Such approaches have the potential to enhance the effectiveness and sustainability of existing efforts.
Investigators hypothesize that a half-day training intervention for Pre-K-12 schools that emphasizes integration of psychological preparedness with emergency preparedness, via shared leadership and peer support, will increase - H1: the emergency preparedness climate; H2: shared leadership for emergency preparedness; H3: peer support and social cohesion associated with emergency preparedness; H4: confidence (in emergency preparedness); and H5: psychological preparedness. Investigators also hypothesize that investigators will observe (H6) an increase in overall mental health and wellbeing, and a reduction in (H7) emergency preparedness-specific burnout. Thus, the impact of this intervention will be on the school workforce's capability to respond to emergencies while maintaining their well-being.
Specific Aim 1: Adapt and implement an integrated workforce mental health intervention into Pre-K-8 school emergency preparedness via shared leadership and peer support.
- Review emergency preparedness plans/drills and mental health supports at 6 Pre-K-12 schools
- Co-create training curriculum with participating schools and district officials (N = 64, 6 focus groups with 36 participants and 28 interview participants) Specific Aim 2: Evaluate the impact of a half day mental health integrated emergency preparedness intervention in Pre-K-12 schools via shared leadership and peer support.
- Matched waitlist control comparison with 6 Pre-K-12 schools (N = 300) in a diverse school district. Data collected for all 6 schools at baseline, and two time points following the intervention.
The output of our project will be a curriculum manual and online toolkit for schools, including the resources necessary for schools to independently assess, implement and evaluate baseline levels of key outcomes and the impact of training content. Resources will be developed and disseminated to schools with the assistance of the Outreach Core, which has proven experience working with 15 school districts in our region. This project addresses NIOSH Emergency Preparedness and Response Cross-Sector Program Goal concerning safety climate (#1) and will specifically address two NIOSH NORA Healthy Work Design \& Well-being objectives: #4: Reduce work organization-related chronic health conditions among workers and #6: Improve the safety, health, and well-being of workers through healthier work design and better organizational practices.
- Conditions
- Mental Health, Burnout, Psychological
- Being tested
- Training
- Medical subject headings
- Psychological Well-Being, Burnout, Psychological
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
TrainingBehavioural
The proposed intervention for the school workforce draws on a mental health integrated disaster preparedness model, emphasizing peer support, developed and used successfully by our team working with communities experiencing multiple disasters.
The 3 hour training is comprised of 4 modules - Module 1: Emergency Preparedness Module 2: Psychological Preparedness Module 3: Peer Support Module 4: Shared Leadership and Feedback Session
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Training | Experimental | Participants receive the intervention, which is a training program. Receives: Behavioral: Training |
| Control | No intervention | Participants do NOT receive the intervention, which is a training program. This is a waitlist control comparison model. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Psychological Preparedness (measuring change from pre to post intervention)
This section has been adapted from existing sources. Examples of specific Psychological Preparedness Items are detailed below -
- I am confident that I can perform the necessary actions in an emergency/high stress situation.
- I am knowledgeable about the impact that emergencies/high stress situations can have on a person's ability to respond as they would like.
All items are associated with a 5 point response scale from Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree (higher scores = greater agreement). Individual items will be examined. A composite scale may be produced based on measures of internal consistency.
Measured: Immediately prior to intervention with follow-up approximately 2-4 weeks after the intervention is implemented
Emergency Preparedness Climate (measuring change from pre to post intervention)
This section has been adapted from existing sources. Examples of specific Emergency Preparedness Climate Items are below -
- My school provides a clear vision for emergency preparedness at work
- My school tries to continually improve emergency preparedness
All items are associated with a 5 point response scale from Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree (higher scores = greater agreement). Individual items will be examined. A composite scale may be produced based on measures of internal consistency.
Measured: Immediately prior to intervention with follow-up approximately 2-4 weeks after the intervention is implemented
Shared leadership for Emergency Preparedness (measuring change from pre to post intervention)
This section has been adapted from existing sources. Examples of specific Shared Leadership for Emergency Preparedness Items are below - School employees -
- behave in a way that displays a commitment to emergency preparedness
- provide a clear vision for emergency preparedness
All items are associated with a 5 point response scale from Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree (higher scores = greater agreement). Individual items will be examined. A composite scale may be produced based on measures of internal consistency.
Measured: Immediately prior to intervention with follow-up approximately 2-4 weeks after the intervention is implemented
Peer Support and Social Cohesion associated with Emergency Preparedness (measuring change from pre to post intervention)
This section has been adapted from existing sources. Examples of specific Peer Support and Social Cohesion Items associated with Emergency Preparedness Items below - School employees -
- help each other to prepare for emergencies in concrete ways
- help each other to prepare for emergencies in emotionally supportive ways
All items are associated with a 5 point response scale from Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree (higher scores = greater agreement). Individual items will be examined. A composite scale may be produced based on measures of internal consistency.
Measured: Immediately prior to intervention with follow-up approximately 2-4 weeks after the intervention is implemented
Confidence in Emergency Preparedness (measuring change from pre to post intervention)
All items related to 'confidence in district and school-level emergency preparedness' are below -
- I am confident that my school district has prepared me to respond to a real emergency at my school.
- I am confident that I can respond to a real emergency at my school.
All items are associated with a response scale of not at all confident to very confident, 5 point scale (higher scores = greater confidence). Individual items will be examined. A composite scale may be produced based on measures of internal consistency.
Measured: Immediately prior to intervention with follow-up approximately 2-4 weeks after the intervention is implemented
Secondary outcomes (6)
Stress/Work Stress (measuring change from pre to post intervention)
All items related to 'perceived stress at work' are below - -Please check the number that describes how much stress/distress you have been experiencing in the past week, including today.
Scale is 0-10 with 10 = greater stress/distress
-Please share how much job-related stress you have been feeling in the past two weeks.
Response scale is 5 point, from none to very much (higher scores = more stress). Individual items will be examined.
Measured: Immediately prior to intervention with follow-up approximately 2-4 weeks after the intervention is implemented
Depression (measuring change from pre to post intervention)
All items related to 'depression' are below -
- I have felt little interest or pleasure in doing things.
- I have felt down, depressed, or hopeless. 4-point scale: 1-not at all, 2-several, 3-more than half, 4-nearly every day (higher scores = greater symptoms). A composite scale may be produced based on measures of internal consistency.
Measured: Immediately prior to intervention with follow-up approximately 2-4 weeks after the intervention is implemented
Anxiety (measuring change from pre to post intervention)
All items related to 'anxiety' are below -
- I have felt nervous, anxious or on edge.
- I have not been able to stop or control worrying.
- I have been worrying too much about different things.
- I have had trouble relaxing.
- I have been so restless that it is hard to sit still.
- I have become easily annoyed or irritable.
- I have been feeling anxious about the potential for an emergency to happen at my job.
- I have felt afraid, as if something awful might happen. 4-point scale: 1-not at all, 2-several, 3-more than half, 4-nearly every day (higher scores = greater symptoms). Individual items will be examined. A composite scale may be produced based on measures of internal consistency.
Measured: Immediately prior to intervention with follow-up approximately 2-4 weeks after the intervention is implemented
Post-traumatic stress disorder (measuring change from pre to post intervention)
All items related to 'PTSD' are below -
- I have been feeling jumpy or easily startled
- I have been having repeated, disturbing and unwanted memories of a stressful or traumatic event.
- I have been avoiding external reminders of a stressful or traumatic event (for example, people, places, activities, conversations, activities, objects or situations).
- I have been having strong negative beliefs about myself, other people or the world. 4-point scale: 1-not at all, 2-several, 3-more than half, 4-nearly every day (higher scores = greater symptoms). Individual items will be examined. A composite scale may be produced based on measures of internal consistency.
Measured: Immediately prior to intervention with follow-up approximately 2-4 weeks after the intervention is implemented
Mental well-being (measuring change from pre to post intervention)
Single item measure - How would you rate your overall mental health and wellbeing? Excellent, Very Good, Good, Fair, Poor, with higher scores indicating worse mental health
Measured: Immediately prior to intervention with follow-up approximately 2-4 weeks after the intervention is implemented
Burnout (measuring change from pre to post intervention)
All items related to 'burnout' are below, adapted from existing measures. Considering this definition (definition provided), please share how much burnout you are feeling related to your job in the past two weeks.
I have been thinking about quitting my job. I've been feeling optimistic about the future related to my job. I've been dealing with problems well at my job. I've been thinking clearly at my job. I've been feeling good about myself at my job.
All items are associated with a 5 point response scale from Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree (higher scores = greater agreement). Individual items will be examined. A composite scale may be produced based on measures of internal consistency.
Measured: Immediately prior to intervention with follow-up approximately 2-4 weeks after the intervention is implemented
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted18 Nov 2022
- Study start2 Nov 2022
- Primary completion1 Jun 2023
- Study completion1 Jun 2023
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Mental HealthStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- 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
- We will employ a matched waitlist control comparison design. Schools (6) will be randomly assigned to either the training arm or the control arm. Schools assigned to the control arm will eventually receive the training.
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 519 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Colorado School of Public Health
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH/CDC)
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Courtney Welton-Mitchell, Colorado School of Public Health
- Investigators
- Courtney Welton-Mitchell, PhD, Principal investigator, Colorado School of Public Health
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05621603
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 21-4190
- Status last verified
- Feb 2024
- First submitted
- 4 Nov 2022
- Last updated
- 7 Feb 2024
- Results posted
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: All participant survey data collected by the researchers will be made available in a timely manner upon written request.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 7 Feb 2024. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Adapting and Testing an Intervention to Integrate Workforce Mental Health Into Pre-K-8 School Emergency Preparedness Via Shared Leadership and Peer Support
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05621603
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 21-4190
- Conditions
- Mental Health, Burnout, Psychological
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 519 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Colorado School of Public HealthUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH/CDC)
- Study start
- 2 Nov 2022 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 1 Jun 2023 (actual)
- Study completion
- 1 Jun 2023 (actual)
- First posted
- 18 Nov 2022 (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.
School leaders, staff, and teachers are tasked with keeping children safe from acts of violence, natural hazards and other emergencies while encouraging learning. Disaster plans are often developed without teacher involvement, resulting in limited knowledge of emergency preparedness, undermining buy-in and limited motivation to comply with safety protocols, including disaster drills. The lack of initial consultation and limited decision-making authority can also be sources of stress for teachers. Teachers and staff may experience anxiety about their roles and responsibilities in a crisis. This research project proposes that the key to enhancing emergency preparedness in this population is to incorporate 'psychological preparedness' within a disaster management framework. In other words, to provide the school workforce with awareness of their likely psychological response to threat and coping skills/strategies for management of that response. Importantly, workforce-focused mental health integrated approaches to emergency preparedness are likely to work best if implemented via peer support and shared leadership frameworks. This project involves adaptation and implementation of an integrated workforce mental health intervention into Pre-K-12 school emergency preparedness via shared leadership and peer support. This includes co-creating training curriculum with Pre-K-12 schools, labor organizations, and district officials, implementing and evaluating the impact of the intervention. A matched waitlist control comparison research design will be used with six Pre-K-12 schools. The hypothesized outcomes of the intervention are increases in H1: emergency preparedness climate; emergency preparedness specific H2: shared leadership; H3: peer support and social cohesion; H4: confidence (in emergency preparedness); and H5: psychological preparedness. The project also anticipates H6: increases in overall mental health and well-being, and H7: a reduction in emergency preparedness-specific burnout.
Detailed description
The burden of poor physical and mental health is high in the Pre-K-8 school workforce. While school employees had lower than average non-fatal occupational injury and illness rates overall in 2019, they had significantly higher rates of injury due to violence (35.5 per 10,000 FTEs vs overall 4.4 per 10,000 FTEs; R100).In addition, mental health needs are higher among teachers than the general population and are a contributing factor to burnout and teacher/staff turnover. Recent estimates of the burden of the COVID-19 pandemic has shed light on the impact that an emergency can have on the education sector workforce, with teachers feeling ill-equipped to adapt to increased expectations associated with safety protocols, online learning and student mental health. Thus, there is an urgent need to enhance emergency preparedness amongst the schools' workforce and a specific need to ensure that they can respond to the needs of others while maintaining their own mental health.
Nearly all public schools have emergency preparedness plans in place. However, disaster plans are often developed at the district level without teacher and staff involvement. This can result in limited knowledge of emergency preparedness and can undermine buy-in and decrease motivation to comply with safety protocols, including disaster drills. Furthermore, the lack of initial consultation and limited decision making authority can be a source of stress among teachers. Teachers and staff may experience anxiety about their roles and responsibilities in a crisis, including keeping themselves and children safe and managing expectations from parents and other stakeholders. It is reasonable to expect some teachers and staff to have strong reactions to drills for active shooter events, weather emergencies and/or disease outbreaks. Staff with a history of trauma exposure, at the school of elsewhere, may be especially vulnerable. Investigators propose that the key to enhancing emergency preparedness in this population is to incorporate 'psychological preparedness' within a disaster management framework. In other words, to provide the school workforce with awareness of their likely psychological response to threat and coping skills/strategies for management of that response. Importantly, such workforce-focused mental health integrated approaches to emergency preparedness are likely to work best if implemented via peer support and shared leadership frameworks. Such approaches have the potential to enhance the effectiveness and sustainability of existing efforts.
Investigators hypothesize that a half-day training intervention for Pre-K-12 schools that emphasizes integration of psychological preparedness with emergency preparedness, via shared leadership and peer support, will increase - H1: the emergency preparedness climate; H2: shared leadership for emergency preparedness; H3: peer support and social cohesion associated with emergency preparedness; H4: confidence (in emergency preparedness); and H5: psychological preparedness. Investigators also hypothesize that investigators will observe (H6) an increase in overall mental health and wellbeing, and a reduction in (H7) emergency preparedness-specific burnout. Thus, the impact of this intervention will be on the school workforce's capability to respond to emergencies while maintaining their well-being.
Specific Aim 1: Adapt and implement an integrated workforce mental health intervention into Pre-K-8 school emergency preparedness via shared leadership and peer support.
- Review emergency preparedness plans/drills and mental health supports at 6 Pre-K-12 schools
- Co-create training curriculum with participating schools and district officials (N = 64, 6 focus groups with 36 participants and 28 interview participants) Specific Aim 2: Evaluate the impact of a half day mental health integrated emergency preparedness intervention in Pre-K-12 schools via shared leadership and peer support.
- Matched waitlist control comparison with 6 Pre-K-12 schools (N = 300) in a diverse school district. Data collected for all 6 schools at baseline, and two time points following the intervention.
The output of our project will be a curriculum manual and online toolkit for schools, including the resources necessary for schools to independently assess, implement and evaluate baseline levels of key outcomes and the impact of training content. Resources will be developed and disseminated to schools with the assistance of the Outreach Core, which has proven experience working with 15 school districts in our region. This project addresses NIOSH Emergency Preparedness and Response Cross-Sector Program Goal concerning safety climate (#1) and will specifically address two NIOSH NORA Healthy Work Design \& Well-being objectives: #4: Reduce work organization-related chronic health conditions among workers and #6: Improve the safety, health, and well-being of workers through healthier work design and better organizational practices.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- We will employ a matched waitlist control comparison design. Schools (6) will be randomly assigned to either the training arm or the control arm. Schools assigned to the control arm will eventually receive the training.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Training | Experimental | Behavioral: TrainingParticipants receive the intervention, which is a training program. |
| Control | No intervention | –Participants do NOT receive the intervention, which is a training program. This is a waitlist control comparison model. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Pre-K-12 schools, including school leadership, teacher, and staff
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Schools other than Pre-K-12
- Only adults are enrolled in this workforce-focused study
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 |
|---|---|---|
| TrainingThe proposed intervention for the school workforce draws on a mental health integrated disaster preparedness model, emphasizing peer support, developed and used successfully by our team working with communities experiencing multiple disasters. The 3 hour training is comprised of 4 modules - Module 1: Emergency Preparedness Module 2: Psychological Preparedness Module 3: Peer Support Module 4: Shared Leadership and Feedback Session | Behavioural | Training |
Primary outcome
Psychological Preparedness (measuring change from pre to post intervention)
Time frame: Immediately prior to intervention with follow-up approximately 2-4 weeks after the intervention is implemented
This section has been adapted from existing sources. Examples of specific Psychological Preparedness Items are detailed below - * I am confident that I can perform the necessary actions in an emergency/high stress situation. * I am knowledgeable about the impact that emergencies/high stress situations can have on a person's ability to respond as they would like. All items are associated with a 5 point response scale from Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree (higher scores = greater agreement). Individual items will be examined. A composite scale may be produced based on measures of internal consistency.
Emergency Preparedness Climate (measuring change from pre to post intervention)
Time frame: Immediately prior to intervention with follow-up approximately 2-4 weeks after the intervention is implemented
This section has been adapted from existing sources. Examples of specific Emergency Preparedness Climate Items are below - * My school provides a clear vision for emergency preparedness at work * My school tries to continually improve emergency preparedness All items are associated with a 5 point response scale from Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree (higher scores = greater agreement). Individual items will be examined. A composite scale may be produced based on measures of internal consistency.
Shared leadership for Emergency Preparedness (measuring change from pre to post intervention)
Time frame: Immediately prior to intervention with follow-up approximately 2-4 weeks after the intervention is implemented
This section has been adapted from existing sources. Examples of specific Shared Leadership for Emergency Preparedness Items are below - School employees - * behave in a way that displays a commitment to emergency preparedness * provide a clear vision for emergency preparedness All items are associated with a 5 point response scale from Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree (higher scores = greater agreement). Individual items will be examined. A composite scale may be produced based on measures of internal consistency.
Peer Support and Social Cohesion associated with Emergency Preparedness (measuring change from pre to post intervention)
Time frame: Immediately prior to intervention with follow-up approximately 2-4 weeks after the intervention is implemented
This section has been adapted from existing sources. Examples of specific Peer Support and Social Cohesion Items associated with Emergency Preparedness Items below - School employees - * help each other to prepare for emergencies in concrete ways * help each other to prepare for emergencies in emotionally supportive ways All items are associated with a 5 point response scale from Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree (higher scores = greater agreement). Individual items will be examined. A composite scale may be produced based on measures of internal consistency.
Confidence in Emergency Preparedness (measuring change from pre to post intervention)
Time frame: Immediately prior to intervention with follow-up approximately 2-4 weeks after the intervention is implemented
All items related to 'confidence in district and school-level emergency preparedness' are below - * I am confident that my school district has prepared me to respond to a real emergency at my school. * I am confident that I can respond to a real emergency at my school. All items are associated with a response scale of not at all confident to very confident, 5 point scale (higher scores = greater confidence). Individual items will be examined. A composite scale may be produced based on measures of internal consistency.
6 secondary outcomes
Stress/Work Stress (measuring change from pre to post intervention)
Time frame: Immediately prior to intervention with follow-up approximately 2-4 weeks after the intervention is implemented
Depression (measuring change from pre to post intervention)
Time frame: Immediately prior to intervention with follow-up approximately 2-4 weeks after the intervention is implemented
Anxiety (measuring change from pre to post intervention)
Time frame: Immediately prior to intervention with follow-up approximately 2-4 weeks after the intervention is implemented
Post-traumatic stress disorder (measuring change from pre to post intervention)
Time frame: Immediately prior to intervention with follow-up approximately 2-4 weeks after the intervention is implemented
Mental well-being (measuring change from pre to post intervention)
Time frame: Immediately prior to intervention with follow-up approximately 2-4 weeks after the intervention is implemented
Burnout (measuring change from pre to post intervention)
Time frame: Immediately prior to intervention with follow-up approximately 2-4 weeks after the intervention is implemented
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 7 Feb 2024.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. All participant survey data collected by the researchers will be made available in a timely manner upon written request.
Related trials for Mental Health
Not yet recruitingObservational study
A Natural History of Cardiometabolic Disease Among US Bhutanese: Developing the Cross-Sectional Bhutanese Community of Central Ohio Health Study to Understand Acculturation as Synergizing Socioenvironmental and Biobehavioral Risk Factors Propagating ...
Cardiometabolic Risk Factors, Mental Health
Not yet recruiting
Short, Wordless Animated Storytelling to Promote Mental Health Help-Seeking in Young Adults: A U.S. Online Randomized Controlled Trial
Mental Health Help-Seeking
Not yet recruiting
Building Resilience Through Anxiety Virtual Education in PICU Survivors
Critical Illness Recovery, Mental Health
Active, not recruiting
Future School of Comprehensive Well-Being
Learning, Comprehensive Wellbeing
Not yet recruiting
Enlace Familiar: Supporting the Mental Health of Latino Adolescents
Mental Health
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.
Courtney Welton-Mitchell, PhD principal investigator
Colorado School of Public Health
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Training in people with Mental Health and Burnout, Psychological, run by Colorado School of Public Health at 1 site in United States.
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 1 inclusion and 2 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 7 Feb 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 United States. 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?
Psychological Preparedness (measuring change from pre to post intervention) (time frame: Immediately prior to intervention with follow-up approximately 2-4 weeks after the intervention is implemented). The study lists 5 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
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 7 Feb 2024; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 31 Oct 2026.