Dataset Information

Comparison of two different mindfulness interventions among health care students in Finland: a randomised controlled trial.

ABSTRACT: We investigated the short- and long-term effects of two different evidence-based mindfulness training on students' stress and well-being. A randomised controlled trial with three measurement points (baseline, post-intervention, and 4 months post-intervention) was conducted among undergraduate students of medicine, dentistry, psychology, and logopaedics at the University of Helsinki. The participants were randomly assigned into three groups: (1) face-to-face mindfulness training based on the Mindfulness Skills for Students course (n = 40), (2) a web-based Student Compass program using Mindfulness and Acceptance and Commitment therapy (n = 22), and (3) a control group that received mental health support as usual (n = 40). The primary outcome was psychological distress measured using the Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation Outcome Measure (CORE-OM). Secondary outcomes included hair cortisol concentrations and a wide range of well-being indicators. Psychological distress increased in all the groups from baseline to post-intervention, but significantly less so in the intervention groups than in the control group. At 4-month follow-up, were found no differences between the primary outcomes of the control and intervention groups, but the participants who continued practising mindfulness at least twice a week were less stressed than the others. Our results suggest that participating in a mindfulness course may mitigate health care students' psychological distress during the academic year, but only if the participants continue practising mindfulness at least twice a week.

SUBMITTER: Repo S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9063251 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of two different mindfulness interventions among health care students in Finland: a randomised controlled trial.

Repo Saara S Elovainio Marko M Pyörälä Eeva E Iriarte-Lüttjohann Mónica M Tuominen Tiina T Härkönen Tiina T Gluschkoff Kia K Paunio Tiina T

Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice 20220503 3

We investigated the short- and long-term effects of two different evidence-based mindfulness training on students' stress and well-being. A randomised controlled trial with three measurement points (baseline, post-intervention, and 4 months post-intervention) was conducted among undergraduate students of medicine, dentistry, psychology, and logopaedics at the University of Helsinki. The participants were randomly assigned into three groups: (1) face-to-face mindfulness training based on the Mind ...[more]

PMID: 35503145

Similar Datasets

Project description:Distress and burnout among medical and psychology professionals are commonly reported and have implications for the quality of patient care delivered. Already in the course of university studies, medicine and psychology students report mental distress and low life satisfaction. There is a need for interventions that promote better coping skills in students in order to prevent distress and future burnout. This study examines the effect of a seven-week Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR) programme on mental distress, study stress, burnout, subjective well-being, and mindfulness of medical and psychology students.A total of 288 students (mean age =?23 years, 76% female) from the University of Oslo and the University of Tromsø were randomly allocated to an intervention or control group. The control group continued with their standard university courses and received no intervention. Participants were evaluated using self-reported measures both before and after the intervention. These were: the 'General Health Questionnaire, Maslach Burnout Inventory Student version, Perceived Medical School Stress, Subjective Well-being, and Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire' and additional indices of compliance.Following the intervention, a moderate effect on mental distress (Hedges'g 0.65, CI =?.41, .88), and a small effect on both subjective well-being (Hedges'g 0.40, CI =?.27, .63) and the mindfulness facet 'non-reacting' (Hedges'g 0.33, CI =?.10, .56) were found in the intervention group compared with the control group. A higher level of programme attendance and reported mindfulness exercises predicted these changes. Significant effects were only found for female students who additionally reported reduced study stress and an increase in the mindfulness facet 'non-judging'. Gender specific effects of participation in the MBSR programme have not previously been reported, and gender differences in the present study are discussed.Female medical and psychology students experienced significant positive improvements in mental distress, study stress, subjective well-being and mindfulness after participating in the MBSR programme.NCT00892138.

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine the effectiveness of two online behavioural interventions, one for parents and carers and one for young people, to support eczema self-management.DesignTwo independent, pragmatic, parallel group, unmasked, randomised controlled trials.Setting98 general practices in England.ParticipantsParents and carers of children (0-12 years) with eczema (trial 1) and young people (13-25 years) with eczema (trial 2), excluding people with inactive or very mild eczema (≤5 on POEM, the Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure).InterventionsParticipants were randomised (1:1) using online software to receive usual eczema care or an online (www.EczemaCareOnline.org.uk) behavioural intervention for eczema plus usual care.Main outcome measuresPrimary outcome was eczema symptoms rated using POEM (range 0-28, with 28 being very severe) every four weeks over 24 weeks. Outcomes were reported by parents or carers for children and by self-report for young people. Secondary outcomes included POEM score every four weeks over 52 weeks, quality of life, eczema control, itch intensity (young people only), patient enablement, treatment use, perceived barriers to treatment use, and intervention use. Analyses were carried out separately for the two trials and according to intention-to-treat principles.Results340 parents or carers of children (169 usual care; 171 intervention) and 337 young people (169 usual care; 168 intervention) were randomised. The mean baseline POEM score was 12.8 (standard deviation 5.3) for parents and carers and 15.2 (5.4) for young people. Three young people withdrew from follow-up but did not withdraw their data. All randomised participants were included in the analyses. At 24 weeks, follow-up rates were 91.5% (311/340) for parents or carers and 90.2% (304/337) for young people. After controlling for baseline eczema severity and confounders, compared with usual care groups over 24 weeks, eczema severity improved in the intervention groups: mean difference in POEM score -1.5 (95% confidence interval -2.5 to -0.6; P=0.002) for parents or carers and -1.9 (-3.0 to -0.8; P<0.001) for young people. The number needed to treat to achieve a 2.5 difference in POEM score at 24 weeks was 6 in both trials. Improvements were sustained to 52 weeks in both trials. Enablement showed a statistically significant difference favouring the intervention group in both trials: adjusted mean difference at 24 weeks -0.7 (95% confidence interval -1.0 to -0.4) for parents or carers and -0.9 (-1.3 to -0.6) for young people. No harms were identified in either group.ConclusionsTwo online interventions for self-management of eczema aimed at parents or carers of children with eczema and at young people with eczema provide a useful, sustained benefit in managing eczema severity in children and young people when offered in addition to usual eczema care.Trial registrationISRCTN registry ISRCTN79282252.

Project description:BackgroundPatient safety research is conducted predominantly in hospital settings, with a dearth of insight from primary care, despite suggestions that 2.2% of primary care consultations result in a patient safety incident. This study aimed to assess the feasibility of an intervention intended to improve patient safety in general practice.MethodsA randomised controlled feasibility study was conducted with general practices in the Republic of Ireland (N = 9) and Northern Ireland (N = 2), randomly assigned to the intervention (N = 5) or control (N = 6) group. The nine-month intervention consisted of: 1) repeated safety climate (SC) measurement (using GP-SafeQuest questionnaire) and feedback (comparative anonymised practice-level SC data), and 2) patient record reviews using a specialised trigger tool to identify instances of undetected patient harm. For control practices, SC was measured at baseline and study end only. The intervention's perceived usefulness and feasibility were explored via an end-of-study questionnaire and semi-structured interviews.ResultsThirteen practices were invited; 11 participated; 10 completed the study. At baseline, 84.8% of intervention practice staff (39/46) and 77.8% (42/54) of control practice staff completed the SC questionnaire; at the study terminus, 78.3% (36/46) of intervention practice staff and 68.5% (37/54) of control practice staff did so. Changes in SC scores, indicating improvement, were observed among the intervention practices but not in the control group. The trigger tool was applied to 188 patient records; patient safety incidents of varying severity were detected in 19.1% (36/188). Overall, 59% of intervention practice team members completed the end-of-study questionnaire, with the majority in both healthcare systems responding positively about the intervention. Interviews (N = 9) identified the intervention's usefulness in informing practice management and patient safety issues, time as a barrier to its use, and the value of group discussion of feedback.ConclusionThis feasibility study suggests that a definitive randomised controlled trial of the intervention is warranted. Our findings suggest that the intervention is feasible, useful, and sustainable. Practices were willing to be recruited into the study, response and retention rates were acceptable, and there is possible evidence of a positive effect of the intervention.Trial registrationThe trial registration number is: ISRCTN11426121 (retrospectively registered 12th June 2018).

Project description:IntroductionEczema care requires management of triggers and various treatments. We developed two online behavioural interventions to support eczema care called ECO (Eczema Care Online) for young people and ECO for families. This protocol describes two randomised controlled trials (RCTs) aimed to evaluate clinical and cost-effectiveness of the two interventions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Design: Two independent, pragmatic, unmasked, parallel group RCTs with internal pilots and nested health economic and process evaluation studies. Setting: Participants will be recruited from general practitioner practices in England. Participants: Young people aged 13-25 years with eczema and parents and carers of children aged 0-12 years with eczema, excluding inactive or very mild eczema (five or less on Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM)). Interventions: Participants will be randomised to online intervention plus usual care or to usual eczema care alone. Outcome measures: Primary outcome is eczema severity over 24 weeks measured by POEM. Secondary outcomes include POEM 4-weekly for 52 weeks, quality of life, eczema control, itch intensity (young people only), patient enablement, health service and treatment use. Process measures include treatment adherence, barriers to adherence and intervention usage. Our sample sizes of 303 participants per trial are powered to detect a group difference of 2.5 (SD 6.5) in monthly POEM scores over 24 weeks (significance 0.05, power 0.9), allowing for 20% loss to follow-up. Cost-effectiveness analysis will be from a National Health Service and personal social service perspective. Qualitative and quantitative process evaluation will help understand the mechanisms of action and participant experiences and inform implementation.Ethics and disseminationThe study has been approved by South Central Oxford A Research Ethics Committee (19/SC/0351). Recruitment is ongoing, and follow-up will be completed by mid-2022. Findings will be disseminated to participants, the public, dermatology and primary care journals, and policy makers.Trial registration numberISRCTN79282252.

Project description:Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) education for the public may improve bystander intention to perform CPR on cardiac arrest patients. Studies have shown that different CPR education intervention methods can improve learning performance, with key indicators including attitude toward to CPR, intention to perform CPR, and degree of CPR knowledge and skills. The present study compared the traditional face-to-face method to hybrid and virtual reality (VR) methods to observe difference in learning performance and length of performance retention. This study adopted randomized controlled trial to compare CPR learning performance between traditional face-to-face, hybrid, and VR methods. Participants from each intervention group completed a pretest and 2 posttests. The measurement tools included an attitude and intention questionnaire, knowledge examination, and skill examination with a RESUSCI ANNE QCPR ® manikin. The performance among all participants in pretest showed no significant difference between the intervention groups, indicating no difference in their background attitude, knowledge, and skill level. Significant differences were observed in the average degree of intention to perform CPR between the hybrid and traditional groups in 1st and 2nd posttest. Compared to the pretest results, the posttests revealed significantly higher attitude toward CPR, intention to perform CPR, knowledge examination results, accuracy of overall chest compression, accuracy of CPR procedure, accuracy of AED usage, accuracy of chest compression rate, and accuracy of chest compression depth. The average time to reattending CPR learning and practice session was 11-12 weeks reported by participants. The hybrid and VR methods to CPR education resulted in the same level of improvement in learning performance as traditional face-to-face teaching. The suggested frequency for renewing CPR knowledge and skills is 12 weeks which may be considered in new strategies aimed at promoting CPR education and exposure to the public.

Project description:ObjectivesTo compare the effectiveness of dry needling (DN) versus percutaneous needle electrolysis (PNE) for improving the level of pain, function and quality of life (QoL) of patients suffering from plantar heel pain (PHP) provoked by myofascial trigger points.DesignA prospective, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial with blinded outcome assessment.SettingA single treatment facility in the State of Kuwait.Participants118 participants were screened for eligibility. Of these, 102 participants were enrolled (30 men (49.5±8.9 years) and 72 women (48.1±8.8 years)) and 68 of them completed the trial.InterventionsTwo parallel groups, one study arm received DN and a stretching protocol whereas the other arm received percutaneous needling electrolysis with a stretching protocol.Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe primary outcome measure was the Foot Pain domain of the Foot Health Status Questionnaire, with 13 questions related to foot health-related domains. Secondary outcome measures included the 0-10 numerical rating scale pain visual analogue scale (VAS) scores, performed before and after each treatment session. In addition, QoL was measured using the EuroQoL-5 dimensions. All measurements were taken at baseline, at 4, 8, 12, 26 and 52 weeks.ResultsFoot Pain domain improved at all time points for DN group (p<0.001; 29.7 (17.8 to 41.5)) and percutaneous needling electrolysis group (p<0.001; 32.7 (18.3 to 47.0)), without significant differences between groups. Pain VAS scores decreased at all time points for both DN (p<0.001; -2.6 (-4.0 to -1.2)) and percutaneous needling electrolysis group (p<0.001; -3.0 (-4.5 to -1.6)). QoL improved at 4 weeks for both DN (p<0.01; 0.15 (0.5 to 0.25)) and percutaneous needling electrolysis group (p<0.01; 0.09 (0.01 to 0.17)) and at 8 and 52 weeks for the PNE group (p<0.01; 0.10 (0.02 to 0.18)), with significant differences between groups for the QoL at 52 weeks (p<0.05; 0.10 (0.01 to 0.18)). There were two small haematomas in the PNE group and one in the DN group. No serious adverse events were reported.ConclusionsBoth PNE and DN were effective for PHP management, reducing mean and maximum pain since the first treatment session, with long lasting effects (52 weeks) and significant differences between groups in the case of QoL at 52 weeks in favour of the PNE group.Trial registration numberNCT03236779.

Dataset Information

Comparison of two different mindfulness interventions among health care students in Finland: a randomised controlled trial.

Publications

Comparison of two different mindfulness interventions among health care students in Finland: a randomised controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets