Effectiveness of Online Therapy to Prevent Burnout

This study aims to address the reliability and validity of the Empowerment for Participation (EFP) batch of assessments to measure Burnout risk in relation to the efficacy of online interventions to provide proactive rehabilitation using Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) and floating to achieve improved mental health and wellbeing.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Conditions

Burnout Behavior Behavioral Symptoms Burnout, Psychological Cognitive Change Personal Satisfaction Psychological Well-Being Risk Reduction Risk Reduction Behavior Stress, Psychological

Age range

22 year–68 year

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

SciensCollege

Malmö, Skåne County, 21124, Sweden

About this study

An Empirical design using raw EFP psychometric data to measure the effectiveness of online therapy to reduce the risk for Burnout between a control group and an online therapy group. The aim is to test whether or not there is a statistically significant difference in the effectiveness on online therapy to reduce the Risk for Burnout compared to that of a Control Group. Fifty participants were randomly selected. The rehabilitation and control Group consisted of twenty-five normally distributed employees (N25) each. The rehabilitation group received therapy, and the control had not yet received any form of therapy. SPSS was used to analyze the data collected, a Repeated Measure ANOVA, an ANCOVA, a Discriminant analysis, and a Construct Validity analysis were used to test for Reliability and Validity.

The group was randomly selected from a list of employees within the My-E-Health ecosystem. The group (N50) normally distributed group met all assumptions and consisted of a Control Group (N25) and a Therapy Group (N25). The post assessment value was used as the dependent variable.

The Burnout measure (30 questions) is obtained from the Empowerment for Participation (EFP) batch of assessments (110 questions). All assessments and CBT were done digitally online and floating was done at a designated location. The full EFP assessment is integrated into a digital ecosystem designed for this purpose and therapy. The online digital system is an integrity-based platform offering both the employee and caregiver a secure and encrypted ecosystem or secure data tunnel or channel between the therapists and patients.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

Employees assessed on the EFP Burnout Scale as having:

a Moderate Risk of Burnout
a High Risk of Burnout
A Burned out Risk (Mental Health Exhaustion)
Employees with a current Bunrout diagnosis from a hospital, outpatient or psychiatric cllinic
A fully employed person with a member organization
No other inclusion criteria.

Exclusion criteria

Employees assessed on the EFP Burnout Scale as having:

No evidence of Burnout
Low Risk of Burnout.
Unemployed persons
No other exclusion critera was used.

Treatment and study plan

EFP Psychometric assessment to determine level of afflication

Diagnostic Test

Patients were asked to complete a psychometric assessment in relation to their psychological wellbeing. Results were presented to the patient and validdated by the patient.

Primary outcomes

To measure the difference between a pre- and post-assessment score for Burnout in a Control Group versus a Therapy Group.

Time frame: From admission to discharge, up to 3 months.

The Burnout measure (30 questions) is obtained from the Empowerment for Participation (EFP) batch of assessments using Visual Analog Scales (VAS) online. A straight line with a beginning and end point. As the slider moves from left to right, the text positioned at either end of the line increases as the opposite end decreases. The position where the slider stops is represented by a number from 0-20.

The risk assessment scale (0-600) determines the level of intervention and preventive care.

There are five risk levels of Burnout in relation to the total score following a lineal guide: 0-99 points (M=0-3.300) = No evidence of Burnout, 100-199 points (M=3.333-6.6333) = Low risk for Burnout, 200-299 points (M=6.6667-9.9667) = Moderate risk for Burnout, 300-399 points (M=10.00-13.300) = High risk for Burnout, and 400-600 points (M=13.3333-20) = Burnout. Patient content validation and score accuracy is required after each assessment.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

SciensCollege

Industry

Collaborators

Karlstad University
My-E-Health

Registry information

Important dates

Study start: 1916
Primary completion: 2021
Study completion: 2022
First posted: Apr 25, 2022
Registry last updated: Apr 25, 2022

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.

Completed