Dataset Information

Feasibility, acceptability, and potential effectiveness of an online expressive writing intervention for COVID-19 resilience.

ABSTRACT:

Background & purpose

The COVID-19 pandemic has negatively impacted mental health in the general population. In this trial, our objective was to assess whether a 6-week expressive writing intervention improves resilience in a sample from the general population in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Materials & methods

This 6-week trial was conducted online. Eligible participants (n=63) were a sample of adults who self-identified as having been significantly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Primary outcome

Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC).

Secondary outcomes

Perceived Stress Scale - 10-Item (PSS-10); Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale - Revised (CESD-R); Post-Traumatic Growth Inventory (PTGI).

Results

Resilience measures (CD-RISC) increased from baseline (66.6 ± 14.9) to immediately post-intervention (73.0 ± 12.4; p=0.014; Cohen's d =0.31), and at a 1- month follow-up (72.9 ± 13.6; p=0.024; Cohen's d =0.28). Across the same timepoints, perceived stress scores (PSS-10) decreased from baseline (21.8 ± 6.6) to immediately post-intervention (18.3 ± 7.0; p=0.008; Cohen's d =0.41), and at the 1- month follow-up to (16.8 ± 6.7; p=0.0002; Cohen's d =0.56). Depression symptoms (CESD-R) decreased from baseline (23.3 ± 15.3) at 6 weeks (17.8 ± 15.4; p=0.058; Cohen's d =0.22), and 10 weeks (15.5 ± 12.7; p=0.004; Cohen's d =0.38). Posttraumatic growth (PTGI) increased from baseline (41.7 ± 23.4) at 6 weeks (55.8 ± 26.4; p=0.004; Cohen's d =0.44), and at the 1-month follow-up (55.9 ± 29.3; p=0.008; Cohen's d =0.49).

Conclusion

An online expressive writing intervention was effective at improving resilience in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic. NCT#: NCT04589104.

SUBMITTER: Bechard E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8314796 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveDue to the wide impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health, the need for scalable interventions that can effectively reduce psychological distress has been recognized. Expressive writing (EW) can be beneficial for different conditions, including depression, suicidal ideation, and coping with trauma. Therefore, we aim to assess the applicability and effectiveness of an online format of EW in the reduction of psychological distress in context of the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsIn this parallel-group, randomized controlled trial, participants (n = 120) were randomly allocated to (1) the intervention group-who completed five EW sessions over the 2 week period-or (2) the control group-who received treatment as usual (TAU). Participants were assessed for primary and secondary outcome measures at baseline, post-treatment, and follow-up-1-month after the treatment. The primary outcome was severity of psychological distress assessed at post-treatment, operationalized as Depression Anxiety Stress Scale (DASS) summary score. Secondary outcomes were severity of depression, anxiety, and stress (DASS subscale scores), well-being (WHO-5), subjective perception of quality of life (SQOL), and subjective evaluation of difficulties coping with pandemic, which were also assessed at post-treatment. Per protocol, analysis was conducted with available cases only.ResultsA less favorable outcome was found in the intervention group on psychological distress, and symptoms of stress, after controlling for baseline scores. Increased stress was recorded in the treatment group, with no effect in the control group. There was no significant difference between the groups on depression, anxiety, well-being, and subjective quality of life. No group effect for any of the outcomes measures was recorded at follow-up. Additional analysis revealed moderation effects of age and gender with older and male participants scoring higher on distress measures.ConclusionEngaging in EW during the pandemic was found to elevate stress; thus, when applied in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, it may be harmful. Hence, EW or similar self-guided interventions should not be applied without prior evidence on their effects in the context of a pandemic and similar stressful and unpredictable circumstances.Clinical trial registrationThis study is approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee (Protocol number #2020-20), and a trial has been registered at ISRCTN registry https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN17898730.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Expressive writing involves writing about stressful or traumatic experiences. Despite trials in people with advanced disease, no systematic review to date has critiqued the evidence on expressive writing in this population. To synthesise the evidence of the effects of expressive writing on pain, sleep, depression and anxiety in people with advanced disease. METHODS:A systematic review according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. CINAHL, CENTRAL, PsycINFO and PubMed were searched from January 1986 to March 2018. Other sources included clinical data registers and conference proceedings. Studies were included if they were randomised controlled trials that assessed the impact of an intervention involving expressive writing for adults with advanced disease and/or studies involving linguistic analysis on the expressive writing output. Methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation tool was used to assess the level of evidence for the outcomes of interest. The protocol of this systematic review has been registered on PROSPERO (CRD42017058193). RESULTS:Six eligible studies with a total of 288 participants were identified, including four randomised controlled trials. All of the trials were in cancer and recruited predominantly women. None of the interventions were tailored to the population. Studies had methodological shortcomings and evidence was generally of low quality. Combined analysis of the four trials, involving 214 participants in total, showed no clear difference in the effect of expressive writing on sleep, anxiety or depression compared to an active control. Pain was not evaluated in the trials. In contrast, analysis of the four studies that included linguistic analysis alluded to linguistic mechanisms for potential effects. CONCLUSION:Although the trial results suggest there is no benefit in expressive writing for people with advanced disease, the current evidence is limited. There is a need for more rigorous trials. It would be of benefit first to undertake exploratory research in trial design including how best to measure impact and in tailoring of the intervention to address the specific needs of people with advanced disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION:The protocol of this systematic review has been registered on PROSPERO, which can be accessed here (registration number: CRD42017058193 ).

Project description:BACKGROUND: Motor neurone disease (MND) practice guidelines suggest developing interventions that will promote hope, meaning, and dignity to alleviate psychological distress, but very little research has been done. This study begins to address this need by exploring the use of dignity therapy with people with MND. Dignity therapy is a brief psychotherapy that promotes hope, meaning and dignity, and enhances the end of life for people with advanced cancer. The aims of this study are to assess the feasibility, acceptability, and potential effectiveness of dignity therapy for people with MND. METHODS/DESIGN: This cross-sectional feasibility study used a one-group pre-test post-test design with 29 people diagnosed with MND. Study participants completed the following self-report questionnaires: Herth Hope Index, FACIT-sp, Patient Dignity Inventory, ALS Assessment Questionnaire, ALS Cognitive Behavioural Screen, and a demographic and health history questionnaire. Acceptability was measured with a 25-item feedback questionnaire. Feasibility was assessed by examining the length of time taken to complete dignity therapy and how symptoms common in MND affected the intervention. Generalised linear mixed models and reliable change scores were used to analyse the data. RESULTS: There were no significant pre-test post-test changes for hopefulness, spirituality or dignity on the group level, but there were changes in hopefulness on the individual level. The results of the feedback questionnaire indicates dignity therapy is highly acceptable to people with MND, who report benefits similar to those in the international randomised controlled trial on dignity therapy, a population who primarily had end-stage cancer. Benefits include better family relationships, improved sense of self and greater acceptance. Dignity therapy with people with MND is feasible if the therapist can overcome time and communication difficulties. CONCLUSIONS: Dignity therapy for people with MND is feasible and acceptable. Further research is warranted to explore its ability to diminish distress. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www.anzctr.org.au ACTRN12611000410954.