The Helpers’ Stress:

Effectiveness of a Web-based Intervention for Professionals Working with

Trauma Survivors in Reducing Job Burnout and Improving Work Engagement

Anna Rogala 1, Ewelina Smoktunowicz 1,

Katarzyna Zukowska 1, Aleksandra Luszczynska 1 2,

Roman Cieslak 1 2

ST

UD

Y R

ES

ULT

S

BACKGROUND

* For further information please contact: anna.rogala@swps.edu.pl

1 University of Social Sciences and Humanities; 2 University of Colorado at Colorado Springs

AIM OF THE STUDY

The study aimed at evaluating mechanisms and effects of the Helpers’ Stress program

which consists of three web-based interventions:

(1) self-efficacy enhancement intervention, (2) psychoeducational intervention, and (3)

social support enhancement intervention.

The three interventions aimed at a reduction of job burnout and enhancement of work

engagement among human service professionals working with trauma survivors.

Hypotheses:

- Compared to a psychoeducational intervention, self-efficacy enhancement

intervention and social support enhancement intervention would affect self-efficacy;

- Compared to a psychoeducational intervention, self-efficacy enhancement

intervention and social support enhancement intervention would predict job burnout

and work engagement;

- The effect of group assignment on job burnout and work engagement would be

mediated by self-efficacy and perceived social support.

Professionals who work with trauma survivors are at risk for indirect exposure to

trauma (Bride et al., 2004).

Indirect exposure to trauma can have positive (e.g., secondary traumatic growth) and

negative (e.g., secondary traumatic stress) consequences (Shoji et al., 2014).

Work-related indirect exposure to trauma may lead to job burnout (Cieslak et al.,

2014).

We can prevent the development of the job burnout and boost work engagement

through psychological interventions enhancing self-efficacy and perceived social

support – resources facilitating coping with trauma and work stress (Benight &

Bandura, 2004; Schwarzer & Knoll, 2007).

Figure 1. Flow of Participants in a Study.

METHODS Participants: 168 human service professionals working

with trauma survivors. Age: M = 37.49 ;SD = 10.39;

Gender: 78% females.

Measures:

• Self-efficacy. The Work Stress and Burnout

Self-Efficacy Scale (WSBSES; Lua, 2008), 28 items,

response scale from 1 to 7, α = .93 at T1, α = .96 at

T2, and α = .96 at T3

• Job burnout. The Oldenburg Burnout Inventory

(OLBI; Demerouti, Bakker, Vardakou, & Kantas, 2003),

16 items, response scale from 1 to 5, α = .89 at T1,

α = .89 at T2, and α = .92 at T3

• Work engagement. Utrecht Work Engagement Scale

(Schaufeli & Bakker, 2003), 9 items, response scale

from 0 to 6, α = .90 at T1, α = .94 at T2, and α = .95

at T3.

Self-efficacy. A significant Group assignment x Time interaction

(F[2, 332] = 6.40, p < .01, η2 = .04): participants assigned to the self-

efficacy enhancement intervention presented higher levels of self-

efficacy (at T2 and T3), compared to those assigned to the

psychoeducational intervention.

Job burnout: A significant Time effect : job burnout decreased

significantly between T1 and T2, and between T1 and T3,

F(2, 332) = 77.38, p < .001, η2 = .32.

Work engagement: A significant Time effect : work engagement

increased significantly between: T1 and T2, T1 and T3, F(2, 332) =

44.97, p < .001, η2 = .21.

Mediation analyses. Self-efficacy (T2) mediated the relationship

between the group assignment (self-efficacy enhancement intervention

versus psychoeducational intervention) and job burnout (T3) or work

engagement (T3).

CONCLUSION

The results highlight the role of self-efficacy enhancement in reducing job

burnout and increasing work engagement among human services workers.

Working in free space by Kailash Gyawali, available under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.0 Generic License at https://www.flickr.com/photos/klash/3206216434

Enrollment (n = 370)

T1

Randomization (n = 253)

Inclusion

criteria:

- 18 years old

- providing services

for survivors of

traumatic events

for at least 1 year

Exclusion

criteria:

- no T1 response

- drop-out before

randomization

- did not experience

secondary trauma

Self-efficacy

enhancement

intervention

(n = 87)

Psychoeducational

intervention

(n = 81)

Social support

enhancement

intervention

(n = 85)

Lost to follow-up:

- at T2 (n = 46)

- at T3 (n = 54)

Lost to follow-up:

- at T2 (n = 40)

- at T3 (n = 56)

Included in analysis

(intention to treat)

(n = 87)

Included in analysis

(intention to treat)

(n = 81)

Not analyzed

due to high drop-out

rate (78%)

(n = 85)

Lost to follow-up:

- at T2 (n = 53)

- at T3 (n = 66)

This study is supported by a grant from the National Science Center (NCN) in Poland (N N106 139537).

CONTENT OF THE PROGRAM

• 3 types of web-based interventions delivered with minimal guidance: two CBT-based and

including interactive tasks (self-efficacy enhancement intervention and social support

enhancement intervention), and one psychoeducational and including static tasks

• 4 weekly sessions

• Online personal journal

• Automatic e-mail reminders to complete the sessions

Figure 4. Levels of self-efficacy at

T1, T2 and T3.

Figure 5. Levels of job burnout at T1,

T2 and T3.

Figure 6. Levels of work engagement

at T1, T2 and T3.

5,01

5,23

5,39

5,22

5,71 5,70

4,60

4,80

5,00

5,20

5,40

5,60

5,80

Self-efficacyT1

Self-efficacyT2

Self-efficacyT3

Psychoeducational intervention

Self-efficacy enhancement intervention

3,00

2,65 2,64

2,86

2,56

2,51

2,20

2,30

2,40

2,50

2,60

2,70

2,80

2,90

3,00

3,10

Job burnoutT1

Job burnoutT2

Job burnoutT3

Psychoeducational intervention

Self-efficacy enhancement intervention

3,47

3,65

3,79

3,57

3,89

4,03

3,10

3,20

3,30

3,40

3,50

3,60

3,70

3,80

3,90

4,00

4,10

Workengagement T1

Workengagement T2

Workengagement T3

Psychoeducational intervention

Self-efficacy enhancement intervention

Figure 3. Results of mediation analysis: the effect of group assignment on work engagement is mediated by self-efficacy.

*p < .05, **p < .001, ***p < .001

Figure 2. Results of mediation analysis: the effect of group assignment on job burnout mediated by self-efficacy.

*p < .05, **p < .001, ***p < .001

Group assignment

(self-efficacy [1] versus

psychoeducational [0])

Self-efficacy

Job burnout

Path a:

β = 32***

Path b:

β = -.48***

Path c: β = .13*

Path c’:β = -.15***

Group assignment

(self-efficacy [1] versus

psychoeducational [0])

Self-efficacy

Work engagement

Path a:

β = .34***

Path b:

β = .46***

Path c: β = -.02

Path c’:β =.15***