Joselyn R. Sarabia, Elinam Dellor, Bridget Freisthler, Katherine Kieninger
{"title":"Exploring the association between post–critical incident intervention preferences and self-reported coping self-efficacy among firefighters","authors":"Joselyn R. Sarabia, Elinam Dellor, Bridget Freisthler, Katherine Kieninger","doi":"10.1002/jts.23029","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Critical incident stress debriefing (CISD) is a commonly utilized intervention in the fire service that aims to minimize psychological harm and adverse mental health outcomes after a potentially traumatic incident. This study aimed to explore firefighter preferences regarding CISD and alternative post–critical incident interventions in relation to firefighter coping self-efficacy (FFCSE) and trauma coping self-efficacy (CSE-T). Firefighters (<i>N</i> = 241) completed an online survey and provided complete data. Most participants were White (<i>n</i> = 203, 84.2%), non-Hispanic (<i>n</i> = 221, 91.7%) men (94.2%; <i>n</i> = 227). CISD was the most preferred intervention among firefighters (<i>n</i> = 113, 46.9%) as compared to informal peer support (<i>n</i> = 31, 12.9%), formal one-on-one counseling (<i>n</i> = 29, 12.0%), and no intervention (<i>n</i> = 68, 28.2%). Firefighters who preferred CISD had statistically significant lower levels of FFCSE, <i>R</i><sup>2</sup> <i>=</i> .033–.044, <i>p</i>s = .012–.030, and CSE-T, <i>R</i><sup>2</sup> <i>=</i> .035–.061 <i>p</i>s = .017–.024, compared to those who preferred no intervention. Firefighters who preferred formal one-on-one counseling had statistically significantly lower levels of FFCSE, <i>R</i><sup>2</sup> <i>=</i> .033–.044, <i>p</i>s = .003–.011, and CSE-T, <i>R</i><sup>2</sup> <i>=</i> .035–0.061, <i>p</i> < .001–<i>p</i> = .002, compared to those who preferred no intervention. The findings from this study may guide future research to increase knowledge on firefighter intervention preferences and the association between preference and coping self-efficacy.</p>","PeriodicalId":17519,"journal":{"name":"Journal of traumatic stress","volume":"37 3","pages":"504-515"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jts.23029","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of traumatic stress","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jts.23029","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Critical incident stress debriefing (CISD) is a commonly utilized intervention in the fire service that aims to minimize psychological harm and adverse mental health outcomes after a potentially traumatic incident. This study aimed to explore firefighter preferences regarding CISD and alternative post–critical incident interventions in relation to firefighter coping self-efficacy (FFCSE) and trauma coping self-efficacy (CSE-T). Firefighters (N = 241) completed an online survey and provided complete data. Most participants were White (n = 203, 84.2%), non-Hispanic (n = 221, 91.7%) men (94.2%; n = 227). CISD was the most preferred intervention among firefighters (n = 113, 46.9%) as compared to informal peer support (n = 31, 12.9%), formal one-on-one counseling (n = 29, 12.0%), and no intervention (n = 68, 28.2%). Firefighters who preferred CISD had statistically significant lower levels of FFCSE, R2= .033–.044, ps = .012–.030, and CSE-T, R2= .035–.061 ps = .017–.024, compared to those who preferred no intervention. Firefighters who preferred formal one-on-one counseling had statistically significantly lower levels of FFCSE, R2= .033–.044, ps = .003–.011, and CSE-T, R2= .035–0.061, p < .001–p = .002, compared to those who preferred no intervention. The findings from this study may guide future research to increase knowledge on firefighter intervention preferences and the association between preference and coping self-efficacy.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Traumatic Stress (JTS) is published for the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies. Journal of Traumatic Stress , the official publication for the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies, is an interdisciplinary forum for the publication of peer-reviewed original papers on biopsychosocial aspects of trauma. Papers focus on theoretical formulations, research, treatment, prevention education/training, and legal and policy concerns. Journal of Traumatic Stress serves as a primary reference for professionals who study and treat people exposed to highly stressful and traumatic events (directly or through their occupational roles), such as war, disaster, accident, violence or abuse (criminal or familial), hostage-taking, or life-threatening illness. The journal publishes original articles, brief reports, review papers, commentaries, and, from time to time, special issues devoted to a single topic.