Measuring mental health professionals' trauma care competencies: Psychometric properties of the novel readiness to work with trauma-exposed patients scale.

IF 4.9 1区 文学 Q1 COMMUNICATION Communication Research Pub Date : 2023-09-01 Epub Date: 2022-04-04 DOI:10.1037/tra0001231
Evaldas Kazlauskas, Lina Jovarauskaite, Odeta Gelezelyte
{"title":"Measuring mental health professionals' trauma care competencies: Psychometric properties of the novel readiness to work with trauma-exposed patients scale.","authors":"Evaldas Kazlauskas, Lina Jovarauskaite, Odeta Gelezelyte","doi":"10.1037/tra0001231","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>A lack of training in PTSD assessment and treatment can cause nonrecognition, misdiagnosis, or mistreatment of trauma-exposed patients in clinical practice. To fill the gap of the measures of trauma care-related competencies, the current study aimed to test psychometric properties of the novel Readiness to Work with Trauma-Exposed Patients Scale (RTEPS) in a sample of clinicians.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The study sample comprised 279 Lithuanian mental health professionals (91% psychologists and 9% psychiatrists). The mean age of study participants was 41.09 (<i>SD</i> = 10.68), 93.9% were female. Almost half of the participants (49.1%) had more than 10 years of work experience in the field of mental health, and 61.3% of clinicians reported routinely seeing trauma-exposed patients in their clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Exploratory structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis revealed that a three-factor, first-order model of the 10-item self-report RTEPS comprising competencies of assessment, treatment, and affect tolerance showed the best fit for the data. Additionally, previous trauma-focused training experience but not work experience was significantly associated with perceived readiness to work with trauma-exposed patients while controlling for the rates of depression and anxiety of mental health professionals.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The findings of the study provide evidence of the RTEPS validity based on test content, internal structure, relations to other variables as well as internal consistency. The RTEPS scale is a brief and easily administered instrument that could be used in the context of training or clinical setting to evaluate the trauma care competencies among professionals. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":48323,"journal":{"name":"Communication Research","volume":"19 1","pages":"S427-S435"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Communication Research","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/tra0001231","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/4/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: A lack of training in PTSD assessment and treatment can cause nonrecognition, misdiagnosis, or mistreatment of trauma-exposed patients in clinical practice. To fill the gap of the measures of trauma care-related competencies, the current study aimed to test psychometric properties of the novel Readiness to Work with Trauma-Exposed Patients Scale (RTEPS) in a sample of clinicians.

Method: The study sample comprised 279 Lithuanian mental health professionals (91% psychologists and 9% psychiatrists). The mean age of study participants was 41.09 (SD = 10.68), 93.9% were female. Almost half of the participants (49.1%) had more than 10 years of work experience in the field of mental health, and 61.3% of clinicians reported routinely seeing trauma-exposed patients in their clinical practice.

Results: Exploratory structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis revealed that a three-factor, first-order model of the 10-item self-report RTEPS comprising competencies of assessment, treatment, and affect tolerance showed the best fit for the data. Additionally, previous trauma-focused training experience but not work experience was significantly associated with perceived readiness to work with trauma-exposed patients while controlling for the rates of depression and anxiety of mental health professionals.

Conclusions: The findings of the study provide evidence of the RTEPS validity based on test content, internal structure, relations to other variables as well as internal consistency. The RTEPS scale is a brief and easily administered instrument that could be used in the context of training or clinical setting to evaluate the trauma care competencies among professionals. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
测量心理健康专业人员的创伤护理能力:新型创伤患者工作准备量表的心理测量特性。
目的:在临床实践中,缺乏创伤后应激障碍评估和治疗方面的培训可能会导致对受创伤患者的不识别、误诊或错误治疗。为了填补创伤护理相关能力测量方面的空白,本研究旨在对临床医生样本中的新型创伤暴露患者工作准备量表(RTEPS)的心理测量特性进行测试:研究样本包括 279 名立陶宛心理健康专业人员(91% 为心理学家,9% 为精神病学家)。研究参与者的平均年龄为 41.09 岁(SD = 10.68),93.9% 为女性。近一半的参与者(49.1%)在心理健康领域有 10 年以上的工作经验,61.3% 的临床医生表示在临床实践中经常接诊有心理创伤的患者:探索性结构方程建模和确认性因子分析显示,由评估、治疗和情感耐受能力组成的 10 项自我报告 RTEPS 的三因子一阶模型与数据的拟合度最高。此外,在控制心理健康专业人员的抑郁和焦虑率的情况下,以前的创伤培训经历(而非工作经历)与感知到的与遭受创伤的患者打交道的准备程度有显著关联:研究结果从测试内容、内部结构、与其他变量的关系以及内部一致性等方面证明了 RTEPS 的有效性。RTEPS 量表是一种简明易用的工具,可用于培训或临床环境中评估专业人员的创伤护理能力。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA,保留所有权利)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Communication Research
Communication Research COMMUNICATION-
CiteScore
17.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: Empirical research in communication began in the 20th century, and there are more researchers pursuing answers to communication questions today than at any other time. The editorial goal of Communication Research is to offer a special opportunity for reflection and change in the new millennium. To qualify for publication, research should, first, be explicitly tied to some form of communication; second, be theoretically driven with results that inform theory; third, use the most rigorous empirical methods; and fourth, be directly linked to the most important problems and issues facing humankind. Critieria do not privilege any particular context; indeed, we believe that the key problems facing humankind occur in close relationships, groups, organiations, and cultures.
期刊最新文献
Personality, Attachment, and Pornography: A Meta-Analysis Expansion and Exploration of the Superdiffuser Model With Agent-Based Modeling “I’ll Change My Beliefs When I See It”: Video Fact Checks Outperform Text Fact Checks in Correcting Misperceptions Among Those Holding False or Uncertain Pre-Existing Beliefs “None of Us Wanted to be at This Party, But What a Guest List”: How Technology Workers Position Themselves on LinkedIn Following Layoffs Caught Within the Family System: An Examination of Emerging Adults’ Dilemmas in Navigating Sibling Depression
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1