Sara M. Stretton , Joy C. MacDermid , Margaret Lomotan , Shannon C. Killip
{"title":"消防员心理健康教育计划比较:对消防员经历的描述性专题分析。","authors":"Sara M. Stretton , Joy C. MacDermid , Margaret Lomotan , Shannon C. Killip","doi":"10.1016/j.comppsych.2024.152547","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>In response to the inherent critical incident exposures experienced by firefighters, various mental health education programs have been developed. The purpose of this study was to explore the perceptions of firefighters who took such programs to understand differences/similarities across these programs.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We recruited 14 participants, who had taken or delivered two or more programs for firefighters (Resilient Minds (RM), Road to Mental Readiness (R2MR), and Before Operational Stress (BOS)). Participants participated in semi-structured interviews, which explored information that they learned, recalled, used, and their preferences. Data was analysed using thematic analysis.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Participants believed that all programs had some shared teaching methods, goals, skills, and topics; however, each program had key focuses/distinctive features. RM was said to be largely group participation and focused on assisting yourself, peers, and citizens. R2MR and BOS was said to be largely lecture style with a focus on the self. 70 % of participants who took RM (<em>n</em> = 7) and one other course preferred RM due to the specificity of training to firefighters, more active teaching methods, and focus on practical skill development. Others (43 %) had no program preference. Participants suggest that a tiered approach to mental health education would benefit firefighters.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>All programs were seen as helpful. Despite some congruency in goals and content, most firefighters preferred RM because the content was fire-specific, and the pedagogical approach was seen as more active and engaging. Program characteristics are important to facilitate appropriate program selection, as such, programs should be explicit about these aspects.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":10554,"journal":{"name":"Comprehensive psychiatry","volume":"136 ","pages":"Article 152547"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparison of firefighter mental health education programs: A descriptive thematic analysis of firefighter experiences\",\"authors\":\"Sara M. Stretton , Joy C. MacDermid , Margaret Lomotan , Shannon C. Killip\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.comppsych.2024.152547\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>In response to the inherent critical incident exposures experienced by firefighters, various mental health education programs have been developed. The purpose of this study was to explore the perceptions of firefighters who took such programs to understand differences/similarities across these programs.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We recruited 14 participants, who had taken or delivered two or more programs for firefighters (Resilient Minds (RM), Road to Mental Readiness (R2MR), and Before Operational Stress (BOS)). Participants participated in semi-structured interviews, which explored information that they learned, recalled, used, and their preferences. Data was analysed using thematic analysis.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Participants believed that all programs had some shared teaching methods, goals, skills, and topics; however, each program had key focuses/distinctive features. RM was said to be largely group participation and focused on assisting yourself, peers, and citizens. R2MR and BOS was said to be largely lecture style with a focus on the self. 70 % of participants who took RM (<em>n</em> = 7) and one other course preferred RM due to the specificity of training to firefighters, more active teaching methods, and focus on practical skill development. Others (43 %) had no program preference. Participants suggest that a tiered approach to mental health education would benefit firefighters.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>All programs were seen as helpful. Despite some congruency in goals and content, most firefighters preferred RM because the content was fire-specific, and the pedagogical approach was seen as more active and engaging. Program characteristics are important to facilitate appropriate program selection, as such, programs should be explicit about these aspects.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10554,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Comprehensive psychiatry\",\"volume\":\"136 \",\"pages\":\"Article 152547\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Comprehensive psychiatry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010440X24000981\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Comprehensive psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010440X24000981","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
A comparison of firefighter mental health education programs: A descriptive thematic analysis of firefighter experiences
Background
In response to the inherent critical incident exposures experienced by firefighters, various mental health education programs have been developed. The purpose of this study was to explore the perceptions of firefighters who took such programs to understand differences/similarities across these programs.
Methods
We recruited 14 participants, who had taken or delivered two or more programs for firefighters (Resilient Minds (RM), Road to Mental Readiness (R2MR), and Before Operational Stress (BOS)). Participants participated in semi-structured interviews, which explored information that they learned, recalled, used, and their preferences. Data was analysed using thematic analysis.
Results
Participants believed that all programs had some shared teaching methods, goals, skills, and topics; however, each program had key focuses/distinctive features. RM was said to be largely group participation and focused on assisting yourself, peers, and citizens. R2MR and BOS was said to be largely lecture style with a focus on the self. 70 % of participants who took RM (n = 7) and one other course preferred RM due to the specificity of training to firefighters, more active teaching methods, and focus on practical skill development. Others (43 %) had no program preference. Participants suggest that a tiered approach to mental health education would benefit firefighters.
Conclusions
All programs were seen as helpful. Despite some congruency in goals and content, most firefighters preferred RM because the content was fire-specific, and the pedagogical approach was seen as more active and engaging. Program characteristics are important to facilitate appropriate program selection, as such, programs should be explicit about these aspects.
期刊介绍:
"Comprehensive Psychiatry" is an open access, peer-reviewed journal dedicated to the field of psychiatry and mental health. Its primary mission is to share the latest advancements in knowledge to enhance patient care and deepen the understanding of mental illnesses. The journal is supported by a diverse team of international editors and peer reviewers, ensuring the publication of high-quality research with a strong focus on clinical relevance and the implications for psychopathology.
"Comprehensive Psychiatry" encourages authors to present their research in an accessible manner, facilitating engagement with clinicians, policymakers, and the broader public. By embracing an open access policy, the journal aims to maximize the global impact of its content, making it readily available to a wide audience and fostering scientific collaboration and public awareness beyond the traditional academic community. This approach is designed to promote a more inclusive and informed dialogue on mental health, contributing to the overall progress in the field.