A Blended Rational Emotive Occupational Health Coaching for Job-Stress among Teachers of children with Special Education Needs

Last registered on July 26, 2021

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
A Blended Rational Emotive Occupational Health Coaching for Job-Stress among Teachers of children with Special Education Needs
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0007992
Initial registration date
July 22, 2021

Initial registration date is when the trial was registered.

It corresponds to when the registration was submitted to the Registry to be reviewed for publication.

First published
July 26, 2021, 11:27 AM EDT

First published corresponds to when the trial was first made public on the Registry after being reviewed.

Locations

Region

Primary Investigator

Affiliation
University of Nigeria

Other Primary Investigator(s)

Additional Trial Information

Status
Completed
Start date
2019-03-10
End date
2019-07-30
Secondary IDs
Abstract
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Heightened stress tends to undermine both teachers’ efficacy and students’ outcomes. Managing job stress in teachers of children with special education needs is continually recommended due to the increased demands for the teachers to adapt curriculum content, learning materials and learning environments for learning. This study investigated the efficacy of blended Rational Emotive Occupational Health Coaching in reducing occupational stress among teachers of children with special needs in Abia state, Nigeria.
Method: The current study adopted a group-randomized waitlist control trial design with pretest, post-test and follow-up assessments. Participants (N= 83) included teachers of children with special education needs in inclusive and specialized schools. bREOHC group participated in a 2 hours intersession face-to-face and online REOC program weekly for a period of 12 weeks. Data were collected using Single Item Stress Questionnaire (SISQ), Teachers’ Stress Inventory and Participants’ Satisfaction questionnaire (PSQ). Data collected at baseline; post-test as well as follow-up 1 and 2 evaluations were analyzed using mean, standard deviation, t-test statistics, repeated measures ANOVA and bar charts.
Results: Results revealed that the mean perceived stress, stress symptoms and the total teachers’ stress score of the bREOHC group at post-test and follow up assessments reduced significantly, compared to the waitlisted group. Participants also reported high level of satisfaction with the therapy and procedures.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Dike, Ibiwari. 2021. "A Blended Rational Emotive Occupational Health Coaching for Job-Stress among Teachers of children with Special Education Needs." AEA RCT Registry. July 26. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.7992-1.0
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Intervention
A rational-emotive occupational health coaching program manual2 used in Onyishi, et al.[35] was adapted and blended with online module and used in the study. The adapted modules utilized the “ABCDE” model (Activating event, Beliefs, Consequences, Disputing, and Effective new philosophy) to change dysfunctional and irrational beliefs associated with work experiences. The major aim of bREOHC was to use ABCDE face-to-face group therapeutic model combined with online module in “disputing” – challenging and questioning employees’ work-related irrational and dysfunctional beliefs and replacing them with rather helpful and functional beliefs.[2, 34]
The researcher adopted the ABCDE model in explaining the relationships existing between activating (A) events associated with teaching children with ASD, dysfunctional thoughts, beliefs or cognitions arising from those events (B); the emotional and behavioral consequences of the beliefs (C).[56, 57] Activating event (A) in teaching children with special education needs could be a challenging situation associated with learning difficulties of the children, behavioural problems, extra work-load and teachers’ personal experiences; the belief (B) is the interpretation and cognitive imagery formed due to “A”. Such cognition about the event (B) elicits a consequence/effect (C) for the teacher, which may be adaptive or maladaptive. Maladaptive consequence may include anxiety, depression and stress symptomatology. Then, disputation techniques (D) are used to eliminate the maladaptive, dysfunctional and self-limiting beliefs and cognitions.[57, 58, 59] Disputation involves challenging and comparing the maladaptive thoughts with more adaptive ones. According to Ellis,[31] the best way to counter irrational beliefs is by considering realistic and logical ones. Hence as participants become aware of and counteract their dysfunctional beliefs, they come up with more effective world-views (E). This ABCDE model as used in earlier study by the first author formed the basis of activities throughout the intervention (See table 1).
Hence, in bREOHC we designed a face-to-face combined with inter-session internet-based therapy in 12 modules (six face-to face modules were delivered in alternate sessions with six internet-based modules). Each of the modules includes information, exercises, worksheets, images, examples, homework exercises and template for progress feedback. Additional audio and video files are also in the internet-based sessions.
Intervention Start Date
2019-04-14
Intervention End Date
2019-07-24

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Results revealed that the mean perceived stress, stress symptoms and the total teachers’ stress score of the bREOHC group at post-test and follow up assessments reduced significantly, compared to the waitlisted group. Participants also reported high level of satisfaction with the therapy and procedures
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
Results revealed that the mean perceived stress, stress symptoms and the total teachers’ stress score of the bREOHC group at post-test and follow up assessments reduced significantly, compared to the waitlisted group. Participants also reported high level of satisfaction with the therapy and procedures

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
The study adopted a group-randomized waitlist control trial design with pretest, post-test, and follow-up assessments
Experimental Design Details
The study adopted a group-randomized waitlist control trial design with pretest, post-test, and follow-up assessments
Randomization Method
Participants were asked to pick 1 envelope containing pressure-sensitive paper labeled with either REOHC or WLG-Waitlist Group
Randomization Unit
Individual
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
87 participants
Sample size: planned number of observations
87 teachers of children with autism
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
43 participants in intervention and 43 in control groups
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
G-Power
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
IRB Approval Date
IRB Approval Number

Post-Trial

Post Trial Information

Study Withdrawal

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information

Intervention

Is the intervention completed?
No
Data Collection Complete
Data Publication

Data Publication

Is public data available?
No

Program Files

Program Files
Reports, Papers & Other Materials

Relevant Paper(s)

Reports & Other Materials