Educators' Digital Occupational Well-being Intervention During Working Hours

NCT05307107 | Completed

• 1 other identifier: University of Turku_UTurku
• Study Type: interventional
• Target: 80
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 1

Brief Summary

This controlled quasi experimental intervention study follows the MRC framework for complex interventions (Bleijenberg et al. 2018) aiming to promote educators' individual aspect of occupational well-being. The purpose of this study is: 1) to evaluate the effectiveness of 8-workweek SHINE (= Self-Help INtervention for Educators) on educator's individual aspect of occupational well-being comparing intervention and control groups and 2) to describe the possible associating factors for the effectiveness of the intervention (if any) and 3) to evaluate SHINE's acceptability (utility and usability) within intervention group.

Conditions

Well-being; Physical Activity; Recovery; Self Regulation

Keywords

educator; occupational well-being; working hours; physical activity; intervention; recovery; break

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (2)

• Change in resource-workload-balance

  Change in resource-workload-balance. 16-item self-reported questionnaire with continuous scale 1-5 (1= very poor - 5= very good). Questionnaire consists of questions of personal resources at work and workload factors \[9-item developed for this study and 7 items from "Occupational well-being of social and health care teachers - index questionnaire" (Saaranen et al., 2007)\]

  pre (week before enrollment) /post (after 8-workweeks) /follow-up (after 12 weeks of enrollment)

• Change in HRV

  Change in physical heart rate variability (=HRV). Change in the HRV (try to increase heart rate variability); in the variation in the time interval between consecutive heartbeats in milliseconds (ms). Heart rate variability (HRV) 3 minutes measurements are performed in work mornings at rest using Kubios HRV mobile application and a compatible belt-heart rate sensor (Polar H10 or H7). The beat-to-beat RR interval data (i.e. time intervals between successive heart beats) is pre-processed and analyzed at Kubios (Tarvainen et al. 2014; https://www.kubios.com/)

  pre (week before enrollment) /post (after 8-workweeks) /follow-up (after 12 weeks)

Secondary Outcomes (2)

• Change in Overall occupational well-being

  pre (week before enrollment) /post (after 8-workweeks) /follow-up (after 12 workweeks)

• Change in General well-being

  pre (week before enrollment) /post (after 8 workweeks) /follow-up (after 12 workweeks)

Other Outcomes (7)

• Change of Physical activity_condition

  pre (week before enrollment) /post (after 8-workweeks) /follow-up (after 12 workweeks)

• Change of Recovery_condition

  pre (week before enrollment) /post (after 8-workweeks) /follow-up (after 12 workweeks)

• Change of Self-regulation_condition

  pre (week before enrollment) /post (after 8-workweeks) /follow-up (after 12 workweeks)

Study Arms (2)

Intervention group (IG)

EXPERIMENTAL

Participants are educators working in health and social care education receiving 8 work week-SHINE.

Behavioral: SHINE

Control group (CG)

NO INTERVENTION

Participants are educators working in health and social care education without the program continuing their normal daily routines receiving SHINE for their voluntary use after this study (waitlist).

Interventions

SHINE BEHAVIORAL

Intervention group will use a 8-workweeks the digital Smart Break SHINE program with workplace support (encouragement and time-support) including daily 3 minutes break exercises twice a day; 1) physical exercise - break and 2) body/mind breathing exercise - break earning stars for exercise completed. The program includes weekly self-reflective task of individual well-being during working hours with weekly changing theme (avoiding sitting time, nature benefits, relaxation exercises, increasing physical activity in workplace etc.) earning diamonds for every weekly task completed. Participants self-monitors their weekly individual resources levels asked in every Thursday (1-5, 1= very poor. 5= very good). Program includes e-mail remainders set by participant themselves for suitable time frame These individual well-being actions takes approximately 15 minutes/workday. Control group will receive this program after this study (waitlist protocol).

Intervention group (IG)

Eligibility Criteria

• Age: 18 Years - 70 Years
• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: Yes
• Age Groups: Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

• Working as qualified educator (at least qualification of EQF 7) in secondary health and social care education
• Full-time work contract
• Having at least one-year employment in the organization

You may not qualify if:

• having pacemaker or being pregnant (cause of the HRV measures)

Sponsors & Collaborators

• University of Turku: lead
• The Trade Union of Education in Finland (OAJ): collaborator
• University of Eastern Finland: collaborator

Study Sites (1)

Jenni Rinne

Turku, 20540, Finland

Location

Related Publications (10)

• Bleijenberg N, de Man-van Ginkel JM, Trappenburg JCA, Ettema RGA, Sino CG, Heim N, Hafsteindottir TB, Richards DA, Schuurmans MJ. Increasing value and reducing waste by optimizing the development of complex interventions: Enriching the development phase of the Medical Research Council (MRC) Framework. Int J Nurs Stud. 2018 Mar;79:86-93. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2017.12.001. Epub 2017 Dec 5.

  PMID: 29220738 BACKGROUND

• Tarvainen MP, Niskanen JP, Lipponen JA, Ranta-Aho PO, Karjalainen PA. Kubios HRV--heart rate variability analysis software. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2014;113(1):210-20. doi: 10.1016/j.cmpb.2013.07.024. Epub 2013 Aug 6.

  PMID: 24054542 BACKGROUND

• Sonnentag S, Fritz C. The Recovery Experience Questionnaire: development and validation of a measure for assessing recuperation and unwinding from work. J Occup Health Psychol. 2007 Jul;12(3):204-21. doi: 10.1037/1076-8998.12.3.204.

  PMID: 17638488 BACKGROUND

• Chau JY, Van Der Ploeg HP, Dunn S, Kurko J, Bauman AE. Validity of the occupational sitting and physical activity questionnaire. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2012 Jan;44(1):118-25. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e3182251060.

  PMID: 21659903 BACKGROUND

• de Bloom J, Kinnunen U, Korpela K. Recovery Processes During and After Work: Associations With Health, Work Engagement, and Job Performance. J Occup Environ Med. 2015 Jul;57(7):732-42. doi: 10.1097/JOM.0000000000000475.

  PMID: 26147541 BACKGROUND

• Hennessy EA, Johnson BT, Acabchuk RL, McCloskey K, Stewart-James J. Self-regulation mechanisms in health behavior change: a systematic meta-review of meta-analyses, 2006-2017. Health Psychol Rev. 2020 Mar;14(1):6-42. doi: 10.1080/17437199.2019.1679654.

  PMID: 31662031 BACKGROUND

• Arian M, Soleimani M, Oghazian MB. Job satisfaction and the factors affecting satisfaction in nurse educators: A systematic review. J Prof Nurs. 2018 Sep-Oct;34(5):389-399. doi: 10.1016/j.profnurs.2018.07.004. Epub 2018 Jul 7.

  PMID: 30243696 BACKGROUND

• Singh C, Cross W, Munro I, Jackson D. Occupational stress facing nurse academics-A mixed-methods systematic review. J Clin Nurs. 2020 Mar;29(5-6):720-735. doi: 10.1111/jocn.15150. Epub 2020 Jan 2.

  PMID: 31856356 BACKGROUND

• Moore GF, Audrey S, Barker M, Bond L, Bonell C, Hardeman W, Moore L, O'Cathain A, Tinati T, Wight D, Baird J. Process evaluation of complex interventions: Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ. 2015 Mar 19;350:h1258. doi: 10.1136/bmj.h1258.

  PMID: 25791983 BACKGROUND

• Saaranen T, Tossavainen K, Turunen H, Kiviniemi V, Vertio H. Occupational well-being of school staff members: a structural equation model. Health Educ Res. 2007 Apr;22(2):248-60. doi: 10.1093/her/cyl073. Epub 2006 Jul 31.

  PMID: 16880218 BACKGROUND

Related Links

• HRV measurement application
• WHO-5 scale: general well-being
• Brooke, 1996. SUS-scale: "Quick and dirty usability scale"

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Motor Activity; Self-Control

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Behavior; Social Behavior

Study Officials

• Helena Leino-Kilpi, PhD

  University of Turku

  STUDY DIRECTOR

Study Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Phase: not applicable
• Allocation: NON RANDOMIZED
• Masking: NONE
• Purpose: PREVENTION
• Intervention Model: PARALLEL
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
• PI Title: Professor

Model Details: Participants (n=80) are educators working in health and social care education in secondary level education in five different educational organizations, which have similar management systems and providing time-support to implement SHINE during working hours. Organizations are randomly assigned either in intervention group (IG, n=2) receiving SHINE or in control group (CG, n=3) without the program continuing their normal daily routines receiving SHINE for their voluntary use after this study.

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: January 12, 2022
• First Posted: April 1, 2022
• Study Start: February 7, 2022
• Primary Completion: May 29, 2022
• Study Completion: May 29, 2022
• Last Updated: December 13, 2022

Record last verified: 2022-12

Data Sharing

• IPD Sharing: Will not share

Locations

FI (1)