Secondary traumatisation in psychosocial emergency care personnel-A longitudinal study accompanying German trainees.

Psychosocial emergency care personnel form an important first responder subgroup, in which trained volunteers provide psychological first aid to accident and trauma survivors, their relatives, eye witnesses, bystanders and first responders themselves. This is the first longitudinal study to assess psychological burden due to secondary traumatisation and relevant resilience factors in psychosocial emergency care personnel. We asked 100 German psychosocial emergency care workers to assess their feeling of preparedness and resilience factors prior training. After training, when participants had worked emergency responses, we assessed secondary traumatisation. Overall, the level of secondary traumatisation was sub-clinical (M = 37.50, SD = 5.35) after training and reported resilience factor levels were high. Three regression analyses were conducted to examine the moderation effect of preparedness on specific expertise (R2  = 0.479, p < 0.001), performance competence (R2  = 0.419, p = 0.002) and inner attitude (R2  = 0.336, p = 0.002) in regard to the relationship between resilience factors and secondary traumatisation. Feeling prepared and competent for emergency responses were protective factors. Practical implications include the following: volunteers should not take part in emergency responses if they are under excessive stress; the volunteers' resilience factors should be taken into account; emergency response training should promote the feeling of preparedness in specific expertise and performance competence.

The psychological burden of volunteers in psychosocial emergency care - a qualitative interview study.

Psychosocial emergency care personnel provide voluntary psychological support directly after potentially traumatic events. During emergency responses, they experience challenging situations. However, previous quantitative studies suggest that the psychological burden of psychosocial emergency care personnel does not exceed that of the general population. This study aimed to obtain an in-depth analysis of the volunteers' psychological reactions and resources regarding emergency responses. 36 psychosocial emergency care volunteers (12 pre-training, 12 post-training, 12 experienced) were invited to participate in semi-structured interviews. The volunteers were selected from previous cross-sectional and longitudinal studies on secondary traumatization in psychosocial emergency care volunteers. A qualitative content analysis of the transcribed interviews was performed following the principles of summary and inductive category development. We identified 845 codes which we summarized in three overarching categories: (I) reactions to emergency responses, (II) psychosocial emergency care work related resources and (III) experiences and changes in life perspective related to working in psychosocial emergency care. The volunteers described both emotional and physical reactions to emergency responses. While they perceived social support as a key coping resource and reported a greater appreciation of their own lives and their families due to their work, many volunteers also felt increased concern that something could happen to them. The volunteers' reactions and symptoms are reasonable responses to stress and not indicative of serious impairment. Nevertheless, emergency responses are both emotionally and physically challenging. Volunteers should be carefully selected, receive regular supervision and determine the frequency of emergency responses.

Secondary Traumatization, Psychological Stress, and Resilience in Psychosocial Emergency Care Personnel.

Volunteers active in psychosocial emergency care offer psychological first aid to survivors of accidents and trauma, their relatives, eye witnesses, bystanders, and other first responders. So far, there are no studies that investigate the secondary and primary traumatization of this group of first responders. We included N = 75 volunteers, who filled out questionnaires to assess their secondary (QST/FST) and primary traumatization (PDS), and levels of comorbid psychological stress (PHQ-9, GAD-7, SF-12). We investigated factors of resilience by measuring attachment behavior (ECR-RD, RQ-2), level of personality functioning (OPD-SFK), sense of coherence (SOC-29), social support (F-SozU), and mindfulness (MAAS). The volunteers' levels of secondary and primary traumatization were below cut-off scores. Their levels of comorbid psychological stress were comparable to representative norm samples. Additionally, the volunteers presented high levels of resilience. Gender (ß = 0.26; p < 0.05), case discussions (ß = -0.37; p < 0.05), and social support (ß = 0.45; p < 0.01) were revealed to be predictors of secondary traumatization, while mindfulness turned out to be a predictor of primary traumatization (ß = -0.34; p = 0.008). However, we cannot rule out that the low prevalence of traumatization and comorbid psychological stress in our study sample might not be explained by a positive response bias.