Development of a trauma-informed self-care measure with child welfare workers

Salloum, Alison; Choi, Mi Jin; Stover, Carla Smith

doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2018.07.008

Cited by 17 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The development processes for the included measures ranged from reviewing the literature and existing measures to extensive multistage processes involving consultation with expert panels, field testing, and/or community-based participatory research (e.g., Baker et al, 2016;Sprang et al, 2016). For seven measures, theory appeared to be integrated into or foundational to development (Goodman et al, 2016;Hallinan et al, 2019;Madden et al, 2017;Richardson et al, 2012;Salloum et al, 2018;THRIVE, 2011), whereas theory was mentioned, but not integrated, or not mentioned at all for the others; details regarding the role of theory were not always clear. Similarly, some articles reported more extensive validation work than others, and a few articles explicitly noted that further validation was needed (e.g., Richardson et al, 2012;Salloum et al, 2018;THRIVE, 2011).…”

Section: Stage 1: T(v)ic Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For seven measures, theory appeared to be integrated into or foundational to development (Goodman et al, 2016;Hallinan et al, 2019;Madden et al, 2017;Richardson et al, 2012;Salloum et al, 2018;THRIVE, 2011), whereas theory was mentioned, but not integrated, or not mentioned at all for the others; details regarding the role of theory were not always clear. Similarly, some articles reported more extensive validation work than others, and a few articles explicitly noted that further validation was needed (e.g., Richardson et al, 2012;Salloum et al, 2018;THRIVE, 2011).…”

Section: Stage 1: T(v)ic Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Two were focused on VT (Hallinan et al, 2019;Sprang et al, 2016) but were included in Stage 1 because they explicitly measured it from a trauma-informed organization perspective. Similarly, one measured trauma-informed self-care (Salloum et al, 2018). Otherwise, they were designed to measure client perceptions of care (Clark et al, 2008; Example items: (a) "There is a connection between mental health issues and past traumatic experiences or ACEs," (b) "TIP is essential for working effectively with our patients and their families," and (c) "I help patients and peers to recognize their own strengths" Adapted existing unpublished/unvalidated tool (Abdoh et al, 2017) The version we obtained from authors has 100 items.…”

Section: Stage 1: T(v)ic Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Measuring Trauma- (and Violence-) Informed Care: A Scoping Review

Wathen

Schmitt

MacGregor

2021

Trauma, Violence, & Abuse

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Trauma- (and violence-) informed care (T(V)IC) has emerged as an important practice approach across a spectrum of care settings; however how to measure its implementation and impact has not been well-examined. The purpose of this scoping review is to describe the nature and extent of available measures of T(V)IC, including the cross-cutting concepts of vicarious trauma and implicit bias. Using multiple search strategies, including searches conducted by a professional librarian from database inception to Summer 2020, 1074 articles were retrieved and independently screened for eligibility by two team members. A total of 228 were reviewed in full text, yielding 13 measures that met pre-defined inclusion criteria: 1) full-text available in English; 2) describes the initial development and validation of a measure, that 3) is intended to be used to evaluate T(V)IC. A related review of vicarious trauma measures yielded two that are predominant in this literature. Among the 13 measures identified, there was significant diversity in what aspects of T(V)IC are assessed, with a clear emphasis on “knowledge” and “safety”, and less on “collaboration/choice” and “strengths-based” concepts. The items and measures are roughly split in terms of assessing individual-level knowledge, attitudes and practices, and organizational policies and protocols. Few measures examine structural factors, including racism, misogyny, poverty and other inequities, and their impact on people’s lives. We conclude that existing measures do not generally cover the full potential range of the T(V)IC, and that those seeking such a measure would need to adapt and/or combine two or more existing tools.

show abstract

Section: Stage 1: T(v)ic Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Stage 1: T(v)ic Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Stage 1: T(v)ic Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Measuring Trauma- (and Violence-) Informed Care: A Scoping Review

Wathen

Schmitt

MacGregor

2021

Trauma, Violence, & Abuse

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Internal reliability was good for the total scale (␣ ϭ .82) and all subscales (␣s ϭ .73-.79). Although initial support for the factor structure was reported (Salloum et al, 2015), Salloum et al (2018) revised and further validated the scale. The revised scale consists of a 10-item measure with the same factors as the original version.…”

Section: Trauma-informed Self-care Scale-original (Tisc; Salloum Et A...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…All of the scales reviewed have been developed within the past decade. Two measures have two validation studies (including both an original version and a revised version of the scale), MSCS (Cook-Cottone et al, 2017) and Brief MSCS (Hotchkiss et al, 2019), TISC (Salloum et al, 2015) and TISC-Revised (Salloum, et al, 2018); all other measures have only one peer-reviewed study reporting the development and initial validation for each, which suggests that measurement development in the field of professional self-care is still in its infancy. The target populations in these measurement studies were professionals or trainees in mental health-related fields, and the actual samples included social workers, child welfare workers, practicing psychologists, hospice professionals, and undergraduate and graduate trainees.…”

Section: Current Stage Of Self-care Measurement Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic review of self-care measures for professionals and trainees.

Jiang

Topps

Suzuki

2021

Training and Education in Professional Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the lack of a universally accepted definition, the concept of self-care has been long recognized in the health care literature (e.g., nursing, behavioral medicine), and research findings have established a foundation to support the importance of self-care in optimizing health and well-being in patients. In recent decades, more attention has been paid to self-care in health service professionals (Wise, Hersh, & Gibson, 2012), and emerging evidence has supported the benefits of self-care in facilitating psychology graduate trainees' professional gains and well-being (Colman et al., 2016). To facilitate more empirical research in this area, the current systematic review was conducted to summarize the current availability of self-care measures among health care professionals and trainees (e.g., psychologists, social workers, and nurses) and assess their psychometric properties and clinical utilities. An electronic search was performed for self-care measures in 3 databases (i.e., PsycINFO, CINAHL, and PudMed). Eight articles published from 2013 to 2019 met the inclusion criteria, and 10 measures assessing self-care among mental health care professionals were identified. The key features of these measures are summarized. Although all the scales have some psychometric support, only a few had adequate support that was demonstrated through high-quality empirical studies. Recommendations are provided for future use of the self-care measures, especially for psychologists, psychology trainees, and social or child welfare workers. Research gaps and future directions of self-care measurement studies to promote self-care practice among mental/health care professionals and trainees are also discussed. Public Significance StatementThis review summarizes the self-care measures that can be used to assess self-care practices in health care professionals and trainees. The findings offer the guidelines for selection of self-care measures in research and/or training and practice, especially in mental health care fields, such as psychology and social work.

show abstract

Child welfare worker wellness: An ethical imperative in the service of children

Bowman

2022

Child Abuse Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Child welfare social workers are at high risk of burnout due to the demanding nature of their work (Bowman, 2020;Lizano & Mor Barak, 2012; Sprang et al., 2011;. This condition can have drastic consequences for the psychosocial and emotional wellbeing of social workers and the vulnerable children and families they serve in child welfare organisations across the world. However, burnout and the associated risk of turnover and reduced self-efficacy can be prevented through effective workplace support and intervention (Brode, 1990). This article provides an overview on the impact of burnout on child welfare workers' health, mental health and turnover as well as child and family outcomes, while underscoring the organisation's role in mitigating this issue. From an extensive literature review, the author proposes the following organisational child welfare wellness model: workplace wellness in child welfare organisations. Recommendations within this model focus on child welfare practices which provide support to workers including wellness (i.e. on-site crisis and mental health support) and growth-needs-focused interventions (i.e. supervision, specialisation and promotion). Key Practitioner MessagesThis model seeks to help practitioners and administrators in child welfare organizations to (A) better understand and identify indicators of burnout in child welfare social workers; (B) define and conceptualize workplace wellness and holistic interventions in child welfare workplace settings; and (C) clearly identify measurable wellness interventions in child welfare settings and apply this knowledge to burnout prevention efforts at the micro (worker), mezzo (unit), and macro (agency) levels.

show abstract

Development of a trauma-informed self-care measure with child welfare workers

Cited by 17 publications

References 35 publications

Measuring Trauma- (and Violence-) Informed Care: A Scoping Review

Measuring Trauma- (and Violence-) Informed Care: A Scoping Review

A systematic review of self-care measures for professionals and trainees.

Child welfare worker wellness: An ethical imperative in the service of children

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About