Skip to main content
. 2023 May 12;2023(5):CD002892. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002892.pub6

Moench 2021.

Study characteristics
Methods Study design: randomised controlled trial
Study grouping: parallel group
Participants Baseline characteristics
Self‐Care Traumatic Episode Protocol
  • Age in years (mean ± SD): NR

  • Sex (N (% female)): NR

  • Sample size: 16

  • Years of experience (mean ± SD): NR


Control (wait list)
  • Age in years (mean ± SD): NR

  • Sex (N (% female)): NR

  • Sample size: 17

  • Years of experience (mean ± SD): NR


Overall
  • Age in years (mean ± SD): NR

  • Sex (N (% female)): NR

  • Sample size: 33

  • Years of experience (mean ± SD): NR


Included criteria: participants were considered suitable for study inclusion if they met the following criteria: they were willing to participate voluntarily in treatment; they provided written consent; and were licenced mental health clinicians who had taken basic EMDR training.
Excluded criteria: participants were excluded if they disclosed severe levels of clinical distress, if they were concurrently receiving psychological treatment during the study period, or if they endorsed suicidal intent.
Pretreatment: NR
Compliance rate: 94%
Response rate: NR
Type of healthcare worker: 34 participants included master’s level clinical social workers (n = 8), Canadian Certified Counsellors (n = 4), master’s or PhD‐level registered psychologists (n = 21), and psychiatrists (n = 1).
Interventions Intervention characteristics
Self‐Care Traumatic Episode Protocol
  • Type of the intervention: Intervention type 4 ‐ Combination of two or more of the above

  • Description of the intervention: The intervention required participating in a video‐ and worksheet‐guided STEP intervention protocol. Within the intervention, participants watched a series of videos (e.g. on self‐care, relaxation), using the protocol to assist in processing any points of disturbance that would come up in relation to the current situation that they have found distressing or what may happen in the future in relation to the COVID‐19 pandemic. Participants were asked to target the COVID‐19 episode from the onset of COVID‐19 until now or even into the future.

  • The number of sessions: 1

  • Duration of each session on average: 1.5 hours

  • Duration of the entire intervention: 0 weeks

  • Duration of the entire intervention short vs long: short

  • Intervention deliverer: Therapists were the first author and a Master of Counselling graduate student in her last year of the program.

  • Intervention form: individual, distance


Control (wait list)
  • Type of the intervention: NA

  • Description of the intervention: NA

  • The number of sessions: NA

  • Duration of each session on average: NA

  • Duration of the entire intervention: NA

  • Duration of the entire intervention short vs long: NA

  • Intervention deliverer: NA

  • Intervention form: NA

Outcomes Depression Anxiety Stress Scale (DASS‐21)
  • Outcome type: ContinuousOutcome

  • Scale: Lovibond & Lovibond, 1995

Identification Sponsorship source: the authors received no specific grant or financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Country: Canada
Setting: NR
Comments: NR
Authors name: Judy Moench
Institution: Judy Moench Psychological Services Ltd.
Email: jmoench@telusplanet.net
Address: #260, 10230 142 Street, NW Edmonton, AB, T5N 3Y6, Canada.
Time period: June 2020
Notes Included in analysis 4.1
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Low risk Using a randomisation sequence based on a random number table.
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Unclear risk Participants were randomized by a research assistant. Insufficient information to understand whether intervention allocations could have been foreseen by participants in advance of, during, enrolment.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes High risk Participants were not blinded.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes High risk Participants were not blinded whereas outcomes are self‐reported.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes Low risk 5% lost to follow‐up.
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Unclear risk No trial registration, nor did we find one online.
Other bias Unclear risk Response rate was not reported.