Group critical incident stress debriefing with emergency services personnel: a randomized controlled trial

Abstract

Although single-session individual debriefing is contraindicated, the efficacy of group psychological debriefing remains unresolved. We conducted the first randomized controlled trial of critical incident stress debriefing (CISD) with emergency workers (67 volunteer fire-fighters) following shared exposure to an occupational potentially traumatic event (PTE). The goals of group CISD are to prevent post-traumatic stress and promote return to normal functioning following a PTE. To assess both goals we measured four outcomes, before and after the intervention: post-traumatic stress, psychological distress, quality of life, and alcohol use. Fire brigades were randomly assigned to one of three treatment conditions: (1) CISD, (2) Screening (i.e., no-treatment), or (3) stress management Education. Controlling for pre-intervention scores, CISD was associated with significantly less alcohol use post-intervention relative to Screening, and significantly greater post-intervention quality of life relative to Education. There were no significant effects on post-traumatic stress or psychological distress. Overall, CISD may benefit broader functioning following exposure to work-related PTEs. Future research should focus on individual, group, and organizational factors and processes that can promote recovery from operational stressors. Ultimately, an occupational health (rather than victim-based) approach will provide the best framework for understanding and combating potential threats to the health and well-being of workers at high risk for PTE exposure.

Keywords:

• critical incident stress debriefing
• psychological debriefing
• emergency services
• randomized controlled trial

Acknowledgments

We gratefully acknowledge the support of the South Australian Country Fire Service and South Australian Fire and Emergency Services Commission, and all of the members of the Stress Prevention and Management Team who helped carry out this logistically challenging research. The authors are both consultants to the agency in which the research was conducted, but neither author conducted any group interventions during the data collection period.