ABSTRACT
Due to the high rates of exposure to potentially traumatic events in childhood, educators may experience high levels of indirect trauma exposure that can lead to adverse consequences, such as Secondary Traumatic Stress (STS). STS is a potential "constellation of symptoms that may run parallel to those of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) including symptoms of intrusion, avoidance, arousal, and emotional numbing" (Molnar et al., 2017, p. 130). However, STS remains understudied in the school personnel population. This quantitative survey study explored to what extent a set of professional (i.e., supervisor support, colleague support, trauma-informed practices professional development, professional role) and personal factors (self-care, personal trauma history, perceived dosage of student trauma, and subjective impact of the COVID-19 pandemic) predicted STS scores for a sample of 225 urban school personnel. Analyses included conducting descriptives and a series of hierarchical and moderation multiple regression analyses. Results reveal 41.2% of the participants met criteria for STS on the Secondary Traumatic Stress Scale (Bride et al., 2007). The results suggest the set of personal factors are significantly associated with STS scores. Professional factors, however, were found to be less strongly related, with the possible exception of supervisor support. Finally, the results suggest supervisor support may moderate or positively impact the relationship between some risk factors (e.g., perceived dosage of student trauma) and STS scores. Implications, limitations, and future directions are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)
ABSTRACT
Due to the high rates of exposure to potentially traumatic events in childhood, educators may experience high levels of indirect trauma exposure that can lead to adverse consequences, such as Secondary Traumatic Stress (STS). STS is a potential "constellation of symptoms that may run parallel to those of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) including symptoms of intrusion, avoidance, arousal, and emotional numbing" (Molnar et al., 2017, p. 130). However, STS remains understudied in the school personnel population. This quantitative survey study explored to what extent a set of professional (i.e., supervisor support, colleague support, trauma-informed practices professional development, professional role) and personal factors (self-care, personal trauma history, perceived dosage of student trauma, and subjective impact of the COVID-19 pandemic) predicted STS scores for a sample of 225 urban school personnel. Analyses included conducting descriptives and a series of hierarchical and moderation multiple regression analyses. Results reveal 41.2% of the participants met criteria for STS on the Secondary Traumatic Stress Scale (Bride et al., 2007). The results suggest the set of personal factors are significantly associated with STS scores. Professional factors, however, were found to be less strongly related, with the possible exception of supervisor support. Finally, the results suggest supervisor support may moderate or positively impact the relationship between some risk factors (e.g., perceived dosage of student trauma) and STS scores. Implications, limitations, and future directions are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)
ABSTRACT
Background: Lynch syndrome (LS) is an inherited disorder characterized by pathogenic variants within mismatch repair genes resulting in an increased risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). In England, the fecal immunochemical test for Haemoglobin (FIT) is currently used in non-LS symptomatic and screening populations to guide subsequent colonoscopy. Herein, we report results from a national emergency clinical service implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic which used FIT to prioritize colonoscopy in LS patients while endoscopy services were limited. Methods: Regional genetic and endoscopy services across England were invited to participate. Patient eligibility was determined by 1) Diagnosis of Lynch Syndrome 2) Planned colonoscopic surveillance between 1 March 2020 and 31 March 2021. Requests for FIT testing from participating NHS Trusts were sent to the NHS Bowel Cancer Screening South of England Hub's Research Laboratory in Surrey. The Hub sent patients a FIT kit (OC-Sensor? (Eiken, Japan)), instructions for use, a questionnaire, and a pre-paid return envelope. Lab reports with feecal haemoglobin (f-Hb) results were returned electronically for clinical action. LS patients were risk-stratified for colonoscopy based upon the following f-Hb thresholds: (1) f-Hb ≥10mg of Haemoglobin (Hb)/g (mg/g) faeces: triaged for colonoscopy via an urgent two-week wait (2WW) pathway, (2) f-Hb ≤10mg/g: schedule patients for colonoscopy within 6-12 weeks, where local endoscopy service availability permits. Results: Fifteen centers across England participated in the clinical service from 9th June 2020 to 31st March 2021. An uptake rate of 64% was observed from this cohort (375/588 invites), though 21 cases were removed from analysis due to repeat FITs, insufficient sample, missing clinical data, or FIT completed after colonoscopy. Of the remaining 354 patients analyzed, 269 patients (76%) had a f-Hb of <6mg/g. 6% (n=23) of patients had a f-Hb that was at or between greater than the limit of detection of the assay (≥6mg/g) yet below 10mg/g.18% (n=62) had FIT results of ≥10mg/g and met criteria for urgent colonoscopy triage via the 2WW pathway. Of the 62 urgently triaged patients, 22 had detectable adenomas, 6 had advanced adenomas (AAs), and 4 were diagnosed with CRC (table). Conclusions: The utility of FIT during the pandemic has demonstrated clinical value for LS patients requiring CRC surveillance. Further longitudinal investigation on the efficacy of FIT in people with LS is warranted and will be examined as part of the multi-center prospective research study “FIT for Lynch Syndrome” (ISRCTN15740250) which is presently recruiting patients in the UK.
ABSTRACT
The authors listed are in correct and should read: Anne Lincoln1, Sally C Benton2, Prof Peter Sasieni1, Kevin J Monahan3,4 Author Affiliations: 1 Comprehensive Cancer Centre, King’s College London, London, UK, 2 Bowel Cancer Screening South of England Hub, Royal Surrey County Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Guildford, UK 3 The Lynch Syndrome Family Cancer Clinic, St Mark’s Hospital and Academic Institute, Harrow, UK 4 Imperial College London, London, UK.