An Acceptance and Commitment Therapy-based workplace intervention for improving wellbeing of NHS staff

INTERVENTION: NHS staff participants will be randomised into two groups, an intervention and control group, by independent primary care managers following a randomisation schedule using an online randomisation tool. Details of the allocated groups were then sent to participants by email by independent NHS CCG staff to ensure allocation concealment. Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT; Hayes, 1987; Hayes, Strosahl, & Wilson, 1999) is a newer type of cognitive behaviour therapy, specifically designed to improve psychological flexibility (PF). The intervention will be based on an existing standardised ACT protocol designed for workplace settings described by Flaxman and Bond (2006; see also Flaxman & Bond, 2010a; Flaxman et al., 2013). Participants will be invited to attend four two‐hour group sessions. The four‐week workshop will be delivered to 10 ‐15 participants and will occur on four consecutive weeks. It will be facilitated by three experienced mindfulness teachers who are either on the national register or who comply with the Good Practice Guidelines. Within the workshop, participants will be introduced to different techniques that are designed to: (1) increase their awareness of how they manage unwanted thoughts and emotions; (2) equip them with mindfulness skills (3); help them to clarify their own personal values and to enact behaviours that are consistent with these values. To do this the intervention will also include two of ACT’s well‐known metaphors (passengers on the bus and the polygraph metaphor (Hayes, Strosahl, & Wilson, 1999)). Participants will be invited to follow‐up homework activities. Trainers will be supervised by an expert Clinical Psychologist (CG). Those allocated to the waiting list control will receive an ACT training later. These participants will complete the questionnaire at four time measurements in parallel to the experimental group but start their training after the follow‐up measures are being completed and returned. CONDITION: Wellbeing and occupational burnout ; Injury, Occupational Diseases, Poisoning ; Wellbeing and occupational burnout PRIMARY OUTCOME: General well‐being and mental health measured using the GHQ‐12 (Goldberg & Williams, 1988) at the baseline, one‐week after beginning the intervention, after 4 weeks and at the 14 week follow up. INCLUSION CRITERIA: 1. NHS staff 2. Working in Leeds, West Yorkshire and the Humber 3. Aged 18 years or older SECONDARY OUTCOME: 1. Burnout measured using the Shirom‐Melamed Burnout Measure (SMBM; Shirom, 2003; Shirom & Melamed, 2006).; 2. Work‐related worry and rumination during non‐work time using the Affective Rumination Subscale of the Work‐related Rumination Questionnaire (WRRQ; Cropley, Michalianou, Pravettoni, & Millward, 2012).; 3. Patient safety measured using items from Louch et al. (in press; 2016).; ; Process of change measures:; 4. Psychological flexibility measured using the Multidimensional Experiential Avoidance Questionnaire (MEAQ) – Distress Endurance subscale (Gamez et al., 2011).; 5. Mindfulness measured using the 15‐item Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (Gu et al., 2016; Baer et al., 2006, 2008).; 6. Values measured using the Valuing Questionnaire (VQ; Smout et al. 2014).; 7. Self‐Compassion measured using the Self‐Compassion Scale – short‐form (SCS‐SF; Raes et al., 2011).;