Introduction: Many disaster and trauma survivors experience persistent subclinical distress that places them at risk of developing a mental health disorder. This study describes the first European feasibility study of a brief and scalable skills-based intervention targeting persistent subclinical distress following disasters and trauma. Method: Randomized controlled feasibility study of the Skills fOr Life Adjustment and Resilience (SOLAR) group program. German trauma survivors (N = 30) with subclinical symptoms of depression, anxiety, or posttraumatic stress disorder or functional impairment, but no current mental disorder other than adjustment disorder, were randomized to the SOLAR group program (n = 15) or to a wait-list control group (n = 15). The primary outcome was feasibility, operationalized through eligibility rate, recruitment speed, treatment adherence, dropout rate, and participant satisfaction with the program. Secondary outcomes were psychological distress, symptoms of insomnia, posttraumatic stress disorder, patient-centered outcomes, quality of life, and perceived social support. Results: Eligibility rate was 33.6%; recruitment speed was two days per participant; 92.9% completed at least four of five sessions; dropout rate was 10.0%; 92.3% were "very satisfied" with the program. Between-group change scores showed a large effect size for patient-centered outcomes. Medium effect sizes were found for symptoms of insomnia, perceived social support, and quality of life. Small effects were identified for reductions in distress and functional impairment. Discussion: The application of the SOLAR group program within a randomized controlled trial was feasible. Its efficacy should be further tested in a larger trial.
During the current COVID‐19 pandemic, people need to cope with multiple stressors which may affect their well‐being. This study aimed (1) to identify latent coping profiles in the German general population, and (2) to investigate differences between these profiles in well‐being. In total,
N
= 2326 German participants were recruited as part of the European Society of Traumatic Stress Studies (ESTSS) ADJUST study from June to September 2020 using an online survey. Coping strategies were assessed using the Brief‐COPE and the Pandemic Coping Scale; well‐being was assessed using the WHO‐5 Well‐Being Index. Coping profiles were identified using latent profile analysis; differences between profiles were examined using the automatic BCH method and multiple group analyses. Five coping profiles were identified that included different types and numbers of coping strategies: (1) High functional coping (17.84%), (2) Moderate functional coping (40.63%), (3) High functional and religious coping (9.07%), (4) Low functional coping (22.06%), (5) Moderate functional and dysfunctional coping (10.40%). The identified profiles significantly differed in well‐being (
χ
2
= 503.68,
p
<0.001). Coping profiles indicating high functional coping were associated with greater well‐being compared to coping profiles indicating low (
χ
2
= 82.21,
p
<0.001) or primarily dysfunctional (
χ
2
= 354.33,
p
<0.001) coping. These results provide insight into how people differ in their coping strategies when dealing with stressors in an early phase of the COVID‐19 pandemic. The study indicates higher levels of well‐being in coping profiles with more frequent use of functional strategies. To promote well‐being in the general population, it might be beneficial to train functional coping strategies in appropriate interventions that are associated with increased well‐being.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.