Cited by 14Mindfulness and Compassion InterventionsDigital Mental Health InterventionsStress and Burnout Research

Efficacy and Feasibility of the Minimal Therapist-Guided Four-Week Online Audio-Based Mindfulness Program ‘Mindful Senses’ for Burnout and Stress Reduction in Medical Personnel: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Open access
Luangapichart, Pavinee, Saisavoey, Nattha, Viravan, Natee·2022·Healthcare

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Previous online mindfulness-based interventions for burnout and stress reduction in medical personnel had limited effect size and high dropout rate, so we developed a new online mindfulness program ‘Mindful Senses (MS)’ with aims to increase effect size and lower dropout rate. To test its efficacy and feasibility, ninety medical personnel with moderate or high levels of burnout and stress from across Thailand were recruited and randomly allocated into Group A and Group B equally. Group A read psychological self-help articles (PSA) and attended MS program through smartphone application during weeks 1–4. Group B read PSA during weeks 1–4 and attended MS program during weeks 9–12. Burnout, stress, anxiety, depression, mindfulness, and quality of life were measured at baseline, week 4, and week 8 for both groups, and at weeks 12 and 16 for Group B. Group x time interaction was analyzed by repeated-measures ANOVA. The results showed that, compared to PSA only, MS + PSA had statistically significant improvement of burnout, stress, anxiety, depression, mindfulness, and quality of life with moderate-to-very large effect sizes at week 4 (d = 1.33, 1.42, 1.04, 1.14, 0.70, and 1.03, respectively) and moderate-to-large effect sizes at week 8 (d = 0.84, 0.98, 0.73, 0.73, 0.66, and 0.94, respectively). The dropout rate was 4.4%. In conclusion, the MS program has potential to be an alternative intervention for medical personnel suffering from burnout and stress.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/healthcare10122532

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 61 · Cited by 14

Authors
Luangapichart, P., Saisavoey, N., & Viravan, N.
Affiliations
Siriraj Hospital (TH)
Corresponding author
Viravan, Natee
Venue
Healthcare
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2022-12-14
Volume
10
Issue
12
Pages
2532
ISSN
2227-9032 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4311792062
Cited by
14
References
61
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2
FWCI
2.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Healthcare (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • medRxiv (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Siriraj Research Development Fund (20PC00012/040/20)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Stress and Burnout Research
Keywords
burnout, occupational stress, healthcare workers, mobile application, anxiety, depression, quality of life, mindfulness, dropout rates, therapist-guided intervention

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review