Well-BeingMESHNCT02946736
Oregon Military Employee Sleep and Health Study
A study testing FSSB/Sleep Leadership Training and Actigraphy Feedback in people with Well-Being and Sleep, run by Oregon Health and Science University at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
This study is a randomized controlled trial that assesses the effects of (1) the Family-Supportive Supervisor Behavior (FSSB) and Sleep Leadership training and (2) sleep/cognitive effectiveness feedback intervention on health and well-being among full-time employees in the Oregon National Guard, their supervisors, and… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Well-Being, Sleep, Health Behavior
- What is being tested?
- FSSB/Sleep Leadership Training and Actigraphy Feedback
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 704 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 21 Jul 2017to 4 Dec 2020
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Full-time employees in the Oregon National Guard, including Military Technicians and Active Guard Reserves.
Who cannot join
- -
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
Oregon Health & Science University
Portland, Oregon, 97239
About this study
Official title: Evaluation of a Work-Family and Sleep Leadership Intervention in the Oregon National Guard: A Behavioral Health Leadership Approach
This study is a randomized controlled trial that assesses the effects of (1) the Family-Supportive Supervisor Behavior (FSSB) and Sleep Leadership training and (2) sleep/cognitive effectiveness feedback intervention on health and well-being among full-time employees in the Oregon National Guard, their supervisors, and their families. The interventions involving both health protection and health promotion are expected to contribute to improvements in employees' and their supervisors' sleep, risk behaviors, mental and physical health, and injury, as well as employees' and their spouse/partners' family experiences, health and well-being, and workplace outcomes.
Read the detailed description
The overall goal of the Military Employee Sleep and Health (MESH) study is to improve safety, health and well-being of service members in the Oregon National Guard and their families. The MESH Study seeks to do this by training supervisors to support Oregon National Guard service members by focusing on a reduction in work-life stress while increasing sleep health.
The Oregon MESH Study proposes that leadership can influence a fundamental change in the recognition of sleep health and service members' overall well-being and the well-being of their family members. With the support of the Oregon National Guard, the MESH Study will provide family-support and sleep leadership training for supervisors while raising awareness of sleep through daily non-invasive sleep measurements.
The investigators of the Oregon MESH Study expect positive results for study participants, including reduced stress and increased social support. Longer term, these effects are expected to create a more supportive work environment, which has positive effects on safety, health, well-being, family, and organizational outcomes. The investigators also expect that providing service members with individual sleep feedback will reduce sleep problems and improve sleep awareness.
- Conditions
- Well-Being, Sleep, Health Behavior
- Being tested
- FSSB/Sleep Leadership Training, Actigraphy Feedback
- Keywords
- Sleep, Physical Health, Psychological Health, Well-Being, Employee, Actigraphy
- Medical subject headings
- Health Behavior, Psychological Well-Being
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
FSSB/Sleep Leadership TrainingBehavioural
Supervisors will receive a training addressing family-supportive supervisor behaviors and sleep leadership.
Actigraphy FeedbackBehavioural
Supervisors and employees will receive personalized feedback on their sleep and activity measurements.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Supervisor Intervention | Experimental | Supervisors in the intervention group will go through the FSSB/sleep leadership training and receive actigraphy feedback. Receives: Behavioral: FSSB/Sleep Leadership Training; Behavioral: Actigraphy Feedback |
| Employee Intervention | Experimental | Employees in the intervention group will receive actigraphy feedback. Receives: Behavioral: Actigraphy Feedback |
| Waitlist Control | No intervention | Supervisor training and actigraphy feedback provided AFTER final 9 month data collection. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Self-Reported Sleep Duration
Total number of hours calculated from reported bed time and wake time. Minimum 0 hours, Maximum 24 hours. Longer duration indicates longer sleep duration. Ideal range is 7-9 hours of sleep per night.
Measured: 4 months
Self-Reported Sleep Duration
Total number of hours calculated from reported bed time and wake time. Minimum 0 hours, Maximum 24 hours. Longer duration indicates longer sleep duration. Ideal range is 7-9 hours of sleep per night.
Measured: 9 months
Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS): Sleep Disturbance Insomnia Subscale
Four item subscale of the larger 8 item Sleep Disturbance scale. Likert-type responses: 1 = Not at all to 5 = Very much).
T-Scores were created using HealthMeasures Scoring service, where data are uploaded into the HealthMeasures scoring service website, which generates T-Scores. This is considered the most accurate option.
T-Scores estimates were developed using a population of 2,252 participants, 259 of which had clinical sleep disorders, and was intended to be representative of the US population. This is the reference population that the T-score means and SDs were calibrated and centered with.
The T-Scores that HealthMeasures generates are not precisely at a mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10 because they are based on the unique MESH samples. A higher PROMIS T-score represents more of the concept being measured (worse).
Measured: 4 months
Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS): Sleep Disturbance Insomnia Subscale
Four item subscale of the larger 8 item Sleep Disturbance scale. Likert-type responses: 1 = Not at all to 5 = Very much). T-Scores were created using HealthMeasures Scoring service, where data are uploaded into the HealthMeasures scoring service website, which generates T-Scores. This is considered the most accurate option.
T-Scores estimates were developed using a population of 2,252 participants, 259 of which had clinical sleep disorders, and was intended to be representative of the US population. This is the reference population that the T-score means and SDs were calibrated and centered with.
The T-Scores that HealthMeasures generates are not precisely at a mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10 because they are based on the unique MESH samples. A higher PROMIS T-score represents more of the concept being measured.
Measured: 9 months
Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS): Dissatisfaction With Sleep Subscale
Four item subscale of the larger 8 item Sleep Disturbance scale. Likert-type responses: 1 = Not at all to 5 = Very much.
T-Scores were created using HealthMeasures Scoring service, where data are uploaded into the HealthMeasures scoring service website, which generates T-Scores. This is considered the most accurate option.
T-Scores estimates were developed using a population of 2,252 participants, 259 of which had clinical sleep disorders, and was intended to be representative of the US population. This is the reference population that the T-score means and SDs were calibrated and centered with.
The T-Scores that HealthMeasures generates are not precisely at a mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10 because they are based on the unique MESH samples. A higher PROMIS T-score represents more of the concept being measured (worse).
Measured: 4 months
Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS): Dissatisfaction With Sleep Subscale
Four item subscale of the larger 8 item Sleep Disturbance scale. Likert-type responses: 1 = Not at all to 5 = Very much).
T-Scores were created using HealthMeasures Scoring service, where data are uploaded into the HealthMeasures scoring service website, which generates T-Scores. This is considered the most accurate option.
T-Scores estimates for Dissatisfaction with Sleep were developed using a population of 2,252 participants, 259 of which had clinical sleep disorders, and was intended to be representative of the US population. This is the reference population that the T-score means and SDs were calibrated and centered with.
The T-Scores that HealthMeasures generates are not precisely at a mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10 because they are based on the unique MESH samples. A higher PROMIS T-score represents more of the concept being measured (worse).
Measured: 9 months
Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS): Sleep Related Impairment Subscale (SRI)
8 item scale. Likert-type responses: 1 = Not at all to 5 = Very much). T-Scores were created using HealthMeasures Scoring service, where data are uploaded into the HealthMeasures scoring service website, which generates T-Scores. This is considered the most accurate option.
T-Scores estimates for SRI were developed using a population of 2,252 participants, 259 of which had clinical sleep disorders, and was intended to be representative of the US population. This is the reference population that the T-score means and SDs were calibrated and centered with.
The T-Scores that HealthMeasures generates are not precisely at a mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10 because they are based on the unique MESH samples. A higher PROMIS T-score represents more sleep impairment (worse).
Measured: 4 months
Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS): Sleep Related Impairment Subscale (SRI)
8 item scale. Likert-type responses: 1 = Not at all to 5 = Very much). T-Scores were created using HealthMeasures Scoring service, where data are uploaded into the HealthMeasures scoring service website, which generates T-Scores. This is considered the most accurate option.
T-Scores estimates for SRI were developed using a population of 2,252 participants, 259 of which had clinical sleep disorders, and was intended to be representative of the US population. This is the reference population that the T-score means and SDs were calibrated and centered with.
The T-Scores that HealthMeasures generates are not precisely at a mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10 because they are based on the unique MESH samples. A higher PROMIS T-score represents more sleep impairment (worse).
Measured: 9 months
Actigraphic Sleep Duration: Total Sleep Time (TST)
Actigraphic measurements obtained using Actiwatch2 worn for 3 weeks Average sleep duration in hours Great duration generally better, with target range of 7-9 hours each sleep period.
Measured: 9 months
Actigraphic Sleep Efficiency: Wake After Sleep Onset (WASO)
Actigraphic measurements obtained using Actiwatch2 worn for 3 weeks Average number of minutes spent awake during the sleep period. More minutes indicates worse outcome.
Measured: 9-months
Overall Job Satisfaction Scale
Service member satisfaction with current job; Likert-type scale 1 = Strongly disagree to 5 = Strongly agree, mean created from the 3 items.
Scores could range from 0-5 with higher levels indicating greater satisfaction. Source: Cammann et al., 1983
Measured: 9-months
Turnover Intentions
Service member intention to quit current job; Two items with responses on Likert-type scale 1 = Strongly disagree to 5 = Strongly agree.
Overall score created with a mean of the two items, with higher levels indicating greater intention to leave one's job.
Source: Boroff \& Lewin, 1997
Measured: 9-months
Perceived Stress Scale
Service member self-reported stress; Likert-type scale 0 = Never to 4 = Very often, combined to a mean score, with a possible range from 0 to 4.
Higher scores indicate greater stress (worse). Source: Cohen \& Williamson, 1988
Measured: 9-months
Walter Reed Functional Impairment: Occupational Subscale (OFI)
Service member difficulty with completing work tasks and quality; 6 items with Likert-type responses: 1 = No difficulty at all to 5 = Extreme difficulty, mean score created from all items, with possible score range from 1 to 5.
Higher levels indicating greater impairment (worse). Source: Subscale of Overall Functional Impairment by Herrell et al., 2014
Measured: 9-months
Walter Reed Functional Impairment Scale: Personal Functioning Subscale (PFI)
Service member difficulty with getting personal life skills completed; 2 items with Likert-type responses: 1 = No difficulty at all to 5 = Extreme difficulty, mean score created from all items, with possible score range from 1 to 5.
Higher levels indicating greater impairment (worse). Source: Subscale of Overall Functional Impairment by Herrell et al., 2014
Measured: 9-months
Walter Reed Functional Impairment Scale: Social Functional Impairment Subscale (SFI)
Service member difficulty functioning in social situations; 4 items with Likert-type responses: 1 = No difficulty at all to 5 = Extreme difficulty, mean score created from all items, with possible score range from 1 to 5.
Higher levels indicating greater impairment (worse). Source: Subscale of Overall Functional Impairment by Herrell et al., 2014
Measured: 9-months
Secondary outcomes (2)
Family Supportive Supervisor Behaviors (FSSB)
Perceived supervisor support for work-family integration as reported by service member, 4 items, with responses on Likert-type scale 1=Strongly disagree to 5= Strongly agree, overall score created by mean score, with possible scores ranging from 1 to 5..
Higher scores indicating higher levels of support (better) Source: Hammer et al., 2013
Measured: 4-months
Sleep Leadership
Perceived supervisor support for sleep health as reported by service member, 8 items, with responses on Likert-type scale 1=Never to 5= Always, overall score created by mean score, with possible scores ranging from 1 to 5..
Higher scores indicating higher levels of support (better) Source: Modified version of Gunia et al., 2015
Measured: 4-months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted27 Oct 2016 (estimated)
- Study start21 Jul 2017
- Primary completion22 May 2020
- Study completion4 Dec 2020
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Well-BeingStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Oregon Health and Science UniversityThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Investigator
- Enrolment
- 704 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Oregon Health and Science University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Portland State University, Colorado State University, United States Department of Defense
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Leslie Hammer, Oregon Health and Science University
- Investigators
- Leslie Hammer, PhD, Principal investigator, Oregon Health and Science University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02946736
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- W81XWH-16-1-0720
- Acronym
- MESH
- Status last verified
- Nov 2024
- First submitted
- 19 Oct 2016
- Last updated
- 3 Jan 2025
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Hobfoll, S. E., Vinokur, A. D., Pierce, P. F., & Lewandowski-Romps, L. (2012). The combined stress of family life, work, and war in Air Force men and women: A test of conservation of resources theory. International Journal of Stress Management, 19(3), 217-237.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 3 Jan 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Evaluation of a Work-Family and Sleep Leadership Intervention in the Oregon National Guard: A Behavioral Health Leadership Approach
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02946736
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- MESH / W81XWH-16-1-0720
- Conditions
- Well-Being, Sleep, Health Behavior
- Keywords
- Sleep, Physical Health, Psychological Health, Well-Being, Employee, Actigraphy
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 704 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Oregon Health and Science UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Portland State University, Colorado State University, United States Department of Defense
- Study start
- 21 Jul 2017 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 22 May 2020 (actual)
- Study completion
- 4 Dec 2020 (actual)
- First posted
- 27 Oct 2016 (estimated)
- Results
- Posted 3 Jan 2025
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This study is a randomized controlled trial that assesses the effects of (1) the Family-Supportive Supervisor Behavior (FSSB) and Sleep Leadership training and (2) sleep/cognitive effectiveness feedback intervention on health and well-being among full-time employees in the Oregon National Guard, their supervisors, and their families. The interventions involving both health protection and health promotion are expected to contribute to improvements in employees' and their supervisors' sleep, risk behaviors, mental and physical health, and injury, as well as employees' and their spouse/partners' family experiences, health and well-being, and workplace outcomes.
Detailed description
The overall goal of the Military Employee Sleep and Health (MESH) study is to improve safety, health and well-being of service members in the Oregon National Guard and their families. The MESH Study seeks to do this by training supervisors to support Oregon National Guard service members by focusing on a reduction in work-life stress while increasing sleep health.
The Oregon MESH Study proposes that leadership can influence a fundamental change in the recognition of sleep health and service members' overall well-being and the well-being of their family members. With the support of the Oregon National Guard, the MESH Study will provide family-support and sleep leadership training for supervisors while raising awareness of sleep through daily non-invasive sleep measurements.
The investigators of the Oregon MESH Study expect positive results for study participants, including reduced stress and increased social support. Longer term, these effects are expected to create a more supportive work environment, which has positive effects on safety, health, well-being, family, and organizational outcomes. The investigators also expect that providing service members with individual sleep feedback will reduce sleep problems and improve sleep awareness.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (participant, investigator)
- Number of arms
- 3
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Supervisor Intervention | Experimental | Behavioral: FSSB/Sleep Leadership Training, Behavioral: Actigraphy FeedbackSupervisors in the intervention group will go through the FSSB/sleep leadership training and receive actigraphy feedback. |
| Employee Intervention | Experimental | Behavioral: Actigraphy FeedbackEmployees in the intervention group will receive actigraphy feedback. |
| Waitlist Control | No intervention | –Supervisor training and actigraphy feedback provided AFTER final 9 month data collection. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Full-time employees in the Oregon National Guard, including Military Technicians and Active Guard Reserves.
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- -
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| FSSB/Sleep Leadership TrainingSupervisors will receive a training addressing family-supportive supervisor behaviors and sleep leadership. | Behavioural | Supervisor Intervention |
| Actigraphy FeedbackSupervisors and employees will receive personalized feedback on their sleep and activity measurements. | Behavioural | Employee Intervention, Supervisor Intervention |
Primary outcome
Self-Reported Sleep Duration
Time frame: 4 months
Total number of hours calculated from reported bed time and wake time. Minimum 0 hours, Maximum 24 hours. Longer duration indicates longer sleep duration. Ideal range is 7-9 hours of sleep per night.
Self-Reported Sleep Duration
Time frame: 9 months
Total number of hours calculated from reported bed time and wake time. Minimum 0 hours, Maximum 24 hours. Longer duration indicates longer sleep duration. Ideal range is 7-9 hours of sleep per night.
Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS): Sleep Disturbance Insomnia Subscale
Time frame: 4 months
Four item subscale of the larger 8 item Sleep Disturbance scale. Likert-type responses: 1 = Not at all to 5 = Very much). T-Scores were created using HealthMeasures Scoring service, where data are uploaded into the HealthMeasures scoring service website, which generates T-Scores. This is considered the most accurate option. T-Scores estimates were developed using a population of 2,252 participants, 259 of which had clinical sleep disorders, and was intended to be representative of the US population. This is the reference population that the T-score means and SDs were calibrated and centered with. The T-Scores that HealthMeasures generates are not precisely at a mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10 because they are based on the unique MESH samples. A higher PROMIS T-score represents more of the concept being measured (worse).
Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS): Sleep Disturbance Insomnia Subscale
Time frame: 9 months
Four item subscale of the larger 8 item Sleep Disturbance scale. Likert-type responses: 1 = Not at all to 5 = Very much). T-Scores were created using HealthMeasures Scoring service, where data are uploaded into the HealthMeasures scoring service website, which generates T-Scores. This is considered the most accurate option. T-Scores estimates were developed using a population of 2,252 participants, 259 of which had clinical sleep disorders, and was intended to be representative of the US population. This is the reference population that the T-score means and SDs were calibrated and centered with. The T-Scores that HealthMeasures generates are not precisely at a mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10 because they are based on the unique MESH samples. A higher PROMIS T-score represents more of the concept being measured.
Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS): Dissatisfaction With Sleep Subscale
Time frame: 4 months
Four item subscale of the larger 8 item Sleep Disturbance scale. Likert-type responses: 1 = Not at all to 5 = Very much. T-Scores were created using HealthMeasures Scoring service, where data are uploaded into the HealthMeasures scoring service website, which generates T-Scores. This is considered the most accurate option. T-Scores estimates were developed using a population of 2,252 participants, 259 of which had clinical sleep disorders, and was intended to be representative of the US population. This is the reference population that the T-score means and SDs were calibrated and centered with. The T-Scores that HealthMeasures generates are not precisely at a mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10 because they are based on the unique MESH samples. A higher PROMIS T-score represents more of the concept being measured (worse).
Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS): Dissatisfaction With Sleep Subscale
Time frame: 9 months
Four item subscale of the larger 8 item Sleep Disturbance scale. Likert-type responses: 1 = Not at all to 5 = Very much). T-Scores were created using HealthMeasures Scoring service, where data are uploaded into the HealthMeasures scoring service website, which generates T-Scores. This is considered the most accurate option. T-Scores estimates for Dissatisfaction with Sleep were developed using a population of 2,252 participants, 259 of which had clinical sleep disorders, and was intended to be representative of the US population. This is the reference population that the T-score means and SDs were calibrated and centered with. The T-Scores that HealthMeasures generates are not precisely at a mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10 because they are based on the unique MESH samples. A higher PROMIS T-score represents more of the concept being measured (worse).
Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS): Sleep Related Impairment Subscale (SRI)
Time frame: 4 months
8 item scale. Likert-type responses: 1 = Not at all to 5 = Very much). T-Scores were created using HealthMeasures Scoring service, where data are uploaded into the HealthMeasures scoring service website, which generates T-Scores. This is considered the most accurate option. T-Scores estimates for SRI were developed using a population of 2,252 participants, 259 of which had clinical sleep disorders, and was intended to be representative of the US population. This is the reference population that the T-score means and SDs were calibrated and centered with. The T-Scores that HealthMeasures generates are not precisely at a mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10 because they are based on the unique MESH samples. A higher PROMIS T-score represents more sleep impairment (worse).
Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS): Sleep Related Impairment Subscale (SRI)
Time frame: 9 months
8 item scale. Likert-type responses: 1 = Not at all to 5 = Very much). T-Scores were created using HealthMeasures Scoring service, where data are uploaded into the HealthMeasures scoring service website, which generates T-Scores. This is considered the most accurate option. T-Scores estimates for SRI were developed using a population of 2,252 participants, 259 of which had clinical sleep disorders, and was intended to be representative of the US population. This is the reference population that the T-score means and SDs were calibrated and centered with. The T-Scores that HealthMeasures generates are not precisely at a mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10 because they are based on the unique MESH samples. A higher PROMIS T-score represents more sleep impairment (worse).
Actigraphic Sleep Duration: Total Sleep Time (TST)
Time frame: 9 months
Actigraphic measurements obtained using Actiwatch2 worn for 3 weeks Average sleep duration in hours Great duration generally better, with target range of 7-9 hours each sleep period.
Actigraphic Sleep Efficiency: Wake After Sleep Onset (WASO)
Time frame: 9-months
Actigraphic measurements obtained using Actiwatch2 worn for 3 weeks Average number of minutes spent awake during the sleep period. More minutes indicates worse outcome.
Overall Job Satisfaction Scale
Time frame: 9-months
Service member satisfaction with current job; Likert-type scale 1 = Strongly disagree to 5 = Strongly agree, mean created from the 3 items. Scores could range from 0-5 with higher levels indicating greater satisfaction. Source: Cammann et al., 1983
Turnover Intentions
Time frame: 9-months
Service member intention to quit current job; Two items with responses on Likert-type scale 1 = Strongly disagree to 5 = Strongly agree. Overall score created with a mean of the two items, with higher levels indicating greater intention to leave one's job. Source: Boroff \& Lewin, 1997
Perceived Stress Scale
Time frame: 9-months
Service member self-reported stress; Likert-type scale 0 = Never to 4 = Very often, combined to a mean score, with a possible range from 0 to 4. Higher scores indicate greater stress (worse). Source: Cohen \& Williamson, 1988
Walter Reed Functional Impairment: Occupational Subscale (OFI)
Time frame: 9-months
Service member difficulty with completing work tasks and quality; 6 items with Likert-type responses: 1 = No difficulty at all to 5 = Extreme difficulty, mean score created from all items, with possible score range from 1 to 5. Higher levels indicating greater impairment (worse). Source: Subscale of Overall Functional Impairment by Herrell et al., 2014
Walter Reed Functional Impairment Scale: Personal Functioning Subscale (PFI)
Time frame: 9-months
Service member difficulty with getting personal life skills completed; 2 items with Likert-type responses: 1 = No difficulty at all to 5 = Extreme difficulty, mean score created from all items, with possible score range from 1 to 5. Higher levels indicating greater impairment (worse). Source: Subscale of Overall Functional Impairment by Herrell et al., 2014
Walter Reed Functional Impairment Scale: Social Functional Impairment Subscale (SFI)
Time frame: 9-months
Service member difficulty functioning in social situations; 4 items with Likert-type responses: 1 = No difficulty at all to 5 = Extreme difficulty, mean score created from all items, with possible score range from 1 to 5. Higher levels indicating greater impairment (worse). Source: Subscale of Overall Functional Impairment by Herrell et al., 2014
2 secondary outcomes
Family Supportive Supervisor Behaviors (FSSB)
Time frame: 4-months
Sleep Leadership
Time frame: 4-months
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 3 Jan 2025.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- BackgroundHobfoll, S. E., Vinokur, A. D., Pierce, P. F., & Lewandowski-Romps, L. (2012). The combined stress of family life, work, and war in Air Force men and women: A test of conservation of resources theory. International Journal of Stress Management, 19(3), 217-237.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Well-Being
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Validation of the Healthcare Relationship Assessment Scale (ERA) in Health Sciences Students.
Health Adult Subjects, Communication
Not yet recruiting
Effect of Stress Ball Use During Femoral Arterial Sheath Removal After Coronary Angiography
Femoral Arterial Sheath Removal, Stress Ball
Not yet recruiting
Preventive and Personalized Digital Emotion Regulation Skills Intervention to Reduce Depression and Anxiety in Youths With Adverse Childhood Experiences
Adverse Childhood Experience, Depression / Major Depressive Disorder
Recruiting
Effect of a Brief Daily Digital Meditation on Well-Being in US Young Adults (BEGIN II)
Mental Health and General Well-being
Recruiting
Colon-delivered Riboflavin and Gut Microbiota Composition
Microbiome Dysbiosis, Gut Health
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Leslie Hammer, PhD principal investigator
Oregon Health and Science University
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing FSSB/Sleep Leadership Training and Actigraphy Feedback in people with Well-Being and Sleep, run by Oregon Health and Science University at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 3 Jan 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 3 Jan 2025). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Self-Reported Sleep Duration (time frame: 4 months). The study lists 16 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02946736, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 3 Jan 2025.