9 ones level of stress is going to vary among each individual, since resiliency itself is different for everyone. Instead of self-reported data, objective data should be measured in order to determine if resilience training is effective. An example of this could be a research study that measures the participants stress hormone levels, cortisol.
There is no doubt that self-reported data is valuable given the area of interest. It would be
interesting to determine if there was a correlation between decreased cortisol levels and the
participants perceived stress level. The research study design could follow similar suits to what
has already been conducted, but using randomized control trials instead to further strengthen the evidence in the findings. Some studies, like Grabbe et al. (2020) or Van Agteren et al. (2018),
also have a smaller sample size of 40 participants. Clearly, the more participants there are in a
study, the more consistent the data becomes.
Suggesting that further research could be explored to objectively confirm the
effectiveness of resiliency training should not take place of implementing these types of classes
in healthcare settings. As mentioned before, self-reported data is valuable, for it is the individuals that determine if the resiliency workshops were worthwhile for them. The issue of nursing
burnout, especially in times of crisis, can and should be dealt with the tools that have been
shown to be effective already, which is resiliency training. Therefore, training classes can be
implemented and evaluated; while a team of researchers continue to study how resiliency
training influences other areas of measurements.
In order to put resilience building classes into practice, it is important to identify the
reason for it. Gathering data from past research, surveys, and employment may reveal effective
treatment methods, turnover rates, and the nurses self-perception of their mental health.
Assembling a team of nurses, educators, and administrators to analyze the data and understand