Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34006556›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2021

Critical care work during COVID-19: a qualitative study of staff experiences in the UK.

Catherine M Montgomery, Sally Humphreys, Corrienne McCulloch, Annemarie B Docherty, Steve Sturdy, Natalie Pattison

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
16.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

38 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 97 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Catherine M MontgomeryCentre for Biomedicine, Self and Society, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK Catherine.montgomery@ed.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-5829-6137
Sally HumphreysCritical Care and Research & Development, West Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust, Suffolk, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4397-6404
Corrienne McCullochAnaesthetics, Theatres and Critical Care, NHS Lothian, Edinburgh, UK.
Annemarie B DochertyAnaesthetics, Theatres and Critical Care, NHS Lothian, Edinburgh, UK.
Steve SturdyCentre for Biomedicine, Self and Society, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3273-1727
Natalie PattisonSchool of Health and Social Work, University of Hertfordshire, Hertfordshire, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6771-8733
NHS Lothian · GBUniversity of Edinburgh · GBUniversity of Hertfordshire · GBWest Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo understand National Health Service (NHS) staff experiences of working in critical care during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK.

designQualitative study using semistructured telephone interviews and rapid analysis, interpreted using Baehr's sociological lens of 'communities of fate'.

participantsForty NHS staff working in critical care, including 21 nurses, 10 doctors and advanced critical care practitioners, 4 allied health professionals, 3 operating department practitioners and 2 ward clerks. Participants were interviewed between August and October 2020; we purposefully sought the experiences of trained and experienced critical care staff and those who were redeployed.

settingFour hospitals in the UK.

resultsCOVID-19 presented staff with a situation of extreme stress, duress and social emergency, leading to a shared set of experiences which we have characterised as a community of fate. This involved not only fear and dread of working in critical care, but also a collective sense of duty and vocation. Caring for patients and families involved changes to usual ways of working, revolving around: reorganisation of space and personnel, personal protective equipment, lack of evidence for treating COVID-19, inability for families to be physically present, and the trauma of witnessing extreme patient acuity and death on a large scale. The stress and isolation of working in critical care during COVID-19 was mitigated by strong teamwork, camaraderie, pride and fulfilment.

conclusionCOVID-19 has changed working practices in critical care and profoundly affected staff physically, mentally and emotionally. Attention needs to be paid to the social and organisational conditions in which individuals work, addressing both practical resourcing and the interpersonal dynamics of critical care provision.

Indexed as

COVID-19Critical CareHumansPandemicsQualitative ResearchSARS-CoV-2State MedicineUnited KingdomCOVID-19intensive & critical careorganisation of health servicesqualitative research

Identifiers

PMID34006556
PMCPMC8137198
OpenAlexW3160338979

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.