SynthesisBMJ open2021
Addressing the psychological impact of COVID-19 on healthcare workers: learning from a systematic review of early interventions for frontline responders.
Synthesis 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, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
38 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Addressing Health Care Workers' Mental Health: A Systematic Review of Evidence-Based Interventions and Current Resources.American journal of public health · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- The impact of emotional support on healthcare workers and students coping with COVID-19, and other SARS-CoV pandemics - a mixed-methods systematic review.BMC health services research · 2023Pooled it
- Effectiveness of a Smartphone-Based Stress Management Program for Depression in Hospital Nurses During COVID-19 in Vietnam and Thailand: 2-Arm Parallel-Group Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Trial
- Effectiveness of a WHO self-help psychological intervention to alleviate stress among healthcare workers in the context of COVID-19 in China: a randomised controlled trial.Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences · 2024Trial
- Assessment of Acceptability and Initial Effectiveness of a Unified Protocol Prevention Program to Train Emotional Regulation Skills in Female Nursing Professionals during the COVID-19 Pandemic.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Trial
- Cumulative trauma, neural circuits, and burnout: an integrative model of healthcare worker post-traumatic stress syndromes.European journal of psychotraumatology · 2026Review
- Interventions for improving resilience among healthcare workers: a systematic map.Npj mental health research · 2026Review
- Improving nurses' mental health through an online Acceptance and Commitment Therapy intervention: an exploratory pilot study across two healthcare contexts.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Resilience-Enhancing Programs for Nurses in the Era of COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Strengthening field epidemiology capacity in Canada: a mixed-methods evaluation of the Canadian field epidemiology program.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Coping strategies and resilient behavior among frontline healthcare workers: A scoping review.Dialogues in health · 2025Review
- Evidenced Interventions Supporting the Psychological Wellbeing of Disaster Workers: A Rapid Literature Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Review
- Mapping the needs of healthcare workers caring for COVID-19 patients using the socio-ecological framework: a rapid scoping review.Human resources for health · 2024Article
- Workforce wellbeing centres and their positive role for wellbeing and presenteeism in healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: secondary analysis of COVID-Well data.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Stress and Anxiety Among Correctional Health Care Professionals in a U.S. State Prison System During COVID-19.Journal of correctional health care : the official journal of the National Commission on Correctional Health Care · 2024Article
- Study protocol: assessment of the usefulness and practicability of a psychoeducational intervention to prevent the negative psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on primary care health workers.BMC primary care · 2023Article
- Ignored and distressed: a cross-sectional study of the impact of COVID-19 on last responders.BMC public health · 2023Article
- Stigmatization, panic disorder, and death anxiety among patients of Covid-19: Fourth wave of pandemic in Pakistan.Acta psychologica · 2023Article
- Psychiatric Issues Among Health Professionals.The Medical clinics of North America · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesProtecting healthcare workers from psychological harm is an urgent clinical issue within the current COVID-19 pandemic. Research on early psychological programmes that aim to prevent or reduce mental health symptoms and that have been tested in frontline responders may assist service providers with choosing a suitable intervention for rapid dissemination in healthcare settings. DESIGN AND OUTCOME MEASURES: First, Embase, Web of Science, PsycINFO and Google Scholar were searched through a systematic literature review of early psychological interventions administered to frontline responders in the last 15 years. Interventions were included if they were designed to prevent or reduce psychological impact and had outcome measures of psychological distress (eg, general psychopathology, post-traumatic stress disorder and stress) and/or positive mental health domains (eg, resilience, self-efficacy and life satisfaction). Second, the suitability of these programmes for the healthcare workforce was evaluated according to the criteria of effectiveness, content applicability and feasibility.
resultsOf 320 articles retrieved, 12 relevant studies were included that described six early psychological interventions. Although the evidence base is limited, psychological first aid, eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing, and trauma risk management showed effectiveness across at least two studies each with frontline workers. Resilience and coping for the healthcare community; anticipate, plan, and deter; and resilience at work programmes found promising results in single studies. Concerning other suitability criteria, all programmes appear applicable to healthcare settings and have acceptable feasibility for rapid implementation.
conclusionsDespite the limited evidence, several interventions were identified as potentially suitable and useful for improving psychological functioning of healthcare workers across a variety of disaster situations. Service providers should continue to implement and evaluate early psychological interventions in frontline workers in order to refine best practices for managing the psychological impact of future disasters.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.