Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34192236›Full record

ArticleGeneral psychiatry2020

A psychological health support scheme for medical teams in COVID-19 outbreak and its effectiveness.

Wenhong Cheng, Fang Zhang, Zhen Liu, Hao Zhang, Yifan Lyu, Hao Xu, Yingqi Hua, Jiarong Gu, Zhi Yang, Jun Liu

Open access · diamondAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in General psychiatry, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

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

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Wenhong Cheng *Department of Psychiatry, Shanghai Mental Health Center, Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.ORCID 0000-0003-4469-9442
Fang Zhang *Department of Psychiatry, Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Zhen LiuDepartment of Psychiatry, Shanghai Mental Health Center, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Hao ZhangDepartment of Psychiatry, Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Yifan LyuDepartment of Psychiatry, Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Hao XuDepartment of Cardiology, Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Yingqi HuaDepartment of Scientific Research Administration, Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Jiarong GuDepartment of Administration, Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Zhi YangLaboratory of Psychological Health and Imaging, Shanghai Mental Health Center, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Jun LiuDepartment of Nephrology, Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Shanghai Jiao Tong University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMedical staff fighting the COVID-19 pandemic are experiencing stress from high occupational risk, panic in the community and the extreme workload. Maintaining the psychological health of a medical team is essential for efficient functioning, but psychological intervention models for emergency medical teams are rare.

aimsTo design a systematic, full-coverage psychological health support scheme for medical teams serving large-scale emergent situations, and demonstrate its effectiveness in a real-world study in Leishenshan Hospital during the COVID-19 epidemic in Wuhan, China.

methodsThe scheme integrates onsite and online mental health resources and features team-based psychosocial support and evidence-based interventions. It contained five modules, including a daily measurement of mood, a daily mood broadcast that promotes positive affirmation, a daily online peer-group activity with themes based on the challenges reported by the team, Balint groups and an after-work support team. The daily mood measurement provides information to the other modules. The scheme also respects the special psychological characteristics of medical staff by promoting their strengths.

resultsThe scheme economically supported a special medical team of 156 members with only one onsite psychiatrist. Our data reflected that the entire medical team maintained an overall positive outlook (7-9 out of 10 in a Daily Mood Index, DMI) for nearly 6 weeks of continuous working. Since the scheme promoted self-strengths and positive self-affirmation, the number of self-reports of life-related gains were high and played a significant effect on the DMI. Our follow-up investigations also revealed that multiple modules of the scheme received high attention and evaluation levels.

conclusionOur quantitative data from Leishenshan hospital, Wuhan, China, show that the programme is adequate to support the continuous high workload of medical teams. This scheme could be applied to medical teams dealing with emergent situations.

Indexed as

crisis interventionglobal burden of diseasepsychology, medical

Identifiers

PMID34192236
PMCPMC7462042
OpenAlexW3081595483

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.