Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34539465›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2021

The Rapid Implementation of a Psychological Support Model for Frontline Healthcare Workers During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Case Study and Process Evaluation.

Sophia Appelbom, Aleksandra Bujacz, Anna Finnes, Karsten Ahlbeck, Filip Bromberg, Johan Holmberg, Liv Larsson, Birgitta Olgren, Michael Wanecek, Dan Wetterborg and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Ethical Lessons from an Intensivist's Perspective.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022
    Review
  15. The Effect of COVID-19 Endemicity on the Mental Health of Health Workers.Journal of the American Medical Directors Association · 2022
    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

11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sophia AppelbomDepartment of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Health Informatics Centre, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Aleksandra BujaczDepartment of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Health Informatics Centre, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Anna FinnesDivision of Psychology, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Karsten AhlbeckPain Clinic, Capio S:t Görans Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Filip BrombergPain Clinic, Capio S:t Görans Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Johan HolmbergDivision of Psychology, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Liv LarssonPain Clinic, Capio S:t Görans Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Birgitta OlgrenPain Clinic, Capio S:t Görans Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Michael WanecekPain Clinic, Capio S:t Görans Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Dan WetterborgDivision of Psychology, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Rikard WicksellDivision of Psychology, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Karolinska Institutet · SESaint Göran Hospital · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the need for psychological support initiatives directed toward frontline healthcare workers, which can be rapidly and sustainably implemented during an infectious disease outbreak. The current case study presents a comprehensive model of psychological support that was implemented at an intensive care unit (ICU) during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. The psychological support model aimed at promoting a resilient stress reaction among frontline staff by protecting physical, social, and psychological resources. The initiatives, targeting different groups of workers, included education and training, peer support, psychologist-supervised and unsupervised group sessions, on-boarding for transferred staff, manager support, and individual sessions for workers experiencing strong stress reactions. The results of the process evaluation of this rapid implementation suggest that peer support initiatives as well as daily group sessions were the most appreciated forms of psychological support. Psychologists involved in organizing and providing the support highlighted several aspects of a successful implementation of the support model: offering support during work hours (preferably after shift), positive attitude of line managers that framed support initiatives as a team effort, and involvement of experienced psychologists able to quickly adjust the content of the support according to the current needs. The study also identified two main problems of the current implementation: the lack of efficient planning due to the use of volunteer work and the need for more structural resources on the organizational level to ensure long-term sustainability of the support model and its implementation among all groups of healthcare staff. The current case study highlights the importance of establishing permanent structural resources and routines for psychological support integrated in clinical practice by healthcare organizations to improve both rapid and sustainable response to future crises.

Indexed as

COVID-19healthcare workersimplementationintensive careprocess evaluationpsychological support

Identifiers

PMID34539465
PMCPMC8446385
OpenAlexW3197918085

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.