Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35115972›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2021

Companions in the Abyss: A Feasibility and Acceptability Study of an Online Therapy Group for Healthcare Providers Working During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Lorraine Smith-MacDonald, Jaimie Lusk, Dayna Lee-Baggley, Katherine Bright, Alexa Laidlaw, Melissa Voth, Shaylee Spencer, Emily Cruikshank, Ashley Pike, Chelsea Jones and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
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 13 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.0field-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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Critical Care Providers' Moral Distress: Frequency, Burden, and Potential Resources.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Lorraine Smith-MacDonaldDepartment of Occupational Therapy, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Jaimie LuskDepartment of Veterans Affairs, Portland Medical Center, Portland, OR, United States.
Dayna Lee-BaggleyDepartment of Family Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada.
Katherine BrightDepartment of Occupational Therapy, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Alexa LaidlawDepartment of Occupational Therapy, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Melissa VothDepartment of Occupational Therapy, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Shaylee SpencerDepartment of Occupational Therapy, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Emily CruikshankDepartment of Occupational Therapy, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Ashley PikeDepartment of Occupational Therapy, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Chelsea JonesDepartment of Occupational Therapy, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Suzette Bremault-PhillipsDepartment of Occupational Therapy, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
University of Alberta · CADalhousie University · CAPortland VA Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionIn the context of the global pandemic of the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus (COVID-19), healthcare providers (HCPs) have experienced difficult moral and ethical dilemmas. Research is highlighting the importance of moral injury (MI)-a trauma syndrome related to transgressing personal morals and values-in understanding the psychological harm and occupational impairment experienced by HCPs. To date, MI treatments have largely been developed for military personnel and veterans and rely on in-person one-on-one psychotherapy. PURPOSE: This project aims to explore the feasibility and acceptability of an evidence-informed online Acceptance and Commitment Therapy-based group therapy for MI in HCPs called "Accepting Moral Pain and Suffering for Healthcare Providers" (AMPS-HCP).

methodThis feasibility and acceptability study included three separate phases with the first two phases focused on the development of the psychotherapeutic intervention and the third phase focused on the evaluation of the psychotherapeutic intervention. Eight participants (including registered nurses, practical nurses and respiratory therapists) completed seven 90-min sessions in an online group format. The focus of these sessions included ACT and MI psychoeducation and experientials. Qualitative semi-structured interview data was thematically analyzed while demographic and quantitative self-reported outcome data underwent descriptive analysis and non-parametric testing.

resultsResults show that the intervention was highly feasible and acceptable to healthcare providers who worked on the frontline during COVID-19. Feasibility (referrals, eligibility, retention, participation engagement) was strong (8 out of 10 participants; 80% vs. desired >70% eligibility) and overall, 80% of participants completed 71% of the intervention. Data further supported the applicability and acceptability of the intervention. Preliminary data suggests that AMPS-HCP may supports HCPs to address MI. DISCUSSION: This study is the first to report on the development and evaluation of an online MI group intervention for registered nurses, registered practical nurses, and respiratory therapists working during COVID-19. Results showed the use of both the online and group components of the intervention were acceptable and feasible during the third wave of COVID-19.

Indexed as

acceptance and commitment therapyCOVID-19healthcare provider (HCP)moral distressmoral injury

Identifiers

PMID35115972
PMCPMC8805113
OpenAlexW4205514899

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.