Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35120794›Full record

ArticleIntensive & critical care nursing2022

Moral distress, emotional impact and coping in intensive care unit staff during the outbreak of COVID-19.

Marta Romero-García, Pilar Delgado-Hito, Macarena Gálvez-Herrer, José Antonio Ángel-Sesmero, Tamara Raquel Velasco-Sanz, Llucia Benito-Aracil, Gabriel Heras-La Calle

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Intensive & critical care nursing, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
16.7field-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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 61 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Marta Romero-GarcíaSchool of Nursing, University of Barcelona (Barcelona), Spain; Fundamental Care and Medical-Surgical Nursing Department, Spain; IDIBELL, Institute of Biomedical Research, Spain; International Research Project for the Humanization of Health Care, Proyecto HU-CI, Spain.
Pilar Delgado-HitoSchool of Nursing, University of Barcelona (Barcelona), Spain; Fundamental Care and Medical-Surgical Nursing Department, Spain; IDIBELL, Institute of Biomedical Research, Spain; International Research Project for the Humanization of Health Care, Proyecto HU-CI, Spain.
Macarena Gálvez-HerrerInternational Research Project for the Humanization of Health Care, Proyecto HU-CI, Spain; Stress and Health Research Team, Autonomous University of Madrid (Madrid), Spain.
José Antonio Ángel-SesmeroInternational Research Project for the Humanization of Health Care, Proyecto HU-CI, Spain; Infanta Leonor University Hospital (Madrid), Spain.
Tamara Raquel Velasco-SanzInternational Research Project for the Humanization of Health Care, Proyecto HU-CI, Spain; Clínico San Carlos University Hospital (Madrid), Spain; Faculty of Nursing, Physiotherapy and Podiatry Complutense University (Madrid) Spain.
Llucia Benito-AracilSchool of Nursing, University of Barcelona (Barcelona), Spain; Fundamental Care and Medical-Surgical Nursing Department, Spain; IDIBELL, Institute of Biomedical Research, Spain. Electronic address: lbenito@ub.edu.
Gabriel Heras-La CalleHospital Comarcal Santa Ana, Motril (Granada), Spain; International Research Project for the Humanization of Health Care, Proyecto HU-CI, Spain; Universidad Francisco de Vitoria, Madrid, Spain.
Institut d'Investigació Biomédica de Bellvitge · ESHospital Universitario Infanta Leonor · ESUniversidad Autónoma de Madrid · ESUniversidad Complutense de Madrid · ESUniversidad Francisco de Vitoria · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFrom the beginning, the COVID-19 pandemic increased ICU workloads and created exceptionally difficult ethical dilemmas. ICU staff around the world have been subject to high levels of moral stress, potentially leading to mental health problems. There is only limited evidence on moral distress levels and coping styles among Spanish ICU staff, and how they influenced health professionals' mental health during the pandemic.

objectivesTo assess moral distress, related mental health problems (anxiety and depression), and coping styles among ICU staff during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Spain.

designCross-sectional. SETTINGS AND

participantsThe study setting consisted of intensive care unit and areas converted into intensive care units in public and private hospitals. A total of 434 permanent and temporary intensive care staff (reassigned due to the pandemic from other departments to units) answered an online questionnaire between March and June 2020.

methodsSociodemographic and job variables, moral distress, anxiety, depression, and coping mechanisms were anonymously evaluated through a self-reported questionnaire. Descriptive and correlation analyses were conducted and multivariate linear regression models were developed to explore the predictive ability of moral distress and coping on anxiety and depression.

resultsMoral distress during the pandemic is determined by situations related to the patient and family, the intensive care unit, and resource management of the organisations themselves. intensive care unit staff already reached moderate levels of moral distress, anxiety, and depression during the first wave of the pandemic. Temporary staff (redeployed from other units) obtained higher scores in these variables (p = 0.04, p = 0.038, and p = 0.009, respectively) than permanent staff, as well as in greater intention to leave their current position (p = 0.03). This intention was also stronger in health staff working in areas converted into intensive care units (45.2%) than in normal intensive care units (40.2%) (p = 0.02). Moral distress, coupled with primarily avoidance-oriented coping styles, explains 37% (AdR

conclusionsOur study reveals that the emotional well-being of intensive care unit staff was already at risk during the first wave of the pandemic. The moral distress they experienced was related to anxiety and depression issues, as well as the desire to leave the profession, and should be addressed, not only in permanent staff, but also in temporary staff, redeployed to these units as reinforcement workers.

Indexed as

COVID-19Psychological DistressAdaptation, PsychologicalCross-Sectional StudiesHumansIntensive Care UnitsMoralsPandemicsSurveys and QuestionnairesAnxietyCopingCOVID-19DepressionICU staffMoral distressNurses

Identifiers

PMID35120794
PMCPMC8776502
OpenAlexW4206229609

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.