Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35617711›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of nursing studies2022

Enhancing the well-being of front-line healthcare professionals in high pressure clinical environments: A mixed-methods evaluative research project.

Ann Ooms, Celayne Heaton-Shrestha, Sarah Connor, Siobhan McCawley, Jennie McShannon, Graham Music, Kay Trainor

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of nursing studies, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

7 authors.

Ann OomsFaculty of Health, Social Care and Education, Kingston University and St George's, University of London, KT2 7LB Kingston upon Thames, UK. Electronic address: a.ooms@sgul.kingston.ac.uk.
Celayne Heaton-ShresthaFaculty of Health, Social Care and Education, Kingston University and St George's, University of London, KT2 7LB Kingston upon Thames, UK. Electronic address: c.heaton-shrestha@sgul.kingston.ac.uk.
Sarah ConnorEpsom and St Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust, UK. Electronic address: sarahconnor2@nhs.net.
Siobhan McCawleyKingston Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Galsworthy Road, KT2 7QB Kingston upon Thames, UK. Electronic address: Siobhan.McCawley@kingstonhospital.nhs.uk.
Jennie McShannonTavistock Consulting, The Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust, 120 Belsize Lane, NW3 5BA London, UK. Electronic address: JMcShannon@TavistockConsulting.co.uk.
Graham MusicTavistock Consulting, The Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust, 120 Belsize Lane, NW3 5BA London, UK. Electronic address: GMusic@tavi-port.ac.uk.
Kay TrainorTavistock Consulting, The Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust, 120 Belsize Lane, NW3 5BA London, UK. Electronic address: KTrainor@TavistockConsulting.co.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe last few years have witnessed a growing concern with the well-being of healthcare professionals internationally because of increasing recognition of its impact on patient outcomes and staff retention. The COVID-19 pandemic, which has placed additional and substantial pressure on frontline healthcare professionals, gives added urgency to the topic. While numerous, and successful, interventions have been developed to address compromised well-being among healthcare professionals, they have not always been able to support the needs of frontline staff, specifically those working in high-pressure environments.

objectiveThis paper presents findings of an evaluative research study of an intervention, named the Resilience and Well-being Training Programme, developed and implemented within an Acute Assessment Unit in a hospital in the UK. The 8 week-long programme followed a combined approach (both person-directed and work-directed), with mindfulness training as well as lectures and discussions to deepen participants' understanding of organisational life. The training, delivered from January to July 2018, involved a total of 72 healthcare professionals from a wide range of levels (UK bands 2-8), trained in three cohorts.

designThe research followed a pre-post design to explore participants' experiences of working on the Unit, the programme and its impact on themselves and their working life.

settingThe study was conducted in a large NHS district general hospital in South London, UK.

participantsParticipants included healthcare assistants and nurses who had completed their preceptorship, worked in the hospital's acute assessment unit, and had undertaken the resilience and well-being training programme.

methodsThe study employed mixed methods (online questionnaire, face-to-face focus groups/interviews) to collect data.

resultsFindings showed participants' positive experience with the programme, however it had limited positive impacts on aspects of compromised well-being at the personal level and a statistically significant enhancement of the quality of relationships and communication on the Unit, with medium effect size (Cohen's D). The programme had a positive impact on the culture of the Unit.

conclusionsResults highlight the demand for and value of programmes designed in ways that enable this group of professionals to take part, because these professionals are often not able to participate in such programmes. A strong commitment from the leadership to enable staff attendance in time-protected programmes is one approach that works well in the short-term. However, this may be challenging to accomplish and raises issues of sustainability.

Indexed as

COVID-19PandemicsDelivery of Health CareHealth PersonnelHumansPreceptorshipAcute careHealthcare professionalsNurseSystems-psychodynamic organisational interventionsWell-being at workWell-being interventions

Identifiers

PMID35617711
PMCPMC9020653

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.