Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36620680›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2022

Case study: Developing a strategy combining human and empirical interventions to support the resilience of healthcare workers exposed to a pandemic in an academic hospital.

Emilie Banse, Geraldine Petit, Geneviève Cool, Joëlle Durbecq, Isabelle Hennequin, Yasser Khazaal, Philippe de Timary

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Emilie BansePsychological Sciences Research Institute, Université Catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium.
Geraldine PetitInstitute of Neuroscience, Université Catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium.
Geneviève CoolDepartment of Psychology, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Brussels, Belgium.
Joëlle DurbecqDepartment of Nursing, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Brussels, Belgium.
Isabelle HennequinDepartment of Human Resources, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Brussels, Belgium.
Yasser KhazaalDepartment of Addiction Psychiatry Section Addiction, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Philippe de TimaryDepartment of Adult Psychiatry, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Brussels, Belgium.
Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc · BEUCLouvain · BEAddiction Switzerland · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has put healthcare workers under important psychological pressure. Concerns have been raised regarding the mental health and psychological status of healthcare workers and have underlined the need for institutions to develop long-term interventions to support their resilience. The current case study presents the way a large university hospital in Brussels, Belgium, has evolved to deal with this health crisis and support its workers. Initiatives were multiple and complementary, as it was decided to combine different forms of clinical interventions that were developed by psychologists, psychiatrists, and human resources, to an empirical approach including a large survey that permitted to reach a much larger audience (the results of the study have been published previously). We describe the initially proposed measures of psychological support, including the creation of a telephone hotline, the presence of psychologists among teams of dedicated COVID-19 units, discussion groups, and individualized follow-ups, and their consequences on healthcare workers. Second, we address how these initial measures of support were modified to tailor in the best way possible the needs of healthcare workers, using a research action project that used a survey to measure and address the psychological distress of healthcare workers. We explain how, through different objectives (screening of distress, adaptation of initial measures based on reported needs, active reinforcement of individual and collective resilience, reminder of availability of help, and normalization of distress), a research action project can be a form of support and is an effective way for an institution to show its pre-occupation for the mental health of its teams. The current case study highlights how an institution can provide support and the importance of the use of a combined strategy to limit the consequences of a major health crisis on the mental health of its healthcare workers. Improving the resilience of healthcare workers both in the short and long term is of the essence to maintain optimal care of patients.

Indexed as

COVID-19healthcare workers (HCWs)mental healthpsychological supportresilience

Identifiers

PMID36620680
PMCPMC9811116
OpenAlexW4313503390

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.