Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38406882›Full record

ArticleQualitative health research2024

Listening to the Voices of Health Care Workers During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Study Providing In-Depth Insights Into Ethical and Individual Challenges.

Barbara Buchberger, Heide Weishaar, Megan Evans, Rike Böttcher, René Umlauf, Swetlana Muminow, Eloisa Montt Maray, Nadine Muller, Souaad Chemali, Brogan Geurts and 2 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Qualitative health research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
5.9field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Barbara BuchbergerEvidence-based Public Health, Centre for International Health Protection, Robert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-8596-740X
Heide WeishaarEvidence-based Public Health, Centre for International Health Protection, Robert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany.
Megan EvansEvidence-based Public Health, Centre for International Health Protection, Robert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany.
Rike BöttcherEvidence-based Public Health, Centre for International Health Protection, Robert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany.
René UmlaufEvidence-based Public Health, Centre for International Health Protection, Robert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany.
Swetlana MuminowEvidence-based Public Health, Centre for International Health Protection, Robert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany.
Eloisa Montt MarayEvidence-based Public Health, Centre for International Health Protection, Robert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany.
Nadine MullerEvidence-based Public Health, Centre for International Health Protection, Robert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany.
Souaad ChemaliEvidence-based Public Health, Centre for International Health Protection, Robert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany.
Brogan GeurtsEvidence-based Public Health, Centre for International Health Protection, Robert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany.
Hanna-Tina FischerEvidence-based Public Health, Centre for International Health Protection, Robert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany.
Charbel El BcheraouiEvidence-based Public Health, Centre for International Health Protection, Robert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany.
Robert Koch Institute · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In their daily practice, health care workers (HCWs) experience the effects of tensions between professional ethos and work realities, which can lead to ethical dilemmas. We aim to explore the ethical dilemmas that affected HCWs in Germany during the COVID-19 pandemic and to understand these in the context of the German health system. Between April and December 2022, we interviewed HCWs from various levels of care and key informants responsible for decisions related to HCWs in Germany. Three themes were identified in the data analyzed from 78 participants. The first highlighted the potency of pre-existing health system problems during the COVID-19 pandemic. The second captured the ethical dilemmas that were described as having arisen due to the tension between professional ethos and structural constraints. The third included factors related to increasing or diminishing the implications of ethical dilemmas. A lack of opportunities for HCWs to participate in political and managerial decisions was suggested to result in policies that do not meet the needs of HCWs and patients. Positive interpersonal interactions were described as helpful when coping with dilemmatic decision-making situations. In order to avoid negative consequences caused by unresolved ethical dilemmas, including moral distress, among HCWs, staff shortages and decision-making in the German health system urgently need to be addressed. HCWs' working conditions regularly evoke ethical dilemmas, particularly during public health emergencies. Together with HCWs, decision-makers must develop new models for working in health care settings that are in line with HCWs' professional ethos.

Indexed as

COVID-19Health PersonnelQualitative ResearchAdultAttitude of Health PersonnelDecision MakingFemaleGermanyHumansMaleMiddle AgedPandemicsSARS-CoV-2COVID-19dilemmaethical challengeshealth care workersmoral distress

Identifiers

PMID38406882
PMCPMC11490055
OpenAlexW4392163675

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.