ArticleBMC health services research2024
A longitudinal qualitative exploration of victorian healthcare workers' and organisations' evolving views and experiences during COVID-19.
Article in BMC health services research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Three years of pandemic stress and staffing challenges: a retrospective qualitative study of COVID-19 impacts on frontline healthcare workers' mental health and wellbeing.BMC psychiatry · 2025Article
- Development, use and evaluation of a national digital platform for physiotherapy during the COVID-19 pandemic - lessons learned.BMC health services research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly impacted individuals, society, and healthcare organisations worldwide. Recent international research suggests that concerns, needs, and experiences of healthcare workers (HCWs) have evolved throughout the pandemic. This longitudinal qualitative study explored the evolving views and experiences of Victorian healthcare workers (HCWs) and organisational key personnel during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic.
methodsWe recruited participants from the Coronavirus in Victorian Health and Aged care workers (COVIC-HA) study cohort. We conducted two rounds of semi-structured interviews with HCWs and organisational key personnel from three different healthcare settings (hospital, aged care and primary care) in Victoria, Australia, in May-July 2021 and May-July 2022. Data were analysed thematically using trajectory and recurrent cross-sectional approaches, guided by a temporal change framework.
resultsTwelve HCWs and five key personnel from various professional roles participated in interviews at both timepoints. Expected themes derived from mid-2021 interviews (navigating uncertainty, maintaining service delivery, and addressing staff needs) evolved over time. Concerns shifted from personal health and safety to workforce pressures, contributing to HCW burnout and fatigue and ongoing mental health support needs. New themes emerged from mid-2022 interviews, including managing ongoing COVID-19 impacts and supporting the healthcare workforce into the future. Clear and consistent communication, stable guidelines and forward-looking organisational responses were considered crucial.
conclusionsOur longitudinal qualitative study highlighted the evolving impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on HCWs' perceptions, health and wellbeing and uncovered long-term sector vulnerabilities. Analysing HCW experiences and key personnel insights over time and across different pandemic phases provided crucial insights for policymakers to protect the healthcare workforce. Findings emphasise the need for proactive strategies that prioritise HCWs' wellbeing and workforce sustainability. Policy makers must invest in HCW health and wellbeing initiatives alongside healthcare system improvements to ensure resilience and capacity to meet future challenges.
trial registrationThis study was approved through the Victorian Streamlined Ethical Review Process (SERP: Project Number 68,086) and registered with ANZCTR (ACTRN12621000533897) on 6 May 2021.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.