scholarly journals Facing the Unknown: Healthcare Workers’ Concerns, Attitudes and Burnout During the COVID-19 Pandemic - A Mixed Methods Study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keren Dopelt ◽  
Osnat Bashkin ◽  
Nadav Davidovitch ◽  
Noam Asna
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Medical Staff ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Psychosocial Support ◽  
National Level ◽  
Health And Safety ◽  
Hospital Staff ◽  
Mixed Methods Study ◽  
Support Network ◽  
Depth Interviews

Abstract Background: Medical staff, who care for patients at their own risk, are on the frontlines of the fight against COVID-19. The aim of this study is to describe the feelings and experiences of medical staff working in hospitals during the coronavirus crisis.Methods: Data were collected as part of a mixed-methods study that included an online survey completed by 263 hospital staff members, as well as 10 semi-structured, in-depth interviews with doctors, nurses and medical technicians working on coronavirus wards.Results: The survey findings revealed that respondents expressed extremely high rates of concern for family members and at a national level, but that they were less apprehensive about their own health and safety. At the same time, burnout was lower than the rates of concern. Nurses displayed more apprehension and burnout compared to medical staff in other professional roles. The in-depth interviews reinforced and supplemented the survey findings and deepened our understanding of the feelings of medical staff directly involved in coronavirus patient care.Conclusions: The study’s findings revealed the main concerns of hospital staff during the coronavirus crisis and deepened our understanding of the issues that require systemic attention in order to strengthen the mental resilience of hospital staff, in particular those working on coronavirus wards. The steps required to continue coping with and fighting the virus include the development of a mental and emotional support network for medical staff, to safeguard them and their health as they care for patients, and to provide ongoing psychosocial support.

scholarly journals Facing the Unknown: Healthcare Workers’ Concerns, Experiences, and Burnout during the COVID-19 Pandemic—A Mixed-Methods Study in an Israeli Hospital

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (16) ◽  
pp. 9021
Author(s):  
Keren Dopelt ◽  
Osnat Bashkin ◽  
Nadav Davidovitch ◽  
Noam Asna
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Psychosocial Support ◽  
Health And Safety ◽  
Hospital Staff ◽  
Study Data ◽  
Mixed Methods Study ◽  
Support Network ◽  
Depth Interviews

The aim of this study was to describe the experiences of healthcare workers during the first wave of the coronavirus crisis. In a mixed-methods study, data were collected through an online survey completed by 263 hospital staff members, as well as 10 semi-structured, in-depth interviews with physicians, nurses, and medical technologists working on coronavirus wards. Respondents expressed extremely high levels of concern for family members, but they were less apprehensive about their own health and safety. Nurses displayed more apprehension and burnout compared to healthcare workers in other professional roles. The in-depth interviews reinforced and supplemented the survey findings and deepened our understanding of the experience of healthcare workers directly involved in the first wave of coronavirus patient care. The findings of this study illuminate the main concerns of hospital staff during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic and deepen our understanding of issues that require systemic attention in order to strengthen mental resilience among hospital staff. The steps required to continue fighting the virus include the development of a mental and emotional support network for healthcare workers to safeguard them and their health, as they care for patients, and to provide ongoing psychosocial support. As later waves of COVID-19 continued, these recommendations are even more pertinent.

scholarly journals Recommending Unfunded Innovative Cancer Therapies: Ethical vs. Clinical Perspectives among Oncologists on a Public Healthcare System—A Mixed-Methods Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 2902-2913
Author(s):  
Osnat Bashkin ◽  
Keren Dopelt ◽  
Noam Asna ◽  
Nadav Davidovitch
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Cancer Treatment ◽  
Psychosocial Support ◽  
Medical Condition ◽  
Mixed Methods Study ◽  
Clinical Aspects ◽  
Public Healthcare ◽  
Cancer Therapies ◽  
New Treatments ◽  
Depth Interviews

Over the past decade, there has been a growing development of innovative technologies to treat cancer. Many of these technologies are expensive and not funded by health funds. The present study examined physicians’ perceptions of the ethical and clinical aspects of the recommendation and use of unfunded technologies for cancer treatment. This mixed-methods study surveyed 127 oncologists regarding their perceptions toward using unfunded innovative cancer treatment technologies, followed by in-depth interviews with 16 oncologists. Most respondents believed that patients should be offered all treatment alternatives, regardless of their financial situation. However, 59% indicated that they often face dilemmas regarding recommending new unfunded treatments to patients with financial difficulties and without private health insurance. Over a third (38%) stated that they felt uncomfortable discussing the cost of treatment with patients. A predictive model found that physicians facing patients whose medical condition worsened due to an inability to access new treatments, and who expressed the opinion that physicians can assist in locating funding for patients who cannot afford treatments, were more likely to recommend unfunded innovative therapies to patients (F = 5.22, R2 = 0.15, p < 0.001). Subsequent in-depth interviews revealed four key themes: economic considerations in choosing therapy, patient–physician communication, the public healthcare fund, and discussion of treatment costs. Physicians feel a professional commitment to offer patients the best medical care and a moral duty to discuss costs and minimize patients’ financial difficulty. There is a need for careful and balanced use of innovative life-prolonging technologies while putting patients at the center of discourse on this complex and controversial issue. It is essential to develop a psychosocial support program for physicians and patients dealing with ethical and psychosocial dilemmas and to set guidelines for oncologists to conduct a comprehensive and collaborative physician–patient discourse regarding all aspects of treatment.

scholarly journals Development of a tool for identifying and addressing prioritised determinants of quality improvement projects led by healthcare professionals: a mixed-methods study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne van Tuijl ◽  
Hub C. Wollersheim ◽  
Cornelia R.M.G. Fluit ◽  
Petra. J. van Gurp ◽  
Hiske Calsbeek
Keyword(s):  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
Learning By Doing ◽  
Mixed Methods Study ◽  
Quality Improvement Initiative ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Priority Score ◽  
A Priority

Abstract Background: Several frameworks have been developed to identify essential determinants for healthcare improvement. These frameworks aim to be comprehensive, leading to the creation of long lists of determinants that are not prioritised based on being experienced as most important. Furthermore, most existing frameworks do not describe the methods or actions used to identify and address the determinants, limiting their practical value. The aim of this study is to describe the development of a tool with prioritised facilitators and barriers supplemented with methods to identify and address each determinant. The tool can be used by those performing quality improvement initiatives in healthcare practice. Methods: A mixed-methods study design was used to develop the tool. First, an online survey was used to ask healthcare professionals about the determinants they experienced as most facilitating and most hindering during the performance of their quality improvement initiative . A priority score was calculated for every named determinant, and those with a priority score ≥ 20 were incorporated into the tool. Semi-structured interviews with implementation experts were performed to gain insight on how to analyse and address the determinants in our tool Results: The 25 healthcare professionals in this study experienced 64 facilitators and 66 barriers when performing their improvement initiatives. Of these, 12 facilitators and nine barriers were incorporated into the tool. Sufficient support from management of the department was identified as the most important facilitator, while having limited time to perform the initiative was considered the most important barrier. The interviews with 16 experts in implementation science led to various inputs for identifying and addressing each determinant. Important themes included maintaining adequate communication with stakeholders, keeping the initiative at a manageable size, learning by doing and being able to influence determinants. Conclusions: This paper describes the development of a tool with prioritized determinants for performing quality improvement initiatives with suggestions for analysing and addressing these determinants. The tool is developed for those engaged in quality improvement initiatives in practice, so in this ways it helps to bridging the research to practice gap of determinants frameworks. More research is needed to validate and develop the tool further.

scholarly journals Companion Animal Type and Level of Engagement Matter: A Mixed-Methods Study Examining Links between Companion Animal Guardianship, Loneliness and Well-Being during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Animals ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (8) ◽  
pp. 2349
Author(s):  
Heather Clements ◽  
Stephanie Valentin ◽  
Nicholas Jenkins ◽  
Jean Rankin ◽  
Nancy R. Gee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Quantitative Data ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Qualitative Data ◽  
Companion Animals ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Companion Animal ◽  
Mixed Methods Study ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Mental Well Being

To reduce the spread of COVID-19, countries worldwide placed limitations on social interaction, which is anticipated to have severe psychological consequences. Although findings are inconsistent, prior research has suggested that companion animals may positively influence human well-being and reduce loneliness. In the context of COVID-19, this has important implications, as companion animal guardians may be less negatively affected by the pandemic. The primary aim of this research was to investigate the influence of companion animals on mental well-being and loneliness during the pandemic, with specific interest in the role of ornamental fishes. A mixed-methods study was conducted, using an international sample. Quantitative data were collected via an online survey (n = 1199) and analysed using robust hierarchical multiple regression analyses; the influence of level of engagement with companion animals was examined for dogs, cats and ornamental fishes. There was no evidence that companion animal guardianship was associated with loneliness and mental well-being during the pandemic but spending more time engaging physically or socially with dogs (and to a lesser extent cats) was generally associated with poorer outcomes. Qualitative data were collected through open-ended survey responses (n = 757) and semi-structured interviews (n = 25) and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Two themes were developed—one related to companion animals as providers of social and emotional support, and the other to companion animals as providers of purpose and perspective. Concerns regarding the impact of the pandemic on animal welfare were also identified. Compared to other animal types, more participants expressed indifference regarding the impact of their fishes on their well-being during the pandemic, possibly because fishes cannot provide comfort via physical touch. The findings of this study reflect the wider field of human–animal interaction; although qualitative data suggest guardians believe their companion animals are a positive influence in their lives, there is little convincing quantitative data to support these beliefs. This highlights the need to refine theories regarding which aspects of companion animal guardianship may influence human well-being; the findings from this research may be useful in the refinement of such theories.

scholarly journals Experiences of preparing children for a death of an important adult during the COVID-19 pandemic: a mixed methods study

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (8) ◽  
pp. e053099
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Rapa ◽  
Jeffrey R Hanna ◽  
Catriona R Mayland ◽  
Stephen Mason ◽  
Bettina Moltrecht ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Social Care ◽  
Psychosocial Support ◽  
Healthcare Team ◽  
Mixed Methods Design ◽  
Significant Relationships ◽  
Health And Social Care ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Parental Belief ◽  
Depth Interviews

ObjectiveThe objectives of this study were to investigate how families prepared children for the death of a significant adult, and how health and social care professionals provided psychosocial support to families about a relative’s death during the COVID-19 pandemic.Design/settingA mixed methods design; an observational survey with health and social care professionals and relatives bereaved during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK, and in-depth interviews with bereaved relatives and professionals were conducted. Data were analysed thematically.ParticipantsA total of 623 participants completed the survey and interviews were conducted with 19 bereaved relatives and 16 professionals.ResultsMany children were not prepared for a death of an important adult during the pandemic. Obstacles to preparing children included families’ lack of understanding about their relative’s declining health; parental belief that not telling children was protecting them from becoming upset; and parents’ uncertainty about how best to prepare their children for the death. Only 10.2% (n=11) of relatives reported professionals asked them about their deceased relative’s relationships with children. This contrasts with 68.5% (n=72) of professionals who reported that the healthcare team asked about patient’s relationships with children. Professionals did not provide families with psychosocial support to facilitate preparation, and resources were less available or inappropriate for families during the pandemic. Three themes were identified: (1) obstacles to telling children a significant adult is going to die, (2) professionals’ role in helping families to prepare children for the death of a significant adult during the pandemic, and (3) how families prepare children for the death of a significant adult.ConclusionsProfessionals need to: provide clear and honest communication about a poor prognosis; start a conversation with families about the dying patient’s significant relationships with children; and reassure families that telling children someone close to them is dying is beneficial for their longer term psychological adjustment.

scholarly journals General Practitioners’ Attitudes toward Municipal Initiatives to Improve Antibiotic Prescribing—A Mixed-Methods Study

Antibiotics ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 120 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marthe Sunde ◽  
Marthe Marie Nygaard ◽  
Sigurd Høye
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
General Practitioners ◽  
Treatment Guidelines ◽  
National Level ◽  
Medical Officer ◽  
Mixed Methods Study ◽  
Antibiotic Prescribing ◽  
E Mail

Antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) interventions directed at general practitioners (GPs) contribute to an improved antibiotic prescribing. However, it is challenging to implement and maintain such interventions at a national level. Involving the municipalities’ Chief Medical Officer (MCMO) in quality improvement activities may simplify the implementation and maintenance, but may also be perceived challenging for the GPs. In the ENORM (Educational intervention in NORwegian Municipalities for antibiotic treatment in line with guidelines) study, MCMOs acted as facilitators of an AMS intervention for GPs. We explored GPs’ views on their own antibiotic prescribing, and their views on MCMO involvement in improving antibiotic prescribing in general practice. This is a mixed-methods study combining quantitative and qualitative data from two data sources: e-mail interviews with 15 GPs prior to the ENORM intervention, and online-form answers to closed and open-ended questions from 132 GPs participating in the ENORM intervention. The interviews and open-ended responses were analyzed using systematic text condensation. Many GPs admitted to occasionally prescribing antibiotics without medical indication, mainly due to pressure from patients. Too liberal treatment guidelines were also seen as a reason for overtreatment. The MCMO was considered a suitable and acceptable facilitator of quality improvement activities in general practice, and their involvement was regarded as unproblematic (scale 0 (very problematic) to 10 (not problematic at all): mean 8.2, median 10). GPs acknowledge the need and possibility to improve their own antibiotic prescribing, and in doing so, they welcome engagement from the municipality. MCMOs should be involved in quality improvement and AMS in general practice.

scholarly journals Engagement with and delivery of the ‘parkrun practice initiative’ in general practice: a mixed methods study

2020 ◽  
Vol 70 (697) ◽  
pp. e573-e580
Author(s):  
Joanna Fleming ◽  
Carol Bryce ◽  
Joanne Parsons ◽  
Chrissie Wellington ◽  
Jeremy Dale
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Focus Group ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Mixed Methods Study ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Practice Staff ◽  
Health And Wellbeing ◽  
Positive Effects ◽  
Improve Patient

BackgroundThe parkrun practice initiative, a joint collaboration between parkrun and the Royal College of General Practitioners, was launched to encourage general practices to improve the health and wellbeing of patients and staff through participating in local 5 km parkrun events. Why and how practices engage with the initiative is unknown.AimTo investigate engagement with and delivery of the parkrun practice initiative in general practice.Design and settingMixed methods study conducted from April–July 2019 comprising an online survey of all registered parkrun practices, and interviews and a focus group with practice staff in the West Midlands.MethodThe designated contacts at 780 registered parkrun practices were invited to complete an online survey. A purposive sample of parkrun practice staff and non-registered practice staff took part either in semi-structured interviews or a focus group, with transcripts analysed thematically.ResultsOf the total number of parkrun practices, 306 (39.2%) completed the survey. Sixteen practice staff (from nine parkrun practices and four non-registered practices) took part in either semi-structured interviews (n = 12) or a focus group (n = 4). Key motivators for becoming a parkrun practice were: to improve patient and staff health and wellbeing, and to become more engaged with the community and enhance practice image. Practices most commonly encouraged patients, carers, and staff to take part in parkrun and displayed parkrun flyers and posters. Challenges in implementing activities included lack of time (both personal and during consultations) and getting staff involved. Where staff did engage there were positive effects on morale and participation. Non-registered practices were receptive to the initiative, but had apprehensions about the commitment involved.ConclusionPractices were keen to improve patient and staff health. Addressing time constraints and staff support needs to be considered when implementing the initiative.

Addressing Adoption in Counseling: A Study of Adult Adoptees' Counseling Satisfaction

2017 ◽  
Vol 98 (3) ◽  
pp. 209-216 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amanda L. Baden ◽  
Andrew Kitchen ◽  
Jonathan R. Mazza ◽  
Elliotte Sue Harrington ◽  
Ebony E. White
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Relationship Satisfaction ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Self Esteem ◽  
Mixed Methods Study ◽  
Common Reason ◽  
Adult Adoptees ◽  
Birth Family ◽  
Adoptive Identity ◽  
Counseling Satisfaction

In this mixed-methods study, 118 adult adoptees completed an online survey gathering information on (a) reasons for seeking therapy, (b) preferences for therapists, (c) perception of therapists' degree of emphasis on adoption during therapy, and (d) relationship satisfaction with adoptive and birth family members. The participants also completed the Satisfaction With Therapy and Therapist Scale–Revised (STTS-R), Adoptive Identity Questionnaire (AIQ), and Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (SES). Findings were that the therapists' adoption competence was the most important factor for adoptees in selecting therapists, adoption-related issues were the most common reason adoptees sought therapy, and adoptees reported being more satisfied with therapy if their therapists placed emphasis on adoption regardless of the amount of attention that was focused on adoption.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document