Effectiveness of a group intervention to reduce the psychological distress of healthcare staff: a pre-post quasi-experimental evaluation.

Abstract

Background Work stress and compassion fatigue are prevalent among healthcare staff and their negative effects on staff well-being and patient care are well-known. This paper reports on the implementation and evaluation of Schwartz Rounds® (Rounds) in UK healthcare organizations, predominantly part of the National Health Service (NHS). Rounds are one-hour, typically monthly, multidisciplinary forums during which clinical and nonclinical healthcare staff discuss the emotional and social demands of delivering patient care. The purpose of this research was to evaluate the effectiveness of Rounds attendance on the psychological distress, work engagement, compassion and self-reflection of healthcare staff. Methods We used a pre-post control design to assess the effect of Rounds attendance across 10 UK healthcare organizations. This design was most appropriate given the voluntary nature of Rounds and ensured the study had ecological validity. Self-reported data were collected from attenders and non-attenders at baseline and at eight-months follow-up. The outcomes were psychological distress, work engagement, compassion and self-reflection. Results During the 8 months’ study duration, regular attenders (N = 51) attended Rounds on average 4 times (2–8). Attenders showed a significantly greater decrease in psychological distress (as measured with the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ)) than non-attenders (N = 233; odds ratio of 0.197; 95% confidence interval (0.047–0.823)). However, Rounds attendance had no significant effect on work engagement, compassion and self-reflection. Conclusions Rounds attendance was linked to a 19% reduction in psychological distress adjusting for covariates. As an organization-wide intervention, Rounds thus constitute an effective, relatively low-cost intervention to assist staff in dealing with the demands of their work and to improve their well-being.

Publication DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-06413-4
Divisions: College of Business and Social Sciences > Aston Business School
Additional Information: © The Author(s). 2021 This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Services & Delivery Research Programme (project number 13/07/49)
Uncontrolled Keywords: Engagement,Intervention study,Psychological distress,Schwartz rounds,Health Policy
Full Text Link:
Related URLs: https://bmcheal ... 913-021-06413-4 (Publisher URL)
http://www.scop ... tnerID=8YFLogxK (Scopus URL)
PURE Output Type: Article
Published Date: 2021-04-27
Accepted Date: 2021-04-19
Authors: Dawson, Jeremy
McCarthy, Imelda (ORCID Profile 0000-0002-4715-9831)
Taylor, Cath
Hildenbrand, Kristin
Leamy, Mary
Reynolds, Ellie
Maben, Jill

Download

[img]

Version: Published Version

License: Creative Commons Attribution

| Preview

Export / Share Citation


Statistics

Additional statistics for this record