School of Medicine, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, UK
Centre for Medical Education, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
BMJ Open. 2021 Aug 17;11(8):e047498. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-047498.
The aim of this scoping review was to identify pre-existing interventions to support the well-being of healthcare workers during a pandemic or other crisis and to assess the quality of these interventions.
Arksey and O'Malley's five-stage scoping review framework was used to identify the types of evidence available in the field of well-being interventions for healthcare workers during a pandemic. PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL and ERIC databases were searched to find interventions for the well-being of doctors during pandemics. Owing to a lack of results, this search was expanded to all healthcare workers and to include any crisis. Databases were searched in June 2020 and again in October 2020.
INCLUSION/EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Articles were included that studied healthcare workers, reported an intervention design and were specifically designed for use during a pandemic or other crisis. Well-being was defined broadly and could include psychological, physical, social or educational interventions.
Searching produced 10 529 total academic references of which 2062 were duplicates. This left 8467 references. Of these, 16 met our inclusion criteria and were included in data extraction. During data extraction, three more papers were excluded. This left 13 papers to summarise and report. Of these 13 papers, 6 were prospective studies and 7 were purely descriptive. None of the interventions were theoretically informed in their development and the quality of the evidence was generally deemed poor.
There are no high-quality, theory-based interventions for the well-being of healthcare workers during a pandemic or other crisis. Given that previous pandemics have been shown to have a negative effect on healthcare workers well-being, it is imperative this shortcoming is addressed. This scoping review highlights the need for high-quality, theory-based and evidence-based interventions for the well-being of healthcare workers during a pandemic.
本范围综述的目的是确定现有的干预措施,以支持大流行或其他危机期间医护人员的健康,并评估这些干预措施的质量。
采用阿特金和奥马利的五阶段范围综述框架,确定大流行期间医护人员健康干预措施领域现有证据的类型。在 PubMed、PsycINFO、Embase、Scopus、Web of Science、CINAHL 和 ERIC 数据库中搜索大流行期间医生健康干预措施的相关文献。由于结果有限,将搜索范围扩大到所有医护人员,并纳入任何危机。数据库于 2020 年 6 月和 10 月再次进行搜索。
纳入/排除标准:纳入研究医护人员、报告干预设计且专门为大流行或其他危机设计的使用的文献。健康的定义较为广泛,可包括心理、生理、社会或教育干预。
搜索产生了 10529 篇学术参考文献,其中 2062 篇是重复的,剩下 8467 篇。在这些文献中,有 16 篇符合我们的纳入标准,并纳入数据提取。在数据提取过程中,又排除了 3 篇文献。最终有 13 篇文献被总结和报告。在这 13 篇文献中,有 6 篇是前瞻性研究,7 篇是纯描述性研究。没有任何干预措施是在其发展过程中基于理论的,证据的质量普遍较差。
在大流行或其他危机期间,没有针对医护人员健康的高质量、基于理论的干预措施。鉴于之前的大流行对医护人员的健康产生了负面影响,解决这一不足迫在眉睫。本范围综述强调了在大流行期间为医护人员提供高质量、基于理论和基于证据的干预措施的必要性。