KITE Research Institute, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Lazaridis School of Business & Economics, Wilfrid Laurier University, Brantford, Ontario, Canada.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2024 Apr 18;24(1):481. doi: 10.1186/s12913-024-10912-5.
Healthcare providers may experience moral distress when they are unable to take the ethically or morally appropriate action due to real or perceived constraints in delivering care, and this psychological stressor can negatively impact their mental health, leading to burnout and compassion fatigue. This study describes healthcare providers experiences of moral distress working in long-term care settings during the COVID-19 pandemic and measures self-reported levels of moral distress pre- and post-implementation of the Dementia Isolation Toolkit (DIT), a person-centred care intervention designed for use by healthcare providers to alleviate moral distress.
Subjective levels of moral distress amongst providers (e.g., managerial, administrative, and front-line employees) working in three long-term care homes was measured pre- and post-implementation of the DIT using the Moral Distress in Dementia Care Survey and semi-structured interviews. Interviews explored participants' experiences of moral distress in the workplace and the perceived impact of the intervention on moral distress.
A total of 23 providers between the three long-term care homes participated. Following implementation of the DIT, subjective levels of moral distress measured by the survey did not change. When interviewed, participants reported frequent experiences of moral distress from implementing public health directives, staff shortages, and professional burnout that remained unchanged following implementation. However, in the post-implementation interviews, participants who used the DIT reported improved self-awareness of moral distress and reductions in the experience of moral distress. Participants related this to feeling that the quality of resident care was improved by integrating principals of person-centered care and information gathered from the DIT.
This study highlights the prevalence and exacerbation of moral distress amongst providers during the pandemic and the myriad of systemic factors that contribute to experiences of moral distress in long-term care settings. We report divergent findings with no quantitative improvement in moral distress post-intervention, but evidence from interviews that the DIT may ease some sources of moral distress and improve the perceived quality of care delivered. This study demonstrates that an intervention to support person-centred isolation care in this setting had limited impact on overall moral distress during the COVID-19 pandemic.
医疗保健提供者在提供护理时由于实际或感知到的限制而无法采取道德或道义上适当的行动时,可能会经历道德困境,这种心理压力源会对他们的心理健康产生负面影响,导致倦怠和同情疲劳。本研究描述了医疗保健提供者在 COVID-19 大流行期间在长期护理环境中工作时的道德困境体验,并衡量了在实施痴呆症隔离工具包(DIT)前后自我报告的道德困境水平,DIT 是一种以人为本的护理干预措施,专为医疗保健提供者设计,用于减轻道德困境。
使用《痴呆症护理中的道德困境调查》在实施 DIT 前后测量了三家长期护理院的提供者(例如管理人员、行政人员和一线员工)的道德困境主观水平,半结构化访谈探讨了参与者在工作场所的道德困境经历以及干预对道德困境的感知影响。
三家长期护理院共有 23 名护理人员参加。实施 DIT 后,调查衡量的道德困境主观水平没有变化。在接受采访时,参与者报告了频繁的道德困境经历,例如实施公共卫生指令、人员短缺和职业倦怠,这些情况在实施后没有改变。然而,在实施后的访谈中,使用 DIT 的参与者报告说,他们对道德困境的自我意识有所提高,并且体验到的道德困境有所减少。参与者将这归因于他们认为通过整合以人为本的护理原则和从 DIT 收集的信息,改善了居民护理的质量。
本研究强调了大流行期间提供者的道德困境普遍存在且加剧,以及导致长期护理环境中道德困境的众多系统因素。我们报告了没有干预后道德困境定量改善的分歧发现,但从访谈中可以看出,DIT 可能减轻了一些道德困境的来源,并提高了所提供护理的感知质量。本研究表明,在这种情况下,支持以人为本的隔离护理的干预措施对 COVID-19 大流行期间的整体道德困境影响有限。