BackgroundBurnout syndrome is an important health problem that affects many professionals and must be addressed globally, with both organizational measures and personal interventions. Burnout of health professionals can be prevented in order to avoid personal, familial, and social consequences, as well as repercussions for patients.Methods/designThis work describes a protocol for a controlled, pragmatic, randomized clinical trial in 2 parallel groups: intervention and control. All health professionals from 7 health care centers will form the intervention group, and all health professionals from 7 different health care centers will form the control group. The intervention group will receive 16 hours of training at their work place. The Maslach's burnout inventory, the Cuestionario de Desgaste Profesional Médico or the Cuestionario de Desgaste Profesional de Enfermería, and the 28-item Goldberg's General Health Questionnaire, validated for our setting, will be used as measurement tools. Change in the average scores from the Maslach's burnout inventory emotional exhaustion scale will be compared between the intervention and control groups, measured as intention-to-treat, and the intervention will be considered effective if a minimum decrease of 20% is achieved.DiscussionDue to the deleterious consequences of burnout syndrome for people suffering from it and for the organization where they work, it is necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of certain interventions for its prevention. Organizational measures are important for preventing burnout syndrome, but so is providing professionals with coping strategies, as this group intervention intends to do.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov processed this record on June 10, 2013. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01870154.
Aim
To explore the main feelings and coping strategies among frontline critical care workers during the first phase of the COVID‐19 pandemic and to evaluate the level of satisfaction after a psychological crisis and emergency intervention.
Background
The health crisis brought about by the COVID‐19 pandemic has exposed critical care workers to an intense physical and emotional burden. Scientific research recommends psychological crisis and emergency interventions during the acute phase to help cope with the situation and prevent emotional side effects.
Design
A multicentre descriptive study with mixed qualitative and quantitative data was developed.
Methods
Healthcare and non‐healthcare critical care workers from 16 hospitals were included. Psychological crisis assistance was given (for individuals and groups), both face‐to‐face and online, with 18 psychologists for two months. Content analysis from the psychologists’ session reports after each intervention was performed (COREQ). Satisfaction with the intervention was assessed with an ‘ad hoc’ 21‐item online survey.
Results
A total of 553 interventions were carried out (361 individually and 192 in groups). Four themes were identified: 1‐Imbalance between occupational demands and resources; 2‐Acute stress responses; 3‐Personal and professional consequences; and 4‐Protection factors. The main protection factor identified was group cohesion and perceived social support. The mean general satisfaction with the intervention was high and 96.2% (n=252) of the participants would recommend it in future.
Conclusions
A psychological crisis and emergency intervention helped critical care workers during the COVID‐19 pandemic to verbalise and integrate the situation, providing strategies to cope with the experience with a high level of satisfaction from the participants assisted.
Relevance to clinical practice
During the COVID‐19 pandemic, support groups guided by psychologists fostered reflection on aspects related to work, interaction with patients and relatives and social support from workmates that help them for coping with stress, share emotions and experiences and feel understood.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.