Psychological interventions to foster resilience in healthcare professionals

Kunzler, Angela; Helmreich, Isabella; Chmitorz, Andrea; König, Jochem; Binder, Harald; Wessa, Michèle; Lieb, Klaus

doi:10.1002/14651858.cd012527.pub2

Cited by 202 publications

(253 citation statements)

References 586 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

191

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These factors are often assessed at the individual, as opposed to institutional, level. Resilience factors may include having a strong sense of purpose, ability to adapt and cope, positive mental state, confidence, optimism and perceiving strong social support [ 17 ]. A 2020 systematic review evaluating psychological interventions to promote resilience in health workers found that resilience training did, indeed, improve measures of resilience and acutely reduced symptoms of depression and stress [ 17 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Resilience factors may include having a strong sense of purpose, ability to adapt and cope, positive mental state, confidence, optimism and perceiving strong social support [ 17 ]. A 2020 systematic review evaluating psychological interventions to promote resilience in health workers found that resilience training did, indeed, improve measures of resilience and acutely reduced symptoms of depression and stress [ 17 ]. Because some resilience factors are modifiable, and interventions do show promise, it is important to identify the resilience factors that may be particularly relevant to the experience of HCWs during COVID-19 response.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Trends in Moral Injury, Distress, and Resilience Factors among Healthcare Workers at the Beginning of the COVID-19 Pandemic

Hines

Chin

Glick

et al. 2021

IJERPH

161

199

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The coronavirus severe acute respiratory syndrome (COVID-19) pandemic has placed increased stress on healthcare workers (HCWs). While anxiety and post-traumatic stress have been evaluated in HCWs during previous pandemics, moral injury, a construct historically evaluated in military populations, has not. We hypothesized that the experience of moral injury and psychiatric distress among HCWs would increase over time during the pandemic and vary with resiliency factors. From a convenience sample, we performed an email-based, longitudinal survey of HCWs at a tertiary care hospital between March and July 2020. Surveys measured occupational and resilience factors and psychiatric distress and moral injury, assessed by the Impact of Events Scale-Revised and the Moral Injury Events Scale, respectively. Responses were assessed at baseline, 1-month, and 3-month time points. Moral injury remained stable over three months, while distress declined. A supportive workplace environment was related to lower moral injury whereas a stressful, less supportive environment was associated with increased moral injury. Distress was not affected by any baseline occupational or resiliency factors, though poor sleep at baseline predicted more distress. Overall, our data suggest that attention to improving workplace support and lowering workplace stress may protect HCWs from adverse emotional outcomes.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trends in Moral Injury, Distress, and Resilience Factors among Healthcare Workers at the Beginning of the COVID-19 Pandemic

Hines

Chin

Glick

et al. 2021

IJERPH

161

199

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This resilience can be defined as “the maintenance or rapid recovery of mental health during or after periods of exposure to stress, as a result of a potentially traumatic event, challenging life circumstances, a critical phase of life transition, or a physical illness”. There is still uncertain evidence on the positive effects of training on such resilience ( Kunzler et al, 2020 ). Coping skills have a moderating effect regarding the SOC and engagement variables ( Mitonga-Monga and Mayer, 2020 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sense of coherence, engagement, and work environment as precursors of psychological distress among non-health workers during the COVID-19 pandemic in Spain

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The interrelationship between the sense of coherence, work environment, work engagement, and psychological distress have particular interest in non-health workers who carried out essential activities during the COVID-19 pandemic. Objective To assess the effects of the COVID-19 on the physical and mental health of non-health workers. Design Observational descriptive cross-sectional study. Data sources 1089 questionnaires have been analysed. Engagement (UWES-9), sense of coherence (SOC-13), mental health (Goldberg GHQ-12), demographic data, perception of health and stress and work environment were assessed. Results At low levels of engagement, the percentage of distress is higher (77.9%). Low levels of sense of coherence correspond to the highest percentages of distress (86.3%). The 94.1% believe it necessary for professionals and volunteers involved in COVID-19 to receive psychological support. Low comprehensibility is mediated by the perception of stress; if the perception is low, comprehensibility is modulated by the level of significance; if it is low, it generates 95.9% of distress. Conclusion The interrelationship between the sense of coherence, work environment, work engagement, and psychological distress have particular interest in non-health workers who carried out essential activities during the COVID-19 pandemic. Almost all respondents believed that professionals and volunteers involved in COVID-19 should receive psychological support. This may be an indicator of the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on workers’ mental health.

show abstract

“…Although anxiety exists about the burnout of nurses and threats to their mental health, research is being conducted regarding how to build resilience among nurses, especially in stressful times. Kunzler et al. (2020) found that the current studies are relatively poor and that there is a need for more study in this area.…”

mentioning

confidence: 78%