The impact of emotional support on healthcare workers and students coping with COVID-19, and other SARS-CoV pandemics – a mixed-methods systematic review

Abstract

Background Pandemics such as COVID-19 pose threats to the physical safety of healthcare workers and students. They can have traumatic experiences affecting their personal and professional life. Increasing rates of burnout, substance abuse, depression, and suicide among healthcare workers have already been identified, thus making mental health and psychological wellbeing of the healthcare workers a major issue. The aim of this systematic review is to synthesize the characteristics of emotional support programs and interventions targeted to healthcare workers and students since the onset of COVID-19 and other SARS-CoV pandemics and to describe the effectiveness and experiences of these programs. Method This was a mixed method systematic review. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed, and the review was registered on PROSPERO [CRD42021262837]. Searches were conducted using Medline, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases. The COVIDENCE systematic review management system was used for data selection and extraction by two independent reviewers. The JBI (Joanna Briggs Institute) critical appraisal tools were used to assess the quality of selected studies by two additional reviewers. Finally, data extraction and narrative analysis were conducted. Results The search retrieved 3161 results including 1061 duplicates. After screening, a total of 19 articles were included in this review. Participants in studies were nurses, physicians, other hospital staff, and undergraduate medical students mostly working on the front-line with COVID-19 patients. Publications included RCTs (n = 4), quasi-experimental studies (n = 2), cross-sectional studies (n = 6), qualitative interview studies (n = 3), and systematic reviews (n = 4). Most (63.4%) of the interventions used online or digital solutions. Interventions mostly showed good effectiveness (support-seeking, positive emotions, reduction of distress symptoms etc.) and acceptance and were experienced as helpful, but there were some conflicting results. Conclusion Healthcare organizations have developed support strategies focusing on providing emotional support for these healthcare workers and students, but it is difficult to conclude whether one program offers distinct benefit compared to the others. More research is needed to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of emotional support interventions for health workers.

PTSD prevalence and factors in intern nursing students after COVID-19 full liberalization in China: a cross-sectional study

“…These include reduced quality of care, absenteeism, turnover, and reduced commitment (27). Providing emotional support interventions for intern nursing students is required (66). To reduce anxiety and stress, the faculty should create a structured learning environment, follow the course schedule, communicate changes or updates promptly, modify assignments to fit the learning environment, take self-care, extend grace, and make use of campus, local, and national resources (67).…”

On the path to recovery: traumatic stress research during the COVID-19 pandemic 2021–2023

“…Reliable social support in the workplace and in their personal lives (Effendy et al, 2023 ) appears instrumental in fostering this positive transformation. Several online emotional support programmes from healthcare workers and trainees have been evaluated during the pandemic, showing evidence of effectiveness in reducing distress and promoting positive emotions and support seeking (Harkanen et al, 2023 ). However, another study found that frontline healthcare workers preferred support from colleagues, family, or psychologists in person to virtual services such as hotlines.…”

Availability, use and impact of workplace mental health supports during the COVID-19 pandemic in a Canadian cohort of healthcare workers

“…Before the pandemic there had been studies that evaluated mental health interventions for HCWs at the individual (Tamminga et al 2023) or organizational level (Gray et al 2019), without providing good evidence for specific interventions. The start of a pandemic was not an environment for the cluster randomized trials that might have resulted in clear evidence of benefit of workplace mental health programs, but a number of short-term interventions were assessed in controlled trials (Amsalem et Härkänen et al 2023) but again without specific recommendations as to the type of intervention, while recognizing the need both for better support with both employee and employer engagement and for more research.…”

“…The start of a pandemic was not an environment for the cluster randomized trials that might have resulted in clear evidence of benefit of workplace mental health programs, but a number of short-term interventions were assessed in controlled trials (Amsalem et al 2022; Coifman et al 2021; Fiol-DeRoque et al 2021). There have been thoughtful reviews of support programs put in place for HCWs during the pandemic (Buselli et al 2021; Villarreal-Zegarra et al 2022; David et al 2022; Härkänen et al 2023) but again without specific recommendations as to the type of intervention, while recognizing the need both for better support with both employee and employer engagement and for more research.…”