Dataset Information

Experiences of healthcare providers during the coronavirus pandemic and its impact on them: protocol for a mixed-methods systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Frontline healthcare providers are redeployed to areas outside their clinical expertise and assigned high-loading workload to address the surge of patients with each coronavirus outbreak. Their importance in crisis is not in doubt. However, they experienced considerable physical distress and psychological stressors, even leading to psychological illness and infection in this environment. There is an urgent need to accurately, comprehensively and objectively understand their experiences, perceptions and current situation of burnout, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), anxiety, depression, insomnia and coronavirus infection. Therefore, this protocol is to conduct a mixed-methods systematic review to summarise the evidence on the experiences of healthcare providers and impacts of the coronavirus on their psychological status and infection during the pandemics.

Methods

Published studies on experience, perspective, impact, burnout, PTSD, anxiety, depression, insomnia, and infection of healthcare providers with SARS, Middle East respiratory syndrome and COVID-19, and written in English and Chinese will be accepted. Databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Web of Science, PubMed, Psychology Information, WanFang and SinoMed) from inception until 30 July 2020 will be searched. Two reviewers will select, screen, extract data and assess the risk of bias independently. Risk of bias of results will be using the Mixed-Methods Appraisal Tool. Using a convergent integrated approach on qualitative/quantitative studies, we will synthesise qualitative and quantitative data separately. The incidence and number of cases about burnout, PTSD, anxiety, depression, insomnia and coronavirus infection among medical staff will be extracted. Then we will transform quantitative data to synthesise narrative findings. This protocol will be reported per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols guidelines.

Ethics and dissemination

Ethical assessment is not required due to the nature of the proposed systematic review. Findings of our research will be disseminated at conferences related to this field and through publication in peer-reviewed journals.

Prospero registration number

CRD42020198506.

SUBMITTER: Xu N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7918807 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Experiences of healthcare providers during the coronavirus pandemic and its impact on them: protocol for a mixed-methods systematic review.

Xu Na N Lv AiLi A Li TianZi T Li XiaoFeng X Huang Mei M Su Yan Y

BMJ open 20210226 2

<h4>Introduction</h4>Frontline healthcare providers are redeployed to areas outside their clinical expertise and assigned high-loading workload to address the surge of patients with each coronavirus outbreak. Their importance in crisis is not in doubt. However, they experienced considerable physical distress and psychological stressors, even leading to psychological illness and infection in this environment. There is an urgent need to accurately, comprehensively and objectively understand their ...[more]

PMID: 33637546

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:When certain complications arise during the second stage of labour, assisted vaginal delivery (AVD), a vaginal birth with forceps or vacuum extractor, can effectively improve outcomes by ending prolonged labour or by ensuring rapid birth in response to maternal or fetal compromise. In recent decades, the use of AVD has decreased in many settings in favour of caesarean section (CS). This review aimed to improve understanding of experiences, barriers and facilitators for AVD use. METHODS:Systematic searches of eight databases using predefined search terms to identify studies reporting views and experiences of maternity service users, their partners, health care providers, policymakers, and funders in relation to AVD. Relevant studies were assessed for methodological quality. Qualitative findings were synthesised using a meta-ethnographic approach. Confidence in review findings was assessed using GRADE CERQual. Findings from quantitative studies were synthesised narratively and assessed using an adaptation of CERQual. Qualitative and quantitative review findings were triangulated using a convergence coding matrix. RESULTS:Forty-two studies (published 1985-2019) were included: six qualitative, one mixed-method and 35 quantitative. Thirty-five were from high-income countries, and seven from LMIC settings. Confidence in the findings was moderate or low. Spontaneous vaginal birth was most likely to be associated with positive short and long-term outcomes, and emergency CS least likely. Views and experiences of AVD tended to fall somewhere between these two extremes. Where indicated, AVD can be an effective, acceptable alternative to caesarean section. There was agreement or partial agreement across qualitative studies and surveys that the experience of AVD is impacted by the unexpected nature of events and, particularly in high-income settings, unmet expectations. Positive relationships, good communication, involvement in decision-making, and (believing in) the reason for intervention were important mediators of birth experience. Professional attitudes and skills (development) were simultaneously barriers and facilitators of AVD in quantitative studies. CONCLUSIONS:Information, positive interaction and communication with providers and respectful care are facilitators for acceptance of AVD. Barriers include lack of training and skills for decision-making and use of instruments.

Project description:BackgroundThe Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes (ECHO) Model of continuing tele-education is an innovative guided-practice model aiming at amplifying healthcare professionals' competencies in the management of chronic and complex health conditions. While data on the impact of the ECHO model is increasingly available in the literature, what influences the model effectiveness remains unclear. Therefore, the overarching aim of this systematic review is to identify, appraise, and synthesize the available quantitative (QUAN) and qualitative (QUAL) evidence regarding the ECHO Model effectiveness and the experiences/views of ECHO's participants about what influences the development of competencies in healthcare professionals.MethodsThe proposed systematic review was inspired by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology for Mixed Methods Systematic Reviews (MMSR) and will follow a convergent segregated approach. A systematic search will be undertaken using QUAN, QUAL and mixed methods (MM) studies of ECHO-affiliated programs identified in six databases. A publication date filter will be applied to find the articles published from 2003 onwards. Sources of unpublished studies and gray literature will be searched as well. Retrieved citations will independently be screened by two reviewers. Disagreements will be resolved through discussion until a consensus is reached or by including a third reviewer. Studies meeting the predefined inclusion criteria will be assessed on methodological quality and the data will be extracted using standardized data extraction forms. Separate QUAN and QUAL synthesis will be performed, and findings will be integrated using a matrix approach for the purpose of comparison and complementarity.DiscussionThis MMSR will fulfill important gaps in the current literature on the ECHO Model as the first to provide estimates on its effectiveness and consider simultaneously the experiences/views of ECHO's participants. As each replication of the ECHO Model greatly varies depending on the context, topic, and targeted professionals, a better understanding of what influences the model effectiveness in developing healthcare professionals' competencies is crucial to inform future implementation.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42020197579.

Project description:ObjectiveTo review the impact of clinical supervision of post-registration/qualification healthcare professionals on healthcare organisational outcomes.BackgroundClinical supervision is a professional support mechanism that benefits patients, healthcare professionals and healthcare organisations. Whilst evidence is growing on the impact of clinical supervision on patient and healthcare professional outcomes, the evidence base for the impact of clinical supervision on organisational outcomes remains weak.MethodsThis review used a convergent segregated approach to synthesise and integrate quantitative and qualitative research findings, as per the Joanna Briggs Institute's recommendations for mixed methods systematic reviews. Databases searched included CINAHL, Embase, PubMed, PschINFO, and Scopus. Whilst a narrative synthesis was performed to present the findings of the quantitative and qualitative studies, the evidence from both quantitative and qualitative studies was subsequently integrated for a combined presentation. The review followed the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.ResultsThirty-two studies including 27 quantitative, two qualitative and three mixed methods studies, were included in the review. The results of the quantitative analysis showed that effective clinical supervision was associated with lower burnout and greater staff retention, and effective supervisor was associated with lower burnout and greater job satisfaction. Qualitative findings showed that healthcare professionals believed that adequate clinical supervision could mitigate the risk of burnout, facilitate staff retention, and improve the work environment, while inadequate clinical supervision can lead to stress and burnout. The evidence from quantitative and qualitative studies were complementary of each other.ConclusionClinical supervision can have a variable effect on healthcare organisational outcomes. The direction of this effect appears to be influenced by the effectiveness of both the clinical supervision provided and that of the clinical supervisor. This highlights the need for organisations to invest in high quality supervision practices if maximal gains from clinical supervision are to be attained.

Project description:BACKGROUND:An awareness campaign set to accompany the Global Maternal Sepsis Study (GLOSS) was launched in 2017. In order to better develop and evaluate the campaign, we sought to understand the factors that influence awareness of maternal sepsis by exploring healthcare providers' knowledge, perception of enabling environments, and perception of severity of maternal sepsis. METHODS:We used a mixed-methods approach that included 13 semi-structured interviews to GLOSS regional and country coordinators and 1555 surveys of providers working in GLOSS participating facilities. Directed content analysis and grounded theory were used for qualitative analysis, based on a framework including four overarching themes around maternal health conditions, determinants of maternal health, barriers and facilitators to sepsis identification and management, plus 24 additional sub-topics that emerged during the interviews. Descriptive statistics for frequencies and percentages were used for the quantitative analysis; significance was tested using Pearson ?2. Logistic regressions were performed to adjust for selected variables. RESULTS:Analysis of interviews described limited availability of resources, poor quality of care, insufficient training and lack of protocols as some of the barriers to maternal sepsis identification and management. Analysis from the quantitative survey showed that while 92% of respondents had heard of maternal sepsis only 15% were able to correctly define it and 43% to correctly identify initial management. Provider confidence, perceived availability of resources and of a supportive environment were low (33%, 38%, and 48% respectively). Overall, the predictor that most explained awareness was training. Respondents from the survey and interviewees identified sepsis among the main conditions affecting women at their facilities. CONCLUSIONS:Awareness on maternal sepsis, while acknowledged as important, remains low. Healthcare providers need resources and support to feel confident about the correct identification and management of sepsis, as a prerequisite for the improvement of awareness of maternal sepsis. Similarly, providers need to know about maternal sepsis and its severity to understand the importance of reducing sepsis-related mortality and morbidity. Awareness raising campaigns can help bring neglected maternal health conditions, such as sepsis, to the forefront of global and local agendas.

Project description:BackgroundTo accelerate universal health coverage, Nigeria's National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) decentralized the implementation of government health insurance to the individual states in 2014. Lagos is one of the states that passed a State Health Insurance Scheme into law, in order to expand the benefits of health insurance beyond the few residents enrolled in community-based health insurance programs, commercial private health insurance plans or the NHIS. Public and private healthcare providers are a critical component of the Lagos State Health Scheme (LSHS) rollout. This study explored the determinants and perception of provider participation in health insurance programs including the LSHS.MethodsThis study used a mixed-methods cross sectional design. Quantitative data were collected from 60 healthcare facilities representatively sampled from 6 Local Government Areas in Lagos state. For the qualitative data, providers were interviewed using structured questionnaires on selected characteristics of each health facility in addition to the managers' opinions about the challenges and benefits of insurance participation, capacity pressure, resource availability and financial management consequences.ResultsA higher proportion of provider facilities participating in insurance relative to non-participating facilities were larger with mid to (very) high patient volume, workforce, and longer years of operation. In addition, a greater proportion of private facilities compared to public facilities participated in insurance. Furthermore, a higher proportion of secondary and tertiary facilities relative to primary facilities participated in insurance. Lastly, increase in patient volume and revenue were motivating factors for provider facilities to participate in insurance, while low tariffs, delay and denial of payments, and patients' unrealistic expectations were mentioned as inhibiting factors.ConclusionFor the Lagos state and other government insurance schemes in developing countries to be successful, effective contracting and quality assurance of healthcare providers are essential. The health facilities indicated that these would require adequate and regular provider payment, investments in infrastructure upgrades and educating the public about insurance benefit plans and service expectations.

Project description:ObjectiveTo explore healthcare provider's perspectives and experiences of the barriers and facilitators to treat and manage COVID-19 cases.Design and settingWe conducted an exploratory qualitative study using a purposive sampling approach, at a private tertiary care teaching hospital in Karachi, Pakistan. Study data were analysed manually using the conventional content analysis technique.ParticipantsKey-informant interviews (KIIs) were conducted with senior management and hospital leadership and in-depth interviews (IDIs) were conducted with front-line healthcare providers.ResultsA total of 31 interviews (KIIs=19; IDIs=12) were conducted, between April and May 2020. Three overarching themes emerged. The first was 'challenges faced by front-line healthcare providers working in COVID-19 wards. Healthcare workers experienced increased anxiety due to the fear of acquiring infection and transmitting it to their family members. They felt overwhelmed due to the exhaustive donning and doffing process, intense work and stigmatisation. The second theme was 'enablers supporting healthcare providers to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic'. Front liners pointed out several enabling factors that supported hospital staff including a safe hospital environment, adequate training, a strong system of information sharing and supportive management. The third theme was 'recommendations to support the healthcare workforce during the COVID-19 crisis'. Healthcare workers recommended measures to mitigate current challenges including providing risk allowance to front-line healthcare providers, preparing a backup health workforce, and establishing a platform to address the mental health needs of the healthcare providers.ConclusionThis study provides an initial evidence base of healthcare providers' experiences of managing patients with COVID-19 in the early stage of the pandemic and highlights measures needed to address the encountered challenges. It offers lessons for hospitals in low-income and middle-income countries to ensure a safe working environment for front-line workers in their fight against COVID-19.

Project description:ObjectiveTo explore parents' and guardians' views and experiences of accessing National Health Service (NHS) general practices for routine childhood vaccinations during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic in England.DesignMixed methods approach involving an online cross-sectional survey (conducted between 19th April and 11th May 2020) and semi-structured telephone interviews (conducted between 27th April and 27th May 2020).Participants1252 parents and guardians (aged 16+ years) who reported living in England with a child aged 18 months or under completed the survey. Nineteen survey respondents took part in follow-up interviews.ResultsThe majority of survey respondents (85.7%) considered it important for their children to receive routine vaccinations on schedule during the COVID-19 pandemic; however, several barriers to vaccination were identified. These included a lack of clarity around whether vaccination services were operating as usual, particularly amongst respondents from lower income households and those self-reporting as Black, Asian, Chinese, Mixed or Other ethnicity; difficulties in organising vaccination appointments; and fears around contracting COVID-19 while attending general practice. Concerns about catching COVID-19 while accessing general practice were weighed against concerns about children acquiring a vaccine-preventable disease if they did not receive scheduled routine childhood vaccinations. Many parents and guardians felt their child's risk of acquiring a vaccine-preventable disease was low as the implementation of stringent physical distancing measures (from March 23rd 2020) meant they were not mixing with others.ConclusionTo promote routine childhood vaccination uptake during the current COVID-19 outbreak, further waves of COVID-19 infection, and future pandemics, prompt and sustained national and general practice level communication is needed to raise awareness of vaccination service continuation and the importance of timely vaccination, and invitation-reminder systems for vaccination need to be maintained. To allay concerns about the safety of accessing general practice, practices should communicate the measures being implemented to prevent COVID-19 transmission.

Project description:BackgroundWith the accumulation of evidence regarding potential harms of cancer screening in recent years, researchers, policy-makers, and the public are becoming more critical of population-based cancer screening. Consequently, a high-quality cancer screening program should consider individuals’ values and preferences when determining recommendations. In cervical cancer screening, offering women autonomy is considered a “person-centered” approach to health care services; however, it may impact the effectiveness of the program should women choose to not participate. As part of a larger project to investigate women’s cervical screening preferences and correlates of these preferences, this systematic review will capture quantitative and qualitative investigations of women’s cervical screening preferences and the methods used to elicit them.Design and methodsThis mixed methods synthesis will use a thematic analysis approach to synthesize qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods evidence. This protocol describes the methods that will be used in this investigation. A search strategy has been developed with a health librarian and peer reviewed using PRESS. Based on this strategy, five databases and the gray literature will be searched for studies that meet the inclusion criteria. The quality of the included individual studies will be examined using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Three reviewers will extract data from the primary studies on the tools or instruments used to elicit women’s preferences regarding cervical cancer screening, theoretical frameworks used, outcomes measured, the outstanding themes from quantitative and qualitative evidence, and the identified preferences for cervical cancer screening. We will describe the relationships between study results and the study population, “intervention” (e.g., tool or instrument), and context. We will follow the PRISMA reporting guideline. We will compare findings across studies and between study methods (e.g., qualitative versus quantitative study designs). The strength of the synthesized findings will be assessed using the validated GRADE and CERQual tool.DiscussionThis review will inform the development of a tool to elicit women’s cervical screening preferences. Understanding the methods used to elicit women’s preferences and what is known about women’s cervical screening preferences will be useful for guideline developers who wish to incorporate a woman-centered approach specifically for cervical screening guidelines.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42016035737Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13643-016-0310-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Project description:BackgroundGlobally, renal healthcare practitioners provide intensive and protracted support to a highly complex multi-morbid patient population however knowledge about the impact of COVID-19 on these practitioners is extremely limited.ObjectiveThis study aimed to explore the experiences of COVID-19 with renal healthcare practitioners during the first global lockdown between June 2020 and September 2020.MethodsA multi-methods approach was carried out including a quantitative survey and qualitative interviews. This was a multinational study of renal healthcare practitioners from 29 countries. Quantitative: A self-designed survey on COVID-19 experiences and standardised questionnaires (General Health Questionnaire-12; Maslach Burnout Inventory). Descriptive statistics were generated for numerical data. Qualitative: Online semi-structured interviews were conducted. Data was subjected to thematic analysis. Renal healthcare practitioners (n = 251) completed an online survey. Thirteen renal healthcare practitioners took part in semi-structured interviews (12 nurses and 1 dietician).ResultsThe majority of participants surveyed were female (86.9 %; n = 218), nurses (86.9 %; n = 218) with an average 21.5 (SD = 11.1) years' experience since professional qualification, and 16.3 years (SD = 9.3) working in renal healthcare. Survey responses indicated a level of preparedness, training and satisfactory personal protective equipment during the pandemic however approximately 40.3 % experienced fear about attending work, and 49.8 % experienced mental health distress. The highest prevalence of burnout was emotional exhaustion (35.9 %). Three themes emerged from the qualitative analysis highlighting the holistic complexities in managing renal healthcare, a neglected specialist workforce, and the need for appropriate support at work during a pandemic.ConclusionsResults have highlighted the psychological impact, in terms of emotional exhaustion and mental health distress in our sample of renal healthcare practitioners. As the pandemic has continued, it is important to consider the long-term impact on an already stretched workforce including the risk of developing mental health disorders. Future research and interventions are required to understand and improve the provision of psychological support for specialist medical and nursing personnel.

Dataset Information

Experiences of healthcare providers during the coronavirus pandemic and its impact on them: protocol for a mixed-methods systematic review.

Introduction

Methods

Ethics and dissemination

Prospero registration number

Publications

Experiences of healthcare providers during the coronavirus pandemic and its impact on them: protocol for a mixed-methods systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure