Dataset Information

Moral Distress and Perceived Community Views Are Associated with Mental Health Symptoms in Frontline Health Workers during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Sudden changes in clinical practice and the altered ability to care for patients due to the COVID-19 pandemic have been associated with moral distress and mental health concerns in healthcare workers internationally. This study aimed to investigate the severity, prevalence, and predictors of moral distress experienced by Australian healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

A nationwide, voluntary, anonymous, single time-point, online survey of self-identified frontline healthcare workers was conducted between 27th August and 23rd October 2020. Participants were recruited through health organisations, professional associations, or colleges, universities, government contacts, and national media.

Results

7846 complete responses were received from nurses (39.4%), doctors (31.1%), allied health staff (16.7%), or other roles (6.7%). Many participants reported moral distress related to resource scarcity (58.3%), wearing PPE (31.7%) limiting their ability to care for patients, exclusion of family going against their values (60.2%), and fear of letting co-workers down if they were infected (55.0%). Many personal and workplace predictors of moral distress were identified, with those working in certain frontline areas, metropolitan locations, and with prior mental health diagnoses at particular risk of distress. Moral distress was associated with increased risk of anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, and burnout. Conversely, feeling appreciated by the community protected against these risks in healthcare workers.

Conclusions

Safeguarding healthcare workforces during crises is important for both patient safety and workforce longevity. Targeted interventions are required to prevent or minimise moral distress and associated mental health concerns in healthcare workers during COVID-19 and other crises.

SUBMITTER: Smallwood N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8392524 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundGlobal health crises, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, confront healthcare workers (HCW) with increased exposure to potentially morally distressing events. The pandemic has provided an opportunity to explore the links between moral distress, moral resilience, and emergence of mental health symptoms in HCWs.MethodsA total of 962 Canadian healthcare workers (88.4% female, 44.6 + 12.8 years old) completed an online survey during the first COVID-19 wave in Canada (between April 3rd and September 3rd, 2020). Respondents completed a series of validated scales assessing moral distress, perceived stress, anxiety, and depression symptoms, and moral resilience. Respondents were grouped based on exposure to patients who tested positive for COVID-19. In addition to descriptive statistics and analyses of covariance, multiple linear regression was used to evaluate if moral resilience moderates the association between exposure to morally distressing events and moral distress. Factors associated with moral resilience were also assessed.FindingsRespondents working with patients with COVID-19 showed significantly more severe moral distress, anxiety, and depression symptoms (F > 5.5, p < .020), and a higher proportion screened positive for mental disorders (Chi-squared > 9.1, p = .002), compared to healthcare workers who were not. Moral resilience moderated the relationship between exposure to potentially morally distressing events and moral distress (p < .001); compared to those with higher moral resilience, the subgroup with the lowest moral resilience had a steeper cross-sectional worsening in moral distress as the frequency of potentially morally distressing events increased. Moral resilience also correlated with lower stress, anxiety, and depression symptoms (r > .27, p < .001). Factors independently associated with stronger moral resilience included: being male, older age, no mental disorder diagnosis, sleeping more, and higher support from employers and colleagues (B [0.02, |-0.26|].InterpretationElevated moral distress and mental health symptoms in healthcare workers facing a global crisis such as the COVID-19 pandemic call for the development of interventions promoting moral resilience as a protective measure against moral adversities.

Project description:BackgroundOne of the challenges that nurses often face in ethical decision-making situations is moral distress. Moral distress is caused by the conflict between professional and individual values in decision-making situations. Despite its importance, there is no reliable scale in Persian to measure it. Therefore, this study was conducted to validate the moral distress scale in mental health nurses in Iranian culture and Persian language.MethodsThis study was conducted in two parts: Translation and cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric analysis. The translation and cross-cultural adaptation process was conducted based on the Polit approach. Next, face validity (qualitative), content validity (quantitative and qualitative), and construct validity were examined. This part of the study was a cross-sectional study. In this step, a demographic questionnaire and the Moral Distress Scale were sent to 500 nurses working in selected educational and medical centers in Iran via online questionnaires. Then, the construct validity of the "Moral Distress Scale" was confirmed by confirmatory factor analysis and the reliability of the instrument was examined by studying the internal consistency with Cronbach's alpha and the internal correlation of the AIC.ResultsThe confirmatory factor analysis showed an acceptable ratio of the expressions in 15 items in three factors: Acquiescence to patients' rights violations (6 items), Unethical conduct by caregivers (5 items), and low staffing (4 items) in the scale. The internal consistency of the instrument with Cronbach's alpha was higher than 7.0.ConclusionThe Persian version of moral distress with 15 items of the three factors had validity and reliability. According to the present findings, this scale can be used to study moral distress among nurses working in psychiatric wards. Moral distress leads to burnout, increases risks to patient safety and reduces quality of care. Nurses need to be able to assess and manage moral distress. Therefore, considering the side effects, it is necessary to have a reliable and valid scale that can be studied. Considering that culture has an impact on nurses' moral distress, it is suggested that this instrument be studied in and tested in other languages and cultures.

Project description:BackgroundNovel virus outbreaks, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, may increase psychological distress among frontline workers. Psychological distress may lead to reduced performance, reduced employability or even burnout. In the present study, we assessed experienced psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic from a self-determination theory perspective.MethodsThis mixed-methods study, with repeated measures, used surveys (quantitative data) combined with audio diaries (qualitative data) to assess work-related COVID-19 experiences, psychological need satisfaction and frustration, and psychological distress over time. Forty-six participants (nurses, junior doctors, and consultants) completed 259 surveys and shared 60 audio diaries. Surveys and audio diaries were analysed separately.ResultsQuantitative results indicated that perceived psychological distress during COVID-19 was higher than pre-COVID-19 and fluctuated over time. Need frustration, specifically autonomy and competence, was positively associated with psychological distress, while need satisfaction, especially relatedness, was negatively associated with psychological distress. In the qualitative, thematic analysis, we observed that especially organisational logistics (rostering, work-life balance, and internal communication) frustrated autonomy, and unfamiliarity with COVID-19 frustrated competence. Despite many need frustrating experiences, a strong connection with colleagues and patients were important sources of relatedness support (i.e. need satisfaction) that seemed to mitigate psychological distress.ConclusionThe COVID-19 pandemic resulted in an increase of psychological distress among frontline workers. Both need frustration and need satisfaction explained unique variance of psychological distress, but seemed to originate from different sources. Challenging times require healthcare organisations to better support their professionals by tailored formal and informal support. We propose to address both indirect (e.g. organisation) and direct (e.g. colleagues) elements of the clinical and social environment in order to reduce need frustration and enhance need satisfaction.

Project description:BackgroundAs some countries announced to remove Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) border, it indicates that the COVID-19 may have entered its terminal stage. In this COVID-19 pandemic, the mental health of frontline healthcare workers (HCWs) experienced unprecedented challenges. However, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health among frontline HCWs lacks a high-quality and long-term systematic review and meta-analysis.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis according to PRISMA guidelines. The system searches EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, ScienceNet, and ERIC. Analyze the mental health problems of frontline HCWs in different regions and periods, including insomnia, stress, anxiety and depression. This study was registered in PROSPERO under the number CRD42021253821.ResultsA total of 19 studies on the effects of COVID-19 pandemic on mental health among frontline HCWs were included in this study. The overall prevalence of insomnia was 42.9% (95% CI, 33.9-51.9%, I 2 = 99.0%) extracted from data from 14 cross-sectional studies (n = 10 127), 1 cohort study (n = 4,804), and 1 randomized controlled trial (RCT; n = 482) in 10 countries. The overall prevalence of stress was 53.0% (95% CI, 41.1-64.9%, I 2 = 78.3%) extracted from data from nine cross-sectional studies (n = 5,494) and 1 RCT study (n = 482) from eight countries. The overall prevalence of anxiety and depression was 43.0% (95% CI, 33.8-52.3%, I 2 = 99.0%) and 44.6% (95% CI, 36.1-53.1%, I 2 = 99.0%) extracted from data from 17 cross-sectional studies (n = 11,727), one cohort study (n = 4,804), and one RCT study (n = 482) from 12 countries. The prevalence of stress and depression was higher in 2020, while the prevalence of insomnia and anxiety was higher in 2021. The prevalence of mental health problems among physicians was higher than that of other frontline HCWs. The prevalence of mental health problems among frontline HCWs is higher in South America and lower in North America.ConclusionsThis systematic review and meta-analysis showed that the COVID-19 pandemic have significant effects on mental health among frontline HCWs. The overall prevalence of insomnia, stress, anxiety and depression among frontline HCWs is high. Therefore, the health policy-makers should pay attention to and respond to the mental health problems of frontline HCWs in the context of public health emergencies.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/.

Project description:BackgroundHealthcare workers (HCWs) from COVID-19 hotspots worldwide have reported poor mental health outcomes since the pandemic's beginning. The virulence of the initial COVID-19 surge in Spain and the urgency for rapid evidence constrained early studies in their capacity to inform mental health programs accurately. Here, we used a qualitative research design to describe relevant mental health problems among frontline HCWs and explore their association with determinants and consequences and their implications for the design and implementation of mental health programs.Materials and methodsFollowing the Programme Design, Implementation, Monitoring, and Evaluation (DIME) protocol, we used a two-step qualitative research design to interview frontline HCWs, mental health experts, administrators, and service planners in Spain. We used Free List (FL) interviews to identify problems experienced by frontline HCWs and Key informant (KI) interviews to describe them and explore their determinants and consequences, as well as the strategies considered useful to overcome these problems. We used a thematic analysis approach to analyze the interview outputs and framed our results into a five-level social-ecological model (intrapersonal, interpersonal, organizational, community, and public health).ResultsWe recruited 75 FL and 22 KI interviewees, roughly balanced in age and gender. We detected 56 themes during the FL interviews and explored the following themes in the KI interviews: fear of infection, psychological distress, stress, moral distress, and interpersonal conflicts among coworkers. We found that interviewees reported perceived causes and consequences across problems at all levels (intrapersonal to public health). Although several mental health strategies were implemented (especially at an intrapersonal and interpersonal level), most mental health needs remained unmet, especially at the organizational, community, and public policy levels.ConclusionsIn keeping with available quantitative evidence, our findings show that mental health problems are still relevant for frontline HCWs 1 year after the COVID-19 pandemic and that many reported causes of these problems are modifiable. Based on this, we offer specific recommendations to design and implement mental health strategies and recommend using transdiagnostic, low-intensity, scalable psychological interventions contextually adapted and tailored for HCWs.

Project description:AimThe present study is an attempt to investigate the relationship between Corley's model variables in mental health nurses.BackgroundBased on Corley's model, burnout and moral distress in nurses are, in retrospect, the consequences of the interplay of organizational and individual factors such as perceived organizational justice, moral sensitivity, and moral courage. The relationship between two variables or three variables of Corley's moral distress model has been investigated, but the test of Corley's moral distress model with more variables has not been done. Therefore, this research was proposed with the aim of investigating the relationship between the variables of moral courage and moral sensitivity (as characteristics of nurses), perceived organizational justice (as an antecedent), moral distress, and job burnout (as consequences of moral distress).MethodsThe study was conducted as a descriptive correlational study involving 500 nurses working in the mental health wards of hospitals. Data collection was conducted using perceived organizational justice scale, moral sensitivity scale, moral courage scale, moral distress scale, and burnout inventory.ResultsThe results showed a significant relationship between perceived organizational justice, moral sensitivity, moral courage, and moral distress (< 0.05). Moreover, perceived organizational justice and moral distress had an inverse relationship. Moral sensitivity and moral courage had a direct relationship with moral distress (< 0.05). Furthermore, the results showed inadequate model fitness.ConclusionsThis study adds to the existing knowledge about the experiences of mental health nurses and their interactions with both organizational and individual factors. It highlights that the connections between perceived organizational justice, moral sensitivity, moral courage, moral distress, and burnout are intricate and multifaceted. As we deepen our understanding of these relationships, it opens the door for the development of interventions and strategies to enhance nurses' well-being and the quality of care they deliver in mental health settings. Moreover, future research and ongoing refinement and expansion of Corley's model will be crucial in addressing the complex challenges within the healthcare sector.