Dataset Information

The impact of providing end-of-life care during a pandemic on the mental health and wellbeing of health and social care staff: Systematic review and meta-synthesis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Disease outbreaks and disasters can result in excess deaths and severe disruption of usual end-of-life care processes. We aimed to: i) synthesise evidence describing the experiences of health and social care staff providing end-of-life care during a disease outbreak or humanitarian disaster, ii) understand the impact on their mental health and wellbeing and, iii) identify means of support.

Methods

A systematic review with meta-synthesis was conducted including studies of health and social care staff providing end-of-life care during disease outbreaks (Ebola, COVID-19, SARs, MERs) or humanitarian disasters (2001-2020). MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase, PsycInfo, Web of Science, and grey literature databases were searched systematically, with forward and backward citation searching of included studies. Any research study designs, in any care settings, were included. Study quality was assessed using an appraisal tool relevant to each study design. Qualitative meta-synthesis was used to analyse the findings, which were then reported narratively. PROSPERO registration: CRD42020181444.

Results

Nineteen studies were included, including 10 Ebola studies and two COVID-19 studies. The analysis generated two superordinate themes: individual experience and organisational responsibilities. Individual experience comprised four themes: dignity in death, positive experiences, negative experience and support for staff. Organisational responsibilities comprised four themes: preparation, adaption, resources, and Personal Protective Equipment (PPE).

Discussion

No studies quantitively measured the impact of providing end-of-life care on staff mental health and wellbeing, however qualitative studies described experiences in varied settings. Serious disease outbreaks and disasters can expose care staff to abnormally high levels of mortality and suffering. Health and social care systems need to proactively prepare for future events and enable peer support mechanisms that may help mitigate experiences of psychological distress in humanitarian crises.

SUBMITTER: Porter B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8445829 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDeath resulting from COVID-19 in a hospital during the pandemic has meant death in isolation. Although many health care providers (HCPs) have struggled with end-of-life (EOL) care for these patients, the various strategies across hospitals are not well known.Research questionWhat EOL care did HCPs give patients dying of COVID-19 and their families in hospitals during the COVID-19 pandemic? What were the key themes in care?Study design and methodsThis qualitative study used individual, semistructured, internet, and face-to-face interviews. We recruited HCPs who provided EOL care to patients with COVID-19 dying in hospitals and their families. Purposive sampling was used through the academic networks at the School of Public Health, Kyoto University. Anonymized verbatim transcripts were analyzed thematically.ResultsFifteen doctors and 18 nurses from 23 hospitals in 13 regions across Japan participated; 16 participants (48%) were women, with an age range of 20 to 59 years (most were 30-39 years of age). Participants described 51 strategies, including providing physical and psychological-spiritual care, making connections, providing death care, and arranging care environments and bereavement care for patients and their families. Four themes emerged as prominent efforts in COVID-19 EOL care: maintaining relationships with isolated patients, connecting patients and families, sharing decision-making in isolation, and creating humanistic episodes.InterpretationProper application and awareness of the four themes may help HCPs to implement better EOL care. To compensate for limited memories resulting from isolation and rapid progression of the disease, communicating and creating humanistic episodes are emphasized. ICU diaries and the HCPs' arrangements based on cultural funerary procedures could be provided as grief care for the family and to build trust. EOL education and building partnerships among palliative care staff and nonmedical personnel on a regular basis may enhance the capacity to deliver the necessary support for EOL care.

Project description:BackgroundEvidence consistently shows that people with advanced dementia experience suboptimal end of life care compared to those with cancer; with increased hospitalisation, inadequate pain control and fewer palliative care interventions. Understanding the views of those service managers and frontline staff who organise and provide care is crucial in order to develop better end of life care for people with dementia.Methods and findingsQualitative interviews and focus groups were conducted from 2013 to 2015 with 33 service managers and 54 staff involved in frontline care, including doctors, nurses, nursing and care home managers, service development leads, senior managers/directors, care assistants and senior care assistants/team leads. All were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Participants represented a diverse range of service types and occupation. Transcripts were subject to coding and thematic analysis in data meetings. Analysis of the data led to the development of seven key themes: Recognising end of life (EOL) and tools to support end of life care (EOLC), Communicating with families about EOL, Collaborative working, Continuity of care, Ensuring comfort at EOL, Supporting families, Developing and supporting staff. Each is discussed in detail and comprise individual and collective views on approaches to good end of life care for people with dementia.ConclusionsThe significant challenges of providing good end of life care for people with dementia requires that different forms of expertise should be recognised and used; including the skills and knowledge of care assistants. Successfully engaging with people with dementia and family members and helping them to recognise the dying trajectory requires a supportive integration of emotional and technical expertise. The study strengthens the existing evidence base in this area and will be used with a related set of studies (on the views of other stakeholders and observations and interviews conducted in four services) to develop an evidence-based intervention.

Project description:BackgroundPsychological distress is a major concern for patients with end-stage heart failure (HF). However, psychiatric care for patients with HF is not as organized as that for patients with cancer. Therefore, the aim of this study was to elucidate and compare the barriers faced by health care providers of cardiology and oncology hospitals in providing end-of-life psychiatric care to patients with HF and cancer, respectively.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional questionnaire survey among the health care providers of Japan. Questionnaires were mailed to physicians and nurses of 427 cardiology and 347 oncology hospitals in March 2018 to assess health care providers' perspectives. First, we compared the scores of the Palliative Care Difficulties Scale and the original scale of end-of-life psychiatric care difficulties between health care providers of cardiology and oncology hospitals. Second, we asked the health care providers to describe the barriers to providing end-of-life psychiatric care with an open-ended question and then compared the freely-provided descriptions using content analysis.ResultsA total of 213 cardiology and 224 oncology health care providers responded to the questionnaire. No significant differences were found between health care providers of cardiology and oncology hospitals in the frequency of experiencing barriers to providing end-of-life psychiatric care (59.8% and 62.2%, respectively). A content analysis identified the following eight barriers: "patients' personal problems," "family members' problems," "professionals' personal problems," "communication problems between professionals and patients," "problems specific to end-of-life care," "problems specific to psychiatric care," "problems of institution or system," and "problems specific to non-cancer patients." The "problems specific to noncancer patients" was described more frequently by health care providers in cardiology hospitals than that in oncology hospitals. However, there were no significant differences in other items between the two.ConclusionAlthough health care providers of both cardiology and oncology hospitals faced barriers to providing end-of-life psychiatric care, those of cardiology hospitals particularly faced challenges pertaining to non-cancer patients, such as unpredictability of prognosis or insufficiency of guideline development. A system of psychiatric care, specifically for patients with HF, should be established.

Project description:BackgroundResearch and policy have identified social cohesion as a potentially modifiable determinant of health and wellbeing that could contribute to more sustainable development. However, the function of social cohesion appears to vary between communities. The aim of this study was to analyse the levels of, and associations, between social cohesion, mental wellbeing, and physical and mental health-related quality of life among a cohort of social housing residents from low socioeconomic status communities in Cornwall, UK. Social housing is below market-rate rental accommodation made available to those in certain health or economic circumstances. These circumstances may impact on the form and function of social cohesion.MethodsDuring recruitment, participants in the Smartline project completed the Short Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale, SF-12v2 and an eight item social cohesion scale. Cross sectional regression analyses of these data adjusted for gender, age, national identity, area socioeconomic status, rurality, education, employment, and household size were undertaken to address the study aim.ResultsComplete data were available from 305 (92.7%) participants in the Smartline project. Univariable analyses identified a significant association between social cohesion, mental wellbeing and mental health-related quality of life. Within fully adjusted multivariable models, social cohesion only remained significantly associated with mental wellbeing. Sensitivity analyses additionally adjusting for ethnicity and duration of residence, where there was greater missing data, did not alter the findings.ConclusionsAmong a relatively homogeneous cohort, the reported level of social cohesion was only found to be significantly associated with higher mental wellbeing, not physical or mental health-related quality of life. The efforts made by social housing providers to offer social opportunities to all their residents regardless of individual physical or mental health state may support the development of a certain degree of social cohesion. Sense of control or safety in communities may be more critical to health than social cohesion. Additional observational research is needed before attempts are made to alter social cohesion to improve health.

Project description:ObjectivesTo explore the experiences of service users, carers and staff seeking or providing secondary mental health services during the COVID-19 pandemic.DesignQualitative interview study, codesigned with mental health service users and carers.MethodsWe conducted semistructured, telephone or online interviews with a purposively constructed sample; a lived experience researcher conducted and analysed interviews with service users. Analysis was based on the constant comparison method.SettingNational Health Service (NHS) secondary mental health services in England between June and August 2020.ParticipantsOf 65 participants, 20 had either accessed or needed to access English secondary mental healthcare during the pandemic; 10 were carers of people with mental health difficulties; 35 were members of staff working in NHS secondary mental health services during the pandemic.ResultsExperiences of remote care were mixed. Some service users valued the convenience of remote methods in the context of maintaining contact with familiar clinicians. Most participants commented that a lack of non-verbal cues and the loss of a therapeutic 'safe space' challenged therapeutic relationship building, assessments and identification of deteriorating mental well-being. Some carers felt excluded from remote meetings and concerned that assessments were incomplete without their input. Like service users, remote methods posed challenges for clinicians who reported uncertainty about technical options and a lack of training. All groups expressed concern about intersectionality exacerbating inequalities and the exclusion of some service user groups if alternatives to remote care are lost.ConclusionsThough remote mental healthcare is likely to become increasingly widespread in secondary mental health services, our findings highlight the continued importance of a tailored, personal approach to decision making in this area. Further research should focus on which types of consultations best suit face-to-face interaction, and for whom and why, and which can be provided remotely and by which medium.