0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Effectiveness of mindfulness-based interventions on the well-being of healthcare workers: a systematic review and meta-analysis

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Growing evidence attests to the efficacy of mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs), but their effectiveness for healthcare workers remains uncertain.

          Aims

          To evaluate the evidence for MBIs in improving healthcare workers’ psychological well-being.

          Methods

          A systematic literature search was conducted on Medline, Embase, Cumulative Index for Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials up to 31 August 2022 using the keywords ‘healthcare worker’, ‘doctor’, ‘nurse’, ‘allied health’, ‘mindfulness’, ‘wellness’, ‘workshop’ and ‘program’. Randomised controlled trials with a defined MBI focusing on healthcare workers and quantitative outcome measures related to subjective or psychological well-being were eligible for inclusion. R V.4.0.3 was used for data analysis, with the standardised mean difference as the primary outcome, employing DerSimonian and Laird’s random effects model. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework was used to evaluate the quality of evidence. Cochrane’s Risk of Bias 2 tool was used to assess the risk of bias in the included studies.

          Results

          A total of 27 studies with 2506 participants were included, mostly from the USA, involving various healthcare professions. MBIs such as stress reduction programmes, apps, meditation and training showed small to large effects on anxiety, burnout, stress, depression, psychological distress and job strain outcomes of the participants. Positive effects were also seen in self-compassion, empathy, mindfulness and well-being. However, long-term outcomes (1 month or longer postintervention) varied, and the effects were not consistently sustained.

          Conclusions

          MBIs offer short-term benefits in reducing stress-related symptoms in healthcare workers. The review also highlights limitations such as intervention heterogeneity, reduced power in specific subgroup analyses and variable study quality.

          PROSPERO registration number

          CRD42022353340.

          Related collections

          Most cited references61

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

          The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update to the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to facilitate implementation. In this article, we present the PRISMA 2020 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and the revised flow diagrams for original and updated reviews.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Meta-analysis in clinical trials

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Gen Psychiatr
                Gen Psychiatr
                gpsych
                gpsych
                General Psychiatry
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2517-729X
                2024
                7 May 2024
                : 37
                : 3
                : e101115
                Affiliations
                [1 ] departmentNUS Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine , Ringgold_63751National University of Singapore , Singapore
                [2 ] departmentHealth Services Research Unit , Ringgold_37581Singapore General Hospital , Singapore
                [3 ] departmentSingHealth Duke-NUS Medicine Academic Clinical Programme , Duke-NUS Medical School , Singapore
                [4 ] Singhealth Duke-NUS Global Health Institute , Singapore
                [5 ] departmentDuke Global Health Institute , Duke University , Durham, North Carolina, USA
                [6 ] departmentDivision of Surgery and Surgical Oncology , Singapore General Hospital , Singapore
                [7 ] departmentSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health , National University of Singapore and National University Health System , Singapore
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Dr Qin Xiang Ng; ng.qin.xiang@ 123456u.nus.edu
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6712-5535
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8565-2926
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8561-2513
                Article
                gpsych-2023-101115
                10.1136/gpsych-2023-101115
                11086195
                38737894
                825fbd9c-6e32-410d-8da0-df4b69f8d8ce
                © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

                This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See:  http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

                History
                : 11 May 2023
                : 07 March 2024
                Categories
                Meta-Analysis
                1506
                2624
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                mood disorders,psychology, medical,public health administration,psychology, applied

                Comments

                Comment on this article