28
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Can Schwartz Center Rounds support healthcare staff with emotional challenges at work, and how do they compare with other interventions aimed at providing similar support? A systematic review and scoping reviews

      systematic-review

      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

          Objectives

          (i) To synthesise the evidence-base for Schwartz Center Rounds (Rounds) to assess any impact on healthcare staff and identify key features; (ii) to scope evidence for interventions with similar aims, and compare effectiveness and key features to Rounds.

          Design

          Systematic review of Rounds literature; scoping reviews of comparator interventions (action learning sets; after action reviews; Balint groups; caregiver support programme; clinical supervision; critical incident stress debriefing; mindfulness-based stress reduction; peer-supported storytelling; psychosocial intervention training; reflective practice groups; resilience training).

          Data sources

          PsychINFO, CINAHL, MEDLINE and EMBASE, internet search engines; consultation with experts.

          Eligibility criteria

          Empirical evaluations (qualitative or quantitative); any healthcare staff in any healthcare setting; published in English.

          Results

          The overall evidence base for Rounds is limited. We developed a composite definition to aid comparison with other interventions from 41 documents containing a definition of Rounds. Twelve (10 studies) were empirical evaluations. All were of low/moderate quality (weak study designs including lack of control groups). Findings showed the value of Rounds to attenders, with a self-reported positive impact on individuals, their relationships with colleagues and patients and wider cultural changes. The evidence for the comparative interventions was scant and also low/moderate quality. Some features of Rounds were shared by other interventions, but Rounds offer unique features including being open to all staff and having no expectation for verbal contribution by attenders.

          Conclusions

          Evidence of effectiveness for all interventions considered here remains limited. Methods that enable identification of core features related to effectiveness are needed to optimise benefit for individual staff members and organisations as a whole. A systems approach conceptualising workplace well-being arising from both individual and environmental/structural factors, and comprising interventions both for assessing and improving the well-being of healthcare staff, is required. Schwartz Rounds could be considered as one strategy to enhance staff well-being.

          Related collections

          Most cited references46

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

          Minor psychiatric disorder in NHS trust staff: occupational and gender differences.

          It is widely suggested that many National Health Service (NHS) workers experience high levels of minor psychiatric disorder. However, inadequacies of sampling and measurement in studies to date have not allowed this suggestion to be properly evaluated. The present study was designed to overcome these methodological weaknesses by using a sample of over 11,000 employees from 19 NHS trusts and a well-established measure of minor psychiatric disorder for which there are comparative data. The findings show that 26.8% of the health service workers reported significant levels of minor psychiatric disorder, compared with 17.8% of people in the general population. Psychiatric morbidity was highest among managers, doctors, nurses and professions allied to medicine, with each of these groups recording higher rates than their professional counterparts outside the health service. It was lower among those in support occupations, such as administrative and ancillary staff. A feature of the findings was that female doctors and managers showed a much higher prevalence of minor psychiatric disorder than their male colleagues. Studies are required to establish the organisational, occupational and individual determinants of minor psychiatric disorder among NHS employees.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The Schwartz Center Rounds: evaluation of an interdisciplinary approach to enhancing patient-centered communication, teamwork, and provider support.

            To assess the impact of Schwartz Center Rounds, an interdisciplinary forum where attendees discuss psychosocial and emotional aspects of patient care. The authors investigated changes in attendees' self-reported behaviors and beliefs about patient care, sense of teamwork, stress, and personal support. In 2006-2007, researchers conducted retrospective surveys of attendees at six sites offering Schwartz Center Rounds ("the Rounds") for > or =3 years and prospective surveys of attendees at 10 new Rounds sites that have held > or =7 Rounds. Most of the retrospective survey respondents indicated that attending Rounds enhanced their likelihood of attending to psychosocial and emotional aspects of care and enhanced their beliefs about the importance of empathy. Respondents reported better teamwork, including heightened appreciation of the roles and contributions of colleagues. There were significant decreases in perceived stress (P < .001) and improvements in the ability to cope with the psychosocial demands of care (P < .05). In the prospective study, after control for presurvey differences, the more Rounds one attended, the greater the impact on postsurvey insights into psychosocial aspects of care and teamwork (both: P < .05). Respondents to both retrospective and prospective surveys described changes in institutional culture and greater focus on patient-centered care and institution-specific initiatives. Schwartz Center Rounds may foster enhanced communication, teamwork, and provider support. The impact on measured outcomes increased with the number of Rounds attended. The Rounds represent an effective strategy for providing support to health care professionals and for enhancing relationships among them and with their patients.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              'Poppets and parcels': the links between staff experience of work and acutely ill older peoples' experience of hospital care.

              Few empirical studies have directly examined the relationship between staff experiences of providing healthcare and patient experience. Present concerns over the care of older people in UK acute hospitals - and the reported attitudes of staff in such settings - highlight an important area of study. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES. To examine the links between staff experience of work and patient experience of care in a 'Medicine for Older People' (MfOP) service in England. A mixed methods case study undertaken over 8 months incorporating a 149-item staff survey (66/192 - 34% response rate), a 48-item patient survey (26/111 - 23%), 18 staff interviews, 18 patient and carer interviews and 41 hours of non-participant observation. Variation in patient experience is significantly influenced by staff work experiences. A high-demand/low-control work environment, poor staffing, ward leadership and co-worker relationships can each add to the inherent difficulties staff face when caring for acutely ill older people. Staff seek to alleviate the impact of such difficulties by finding personal satisfaction from caring for 'the poppets'; those patients they enjoy caring for and for whom they feel able to 'make a difference'. Other patients - noting dehumanising aspects of their care - felt like 'parcels'. Patients are aware of being seen by staff as 'difficult' or 'demanding' and seek to manage their relationships with nursing staff accordingly. The work experiences of staff in a MfOP service impacted directly on patient care experience. Poor ward and patient care climates often lead staff to seek job satisfaction through caring for 'poppets', leaving less favoured - and often more complex patients - to receive less personalised care. Implications for practice. Investment in staff well-being and ward climate is essential for the consistent delivery of high-quality care for older people in acute settings. © 2012 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Open
                bmjopen
                bmjopen
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2044-6055
                2018
                18 October 2018
                : 8
                : 10
                : e024254
                Affiliations
                [1 ] departmentSchool of Health Sciences , University of Surrey , Guildford, UK
                [2 ] departmentFlorence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery & Palliative Care , King’s College London , London, UK
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Dr. Cath Taylor; cath.taylor@ 123456surrey.ac.uk
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6239-4744
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2359-4337
                Article
                bmjopen-2018-024254
                10.1136/bmjopen-2018-024254
                6196967
                30341142
                db288248-bb3f-4f5f-bfca-19e5db3ac6d1
                © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2018. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.

                This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 17 May 2018
                : 27 July 2018
                : 23 August 2018
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100002001, Health Services and Delivery Research Programme;
                Categories
                Health Services Research
                Research
                1506
                1704
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                Medicine
                schwartz rounds,occupational stress,staff wellbeing,systematic review,compassion,reflection
                Medicine
                schwartz rounds, occupational stress, staff wellbeing, systematic review, compassion, reflection

                Comments

                Comment on this article