Healthcare worker

医护人员
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    在COVID-19大流行期间,持久的心理健康对医护人员的影响越来越明显。这篇综述的重点是拉丁美洲医护人员面临的大流行后心理健康挑战。这凸显了医护人员的持续负担,尤其是女性,经济差距加剧了这种情况,医疗系统的不足,和持续的职业压力源。我们的文献综述,利用PubMed等数据库,Scopus,和谷歌学者,在大流行高峰之后,该地区医疗保健专业人员的心理健康状况进行了审查。分析表明持续的心理困扰,一线工人和妇女继续受到不成比例的影响。这些发现强调了迫切需要个性化干预措施,以有效解决这种情况下复杂的心理健康挑战。这篇评论提倡战略干预,包括量身定制的心理支持,创新诊断,和技术解决方案,融入以患者为中心的护理模式。这些方法旨在增强后COVID时代拉丁美洲医疗保健专业人员的心理韧性和整体福祉。
    Over the COVID-19 pandemic, the impact of enduring mental health on healthcare workers has become increasingly evident. This review focuses on post-pandemic mental health challenges faced by healthcare personnel in Latin America. This highlights the persistent burden on healthcare workers, especially women, which is exacerbated by economic disparities, inadequacies in the healthcare system, and ongoing occupational stressors. Our literature review, utilizing databases such as PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar, scrutinized the mental health status of healthcare professionals in the region after the pandemic\'s peak. The analysis indicated sustained levels of psychological distress, with frontline workers and women continuing to be affected disproportionately. These findings emphasize the urgent need for personalized interventions to effectively address the complex mental health challenges in this context. This review advocates strategic interventions, including tailored psychological support, innovative diagnostics, and technological solutions, integrated into patient-centered care models. Such approaches aim to enhance the mental resilience and overall well-being of healthcare professionals across Latin America in the post-COVID era.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    医护人员的手部卫生依从性对于预防医疗机构中的感染至关重要。这项系统评价和荟萃分析旨在评估东地中海地区的医护人员对手部卫生指南的遵守情况,并综合有关改善手部卫生策略成功率的证据。五个电子数据库(PubMed,CINAHL,科克伦,WebofScience,和Scopus)被搜索到2020年8月。如果在东地中海地区进行,则包括文章。对收录论文的参考清单进行了手动搜索,并审查了相关的其他参考文献。两名审稿人独立筛选文章,执行数据提取,并评估质量。进行了荟萃分析,以综合发现并确定手卫生依从性干预措施的患病率。搜索产生了6678篇文章。删除重复项并应用纳入/排除标准后,包括42篇文章,其中24项进行了荟萃分析。荟萃分析显示,依从性患病率为32%,具有显着的异质性(I2=99.7%p<0.001)。使用世界卫生组织(WHO)指南的干预措施提高依从率的可能性高出两倍以上(OR=2.26,[95%CI:(2.09-2.44)],I2=95%,p<0.001)与无干预相比。其他干预措施提高依从率的可能性接近两倍(OR=1.84,[95%CI:(1.66-2.04)],I2=98%p=0.001)。东地中海地区大约三分之二的医疗保健提供者不符合标准的手部卫生习惯,强调需要加大努力,意识,观察,和控制政策。
    Hand hygiene compliance among healthcare workers is crucial for preventing infections in healthcare settings. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the compliance of healthcare workers in the Eastern Mediterranean region with hand hygiene guidelines and synthesize evidence on the success rate of strategies to improve hand hygiene. Five electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Scopus) were searched up to August 2020. Articles were included if they were conducted in the Eastern Mediterranean Region. A manual search was conducted for reference lists of included papers, and relevant additional references were reviewed. Two reviewers independently screened articles for inclusion, performed data extraction, and assessed quality. A meta-analysis was conducted to synthesize findings and determine the prevalence of hand hygiene compliance interventions. The search yielded 6678 articles. After removing duplicates and applying inclusion/exclusion criteria, 42 articles were included, of which 24 were meta-analyzed. The meta-analysis showed a compliance prevalence of 32% with significant heterogeneity (I2= 99.7% p <0.001). Interventions using the World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines were over two times more likely to improve compliance rates (OR= 2.26, [95% CI:(2.09 - 2.44)], I2= 95%, p<0.001) compared to no intervention. Other interventions were close to two times more likely to improve compliance rates (OR= 1.84, [95% CI:(1.66 - 2.04)], I2= 98% p= 0.001). Approximately two-thirds of healthcare providers in the Eastern Mediterranean region were non-compliant with standard hand hygiene practices, highlighting the need for increased efforts, awareness, observation, and control policies.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Systematic Review
    目的:系统评估调查医护人员行为对冠状病毒临床领域感染预防和控制实践的影响的实证研究,并评估和综合这些发现。
    方法:文献系统综述。
    方法:评论使用了Khan等人描述的五步框架。(皇家医学学会杂志,2003,96和118)提出问题以供审查;确定相关工作;评估研究质量;总结证据;并解释发现。在CINHAL中进行了搜索,MEDLINE,心理信息,Scopus,和谷歌学术数据库,以检索2019年至2023年间以英语出版的相关同行评审文献。Covidence和JoannaBriggs质量评估工具用于关键评估。为了提高报告的透明度,这篇综述使用了系统综述指南中的无荟萃分析综合(SWiM),正如坎贝尔等人所告知的。(BMJ,2020,368)。
    结果:本综述纳入了20项研究,确定九个主题,描述影响HCWs在冠状病毒环境中对IPC实践的行为的因素。总体影响以知识为导向,以人为本,以环境为导向。
    结论:医护工作者的责任包括为高度传染性感染的患者提供直接护理,并在可能不适合IPC实践的临床环境中工作。增加传播风险。鉴于缺乏根除新的突变病毒的最终解决方案,以及IPC做法是预防和控制传播性病毒的主体,改进措施势在必行。针对IPC行为的已确定的HCW领域对于减轻风险的策略至关重要,并进一步为开发IPC模型提供了机会,该模型与出现或合并突变病毒爆发期间HCW所需的快速反应相一致。这很重要,鉴于HCW在护理点对IPC实践的准备是患者护理的核心,劳动力和社区安全。
    OBJECTIVE: To systematically evaluate empirical studies investigating the influences of healthcare workers\' behaviours towards infection prevention and control practices in the Coronavirus clinical space, and to appraise and synthesise these findings.
    METHODS: A systematic review of the literature.
    METHODS: The review used a five-step framework described by Khan et al. (Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 2003, 96 and 118) of Framing questions for a review; Identifying relevant work; Assessing the quality of studies; Summarising the evidence; and Interpreting the findings. Searches were conducted in CINHAL, MEDLINE, PsychINFO, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases to retrieve relevant peer-reviewed literature published in English between 2019 and 2023. Covidence and Joanna Briggs Quality appraisal tools were used for critical assessment. To improve transparent reporting, this review used a Synthesis Without Meta-analysis (SWiM) in systematic review guidelines, as informed by Campbell et al. (BMJ, 2020, 368).
    RESULTS: Twenty studies were included in this review, identifying nine themes describing factors influencing HCWs\' behaviours towards IPC practices in the coronavirus environment. The overarching influences emerged as knowledge-oriented, person-oriented, and environment-oriented.
    CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare workers\' responsibilities at point-of-care involve providing direct care to patients with highly transmissible infections and working in clinical settings that may be ill-designed for IPC practices, increasing the risk of transmission. Given the lack of a definitive solution to eradicate new mutant viruses and that IPC practices are the mainstay of prevention and control of transmissible, measures to improve are imperative. The identified HCWs\' domains on behaviours towards IPC are critical in strategies to mitigate risks and further set an opportunity for developing an IPC model congruent with the rapid response required for HCWs during emerging or re-merging mutant virus outbreaks. This is significant, given that HCWs\' preparedness with IPC practices at point-of-care is central to patient care, the workforce and community safety.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:医疗工作者(HCW)显著影响老年人的疫苗接受度。这项系统评价旨在确定针对医护人员的有效教育干预措施,以增强他们与老年人就疫苗接种进行对话的能力。
    方法:Medline,Scopus,在Cochrane图书馆和灰色文献中进行了比较研究,以调查有关老年人接种疫苗的教育干预措施。搜索涵盖所有语言和出版年份。对“提供或订购的疫苗”和“疫苗接种率”的结果进行分析。只要可行,对出版年份进行了分分析。使用RCT的RoB2和非随机研究的GRADE清单评估方法学局限性。研究结果根据四水平柯克帕特里克模型(1996)的有效性进行分类:反应,学习,行为,和结果。
    结果:总计,48项研究符合所有纳入标准。大多数研究包括提醒系统对接种疫苗的患者发出信号。其他干预措施包括研讨会,学术细节和同行比较反馈。四篇报告反应水平的文章表明,大多数HCW对干预措施持赞成态度。在报告学习水平的六篇文章中,有两篇观察到由于干预措施,态度或知识发生了积极变化。17项研究报告了行为水平。对17项研究中的11项进行了分析,重点是疫苗“订购”或“提供”的结果,这表明量身定制的提醒,特别是在2000年之前实施的那些措施是最有效的。在报告结果水平的34项研究中,24人符合结果“疫苗接种率”的分析条件,这表明与常规护理相比,多组分干预是最有效的,其次是量身定制的提醒,尤其是那些早于2000年的。尽管如此,与常规命令或患者提醒等其他干预措施相比,量身定制的提醒通常不足。在行为层面和结果层面,“仅教育”干预措施相对于其他干预措施往往表现不佳。27个RCT中有17个,21项非随机研究中有7项在研究结果中呈现低-中偏倚风险.
    结论:量身定制的提醒和多成分干预措施有效地帮助HCWs解决老年人的疫苗问题。然而,与其他干预措施相比,纯教育干预措施似乎效果较差,态度,知识。
    BACKGROUND: Healthcare workers (HCW) significantly influence older adults\' vaccine acceptance. This systematic review aimed to identify effective educational interventions for HCWs that could enhance their ability to engage in a dialogue with older adults on vaccination.
    METHODS: Medline, Scopus, Cochrane library and grey literature were searched for comparative studies investigating educational interventions concerning older adult vaccinations. The search encompassed all languages and publication years. Analysis was performed on the outcomes \'vaccines offered or ordered\' and \'vaccination rates\'. Whenever feasible, a sub-analysis on publication year was conducted. Methodological limitations were assessed using the RoB 2 for RCTs and the GRADE checklist for non-randomized studies. Study outcomes were categorized according to the four-level Kirkpatrick model (1996) for effectiveness: reaction, learning, behaviour, and results.
    RESULTS: In total, 48 studies met all inclusion criteria. Most studies included reminder systems signalling HCWs on patients due for vaccination. Other interventions included seminars, academic detailing and peer-comparison feedback. Four articles reporting on the reaction-level indicated that most HCWs had a favourable view of the intervention. Two of the six articles reporting on the learning-level observed positive changes in attitude or knowledge due to the intervention. Seventeen studies reported on the behaviour-level. An analysis on eleven out of seventeen studies focusing on vaccines \'ordered\' or \'offered\' outcomes suggested that tailored reminders, particularly those implemented before 2000, were the most effective. Out of 34 studies reporting on the result-level, 24 were eligible for analysis on the outcome \'vaccination rate\', which showed that compared to usual care, multicomponent interventions were the most effective, followed by tailored reminders, especially those predating 2000. Nonetheless, tailored reminders often fell short compared to other interventions like standing orders or patient reminders. In both the behaviour-level and result-level \'education only\' interventions frequently underperformed relative to other interventions. Seventeen out of the 27 RCTs, and seven of the 21 non-randomized studies presented a low-to-medium risk for bias in the studies\' findings.
    CONCLUSIONS: Tailored reminders and multicomponent interventions effectively assist HCWs in addressing vaccines with older adults. However, education-only interventions appear to be less effective compared to other interventions rates, attitude, knowledge.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Meta-Analysis
    医护人员(HCWs)被认为是发展手部湿疹(HE)的高危人群,主要是由于潮湿的工作和接触过敏原在工作。荟萃分析HE在HCWs中的患病率和发病率,以及在HCW中绘制特应性皮炎(AD)的患病率和HE严重程度。根据2020年系统评价和荟萃分析指南的首选报告项目进行系统评价和荟萃分析。根据预定义的纳入和排除标准,2000年至2022年发表的文献符合资格。共纳入18项研究。集合的生活时间,HCW中自我报告HE的1年和点患病率为33.4%(95%置信区间[CI]:28.3-38.6),27.4%(95%CI:19.3-36.5)和13.5%(95%CI:9.3-18.4),分别。AD患病率为15.4%(95%CI:11.3-19.9)。总的来说,大多数HCWs报告轻度HE。一项纳入研究评估HE发病率报告34例/1000人年。大多数研究使用新渥太华量表得分低-中度,汇总点患病率数据显示宽CI。总之,HE在HCWs中的高患病率凸显了这一专业人群的风险增加和预防措施的必要性.有,然而,需要进一步标准化的高质量研究。
    Healthcare workers (HCWs) are considered a high-risk group for developing hand eczema (HE), mainly owing to wet work and contact with allergens at work. To meta-analyse the prevalence and incidence of HE in HCWs, as well as mapping the prevalence of atopic dermatitis (AD) and HE severity in HCWs. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses 2020 guidelines. Published literature from 2000 to 2022 was eligible based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. A total of 18 studies were included. Pooled life-time, 1-year and point prevalence of self-reported HE in HCWs was 33.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 28.3-38.6), 27.4% (95% CI: 19.3-36.5) and 13.5% (95% CI: 9.3-18.4), respectively. AD prevalence was 15.4% (95% CI: 11.3-19.9). Overall, the majority of HCWs reported mild HE. One included study assessed HE incidence reporting 34 cases/1000 person years. Most studies scored low-moderate using the New Ottawa Scale and the pooled point prevalence data showed broad CIs. In conclusion, the high prevalence of HE in HCWs underlines the increased risk and need for preventive measures for this professional group. There is, however, a need of further standardized high-quality studies.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Systematic Review
    目的:通过混合方法系统评价(MMSR)分析医疗保健提供者(HCP)在性保健方面的经验。
    背景:乳腺癌幸存者(BCS)的性健康变得越来越重要,因为幸存者的寿命更长。HCP在提供性保健方面至关重要。
    方法:混合方法系统综述。
    方法:文献检索在MEDLINE数据库中进行,CINAHL,心理学与行为科学合集,WebofScience,科克伦图书馆,Scopus,从开始到2022年12月30日,搜索了ClinicalTrials.gov和参考列表。两名独立审阅者使用JBIMMSR指南提取并分析了数据。
    结果:在筛选2849篇引文后,19项研究符合MMSR的条件,涉及2068个HCP。大多数HCP认为性保健是他们的责任。然而,性健康没有得到充分解决。缺乏知识是提供性保健的最大障碍。此外,HCP希望获得更多知识,并认为当前的性保健培训不足。
    结论:研究结果表明,HCP并不经常解决BCS中的性健康问题,缺乏知识是最常见的障碍。医疗保健会议管理员应为提供多种格式的性医疗保健培训分配资源,可访问的内容和便利。他们也应该是多方面的,积极主动的,满足BCS在不同阶段的多样化需求,注重有效沟通。
    结论:这项研究强调了在BCS中解决性健康问题的重要性,以及HCP接受这方面培训的必要性。培训应该是多方面的,积极主动,满足不同阶段BCS的多样化需求,注重有效沟通。通过解决这个问题,HCP将更好地支持BCS的性健康需求,最终改善他们的整体福祉和生活质量。PROSPERO注册号:CRD42022327018(https://www.crd.约克。AC.uk/prospro/display_record.php?RecordID=327018)。
    OBJECTIVE: To analyse healthcare providers\' (HCPs) experiences in sexual health care through the mixed-methods systematic review (MMSR).
    BACKGROUND: Sexual health for breast cancer survivors (BCSs) is becoming increasingly important as survivors live longer. HCPs are critical in providing sexual health care.
    METHODS: A mixed-methods systematic review.
    METHODS: Literature searches were conducted in databases MEDLINE, CINAHL, Psychology & Behavioral Sciences Collection, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov and reference lists were searched from inception to 30 December 2022. Two independent reviewers extracted and analysed the data using the JBI guidelines for MMSR.
    RESULTS: After screening for 2849 citations, 19 studies were eligible for MMSR, involving 2068 HCPs. Most HCPs believe that sexual health care is their responsibility. However, sexual health was not adequately addressed. A lack of knowledge was the most significant barrier to providing sexual health care. Moreover, HCPs would like to acquire more knowledge and felt that current sexual healthcare training was inadequate.
    CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that HCPs did not frequently address sexual health in BCSs and that lack of knowledge was the most common barrier. Healthcare session administrators should allocate resources for sexual healthcare training that offer multiple formats, accessible content and convenience. They should also be multifaceted and proactive, meet the diverse needs of BCS at different stages and focus on effective communication.
    CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the importance of addressing sexual health in BCSs and the need for HCPs to receive training in this area. Training should be multifaceted, proactive and meet the diverse needs of BCSs at different stages, with a focus on effective communication. By addressing this issue, HCPs will be better equipped to support the sexual health needs of BCSs, ultimately improving their overall well-being and quality of life. PROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42022327018 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=327018).
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Systematic Review
    目的:绘制癌症护士工作相关研究的关键概念,并确定知识差距。
    方法:在PubMed®中进行了搜索,CINAHL®,和PsycINFO®数据库,用于在2023年3月之前发表的有关癌症护士和工作相关主题的文章。
    方法:使用系统评价和Meta分析的首选报告项目扩展范围评价检查表报告结果,并使用JBI关键评估工具来评估研究质量。共包括11篇文章。
    结果:确定了以下四个关键概念:工作中的角色调整,癌症对工作的影响,组织支持,并将从癌症经验中获得的见解转化为工作。范围审查发现的研究差距是缺乏理论或概念框架,缺乏主要思想的综合,并且缺乏有关研究参与者社会经济状况的明确数据。
    结论:存在最少的研究来映射预测因子,结果,或干预目标,以指导组织策略,以支持护士在护理队伍中的保留。一个指导框架,招募不同的护士,并将重点放在本次范围界定审查中确定的四个关键概念上,建议用于未来的研究。
    OBJECTIVE: To map key concepts underpinning work-related studies about nurses with cancer and identify knowledge gaps.
    METHODS: A search was conducted in the PubMed®, CINAHL®, and PsycINFO® databases for articles about nurses with cancer and work-related topics published through March 2023.
    METHODS: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews Checklist was used to report results, and the JBI critical appraisal tools were used to assess the quality of studies. Eleven articles were included.
    RESULTS: The following four critical concepts were identified: role adjustments at work, cancer impacts on work, organizational support, and translating insights gained from cancer experience into work. Research gaps identified by the scoping review were a lack of theoretical or conceptual frameworks, lack of syntheses of main ideas, and lack of clear data about participants\' socioeconomic status across studies.
    CONCLUSIONS: Minimal research exists to map predictors, outcomes, or intervention targets to guide organizational strategies to support nurses\' retention in the nursing workforce. A guiding framework, recruitment of diverse nurses, and focus on the four critical concepts identified in this scoping review are suggested for future research.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:职业倦怠和社会心理困扰是全球医护人员(HCWs)和医疗保健系统面临的严重且日益严重的问题。新冠肺炎大流行期间和之后医疗保健服务的变化加剧了这种情况,这些问题会对HCW的福祉产生负面影响,临床结果和患者安全。艺术疗法已被证明是一种合适但正在研究的干预措施,保证进一步调查。本系统综述旨在确定在健康和社会护理文献中报道了哪些基于艺术疗法的干预措施来解决HCW的倦怠和/或社会心理困扰,以及如何评估这些干预措施。
    方法:六个数据库(PubMed,PsycINFO,MEDLINE,EMBASE,CINAHL,ProQuestCentral),谷歌学者和三个临床试验注册中心(CENTRAL,搜索了ICTRP和ClinicalTrials.gov),以使用基于艺术疗法的方法进行研究,以解决HCW中的倦怠风险或心理社会困扰。筛选合格性之后,由两名评审员独立提取研究特征和结果。使用JoannaBriggs研究所(JBI)关键评估工具对研究进行了评估。结果进行分组分析。使用叙事合成对定量和定性结果进行综合和整合。
    结果:27项研究,来自十三个国家,横跨五大洲被选中列入名单。百分之五十是在过去五年发表的,表明该领域的全球研究正在增长。14项研究采用定量研究方法,13项研究采用定性研究方法。共有1580名参与者参加了这项研究,护士代表最广泛(59%)。干预措施主要以小组(95%)和艺术治疗师(70%)进行。异质性和随机对照试验不足排除了荟萃分析的可能性。然而,对现有数据的审查显示,情绪疲惫(倦怠)有中等到大的影响,与工作有关的压力和常见的心理健康问题。对感知效果的定性数据的内容分析补充了定量结果。
    结论:关于使用基于艺术疗法的方法来解决医护人员职业倦怠和社会心理困扰的全球研究正在增长。虽然进一步的高质量证据,如随机对照试验将是有益的,研究结果表明,基于艺术治疗的方法应被视为一种可接受且有效的治疗HCW的情绪衰竭(倦怠)和社会心理困扰症状的方法。
    BACKGROUND: Burnout and psychosocial distress are serious and growing issues for healthcare workers (HCWs) and healthcare systems across the globe. Exacerbated by changes in healthcare delivery during and following the Covid-19 pandemic, these issues negatively affect HCW wellbeing, clinical outcomes and patient safety. Art Therapy has demonstrated promise as a suitable but under researched intervention, warranting further investigation. This systematic review aims to ascertain what art therapy-based interventions used to address burnout and / or psychosocial distress in HCWs have been reported in the health and social care literature and how these have been evaluated.
    METHODS: Six databases (PubMed, PsycINFO, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, ProQuest Central), Google Scholar and three clinical trial registries (CENTRAL, ICTRP and ClinicalTrials.gov) were searched for studies using art therapy-based methods to engage with burnout risk or psychosocial distress in HCWs. Following screening for eligibility study characteristics and outcomes were extracted by two reviewers independently. Studies were evaluated using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Tools. Outcomes were grouped for analysis. Quantitative and qualitative results were synthesised and integrated using narrative synthesis.
    RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies, drawn from thirteen countries, spanning five continents were selected for inclusion. Fifty percent were published in the last five years, indicating growing global research in the field. Fourteen studies used quantitative research methods and thirteen used qualitative methods. A total of 1580 participants took part in the studies, with nurses most broadly represented (59%). Interventions were mostly delivered in groups (95%) and by an art therapist (70%). Heterogeneity and insufficient randomised controlled trials precluded the possibility of meta-analysis. However, a review of available data showed evidence of medium to large effects for emotional exhaustion (burnout), work-related stress and common mental health issues. A content analysis of qualitative data of perceived effect complemented quantitative findings.
    CONCLUSIONS: Global research into the use of art therapy-based methods to address burnout and psychosocial distress in HCWs is growing. Whilst further high-quality evidence such as randomised controlled trials would be beneficial, findings suggest that art therapy-based methods should be strongly considered as an acceptable and effective treatment for symptoms of emotional exhaustion (burnout) and psychosocial distress in HCWs.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Review
    背景:在COVID-19大流行期间,由于隔离政策和控制措施,学生和工人遭受的心理困扰程度增加。此范围审查旨在概述已发表的有关非心理健康相关问题以及大流行期间学生和工人的心理健康相关问题的正式和非正式求助意图/行为的证据。
    方法:2022年6月,我们搜索了MEDLINE,APAPsycNet,和CINAHL,用于报道大流行期间学生和工人寻求帮助的意图/行为状况的文章。选择了以英语发表的同行评审的原始文章。
    结果:总计,确定了150篇文章,在剔除符合排除标准的文章后,选择12篇文章进行最终分析.三项研究针对大学生,和9名目标医护人员。研究环境仅限于西方国家和中国。在12项研究中,11项是观察性研究,主要是横断面研究。两项使用学生样本的纵向研究表明,与之前相比,在COVID-19大流行期间,大学生变得更加不愿意从正式和非正式来源寻求帮助,尽管大流行期间对支持的需求增加。在医护人员中,亲自从正式来源寻求帮助的人的比例很低(7-26%),即使是那些有心理健康问题的人,尽管对精神卫生服务的需求有所增加。一项随机对照研究报告说,与非干预组相比,干预组的简短视频干预增加了医护人员寻求治疗的意愿。
    结论:本综述显示,尽管最终分析中包含的大多数研究都是横断面的,大学生从正式和非正式来源寻求帮助的意图/行为有所下降,即使是那些有心理健康问题的人。在医护人员中,虽然亲自从正式来源寻求帮助的频率很低,有人建议进行简短的在线干预,以促进从正式来源寻求帮助。在COVID-19大流行等公共卫生危机期间,在线求助服务的系统和基础设施开发可能会促进各种问题的正式和非正式求助意图/行为,包括与精神健康无关的问题,在大学生和医护人员/提供者中。
    BACKGROUND: Students and workers have been subjected to increased levels of psychological distress due to the quarantine policy and containment measures during the COVID-19 pandemic. This scoping review aimed to present an overview of published evidence regarding formal and informal help-seeking intentions/behaviors for non-mental health-related issues as well as mental health-related issues among students and workers during the pandemic.
    METHODS: In June 2022, we searched MEDLINE, APA PsycNet, and CINAHL for articles reporting the state of help-seeking intentions/behaviors among students and workers during the pandemic. Peer-reviewed original articles published in English were selected.
    RESULTS: In total, 150 articles were identified, and 12 articles were selected for final analysis after removing articles that met the exclusion criteria. Three studies targeted university students, and nine targeted healthcare workers. Study settings were restricted to Western countries and China. Of the 12 studies, 11 were observational and predominantly cross-sectional studies. Two longitudinal studies using student samples suggested that university students became more reluctant to seek help from both formal and informal sources during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to before, despite the increased need for support during the pandemic. Among healthcare workers, the proportions of those who sought help from formal sources in person were low (7-26%), even among those with mental health issues, despite the increase in the need for mental health services. One randomized controlled study reported that a brief video-based intervention increased treatment-seeking intentions among healthcare workers in the intervention group compared with the non-intervention group.
    CONCLUSIONS: The present review revealed that, although most studies included in the final analysis were cross-sectional, intentions/behaviors to seek help from both formal and informal sources decreased among university students, even those with mental health issues. Among healthcare workers, while the frequency of help-seeking from formal sources in person was low, a brief online intervention was suggested to be useful for promoting help-seeking from formal sources. During public health crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic, system and infrastructure development of online help-seeking services could potentially promote formal and informal help-seeking intentions/behaviors for diverse issues, including non-mental health-related issues, among university students and healthcare workers/providers.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    简介:旨在改善医院安全文化的干预措施可以促进组织环境,防止患者安全事件发生,并在事件发生时支持组织和员工学习。安全文化支持所需的卫生人力行为和规范,以实现安全的患者护理,以及患者和工作人员的福祉。已经建立了安全文化干预措施对员工对安全文化和患者预后的看法的影响。到目前为止,然而,对于哪些员工成果与改善安全文化的干预措施相关,以及应衡量哪些员工成果,目前尚无共识。目标:该研究旨在检查安全文化干预措施对医院工作人员的影响,全球。方法和分析:将根据系统评价和荟萃分析(PRISMA)指南的首选报告项目进行混合方法系统评价。将使用MEDLINE的电子数据库进行搜索,EMBASE,CINAHL,健康商业精英,还有Scopus.退货将根据纳入和排除标准在Covidence中进行筛选。混合方法评估工具(MMAT)将用作质量评估工具。CochraneCollaboration用于评估随机试验和非随机干预研究中偏倚风险的工具将用于验证偏倚。综合将遵循乔安娜·布里格斯研究所关于混合方法审查的方法学指导,它建议采用聚合方法进行合成和集成。讨论:本系统评价将有助于提供国际证据,说明改善安全文化的干预措施如何支持员工的成果,以及如何适当设计和实施此类干预措施。
    Introduction: Interventions designed to improve safety culture in hospitals foster organisational environments that prevent patient safety events and support organisational and staff learning when events do occur. A safety culture supports the required health workforce behaviours and norms that enable safe patient care, and the well-being of patients and staff. The impact of safety culture interventions on staff perceptions of safety culture and patient outcomes has been established. To-date, however, there is no common understanding of what staff outcomes are associated with interventions to improve safety culture and what staff outcomes should be measured. Objectives: The study seeks to examine the effect of safety culture interventions on staff in hospital settings, globally. Methods and Analysis: A mixed methods systematic review will be conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Searches will be conducted using the electronic databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Health Business Elite, and Scopus. Returns will be screened in Covidence according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. The mixed-methods appraisal tool (MMAT) will be used as a quality assessment tool. The Cochrane Collaboration\'s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials and non-randomised studies of interventions will be employed to verify bias. Synthesis will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute methodological guidance for mixed methods reviews, which recommends a convergent approach to synthesis and integration. Discussion: This systematic review will contribute to the international evidence on how interventions to improve safety culture may support staff outcomes and how such interventions may be appropriately designed and implemented.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号