Testing an Intervention to Improve Health Care Worker Well-Being During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Author:

Meredith Lisa S.1,Ahluwalia Sangeeta1,Chen Peggy G.1,Dong Lu1,Farmer Carrie M.2,Bouskill Kathryn E.1,Dalton Sarah1,Qureshi Nabeel1,Blagg Tara1,Timmins George1,Schulson Lucy B.34,Huilgol Shreya S.4,Han Bing5,Williamson Stephanie1,Watson Patricia6,Schnurr Paula P.67,Martineau Monique8,Davis Katie9,Cassells Andrea10,Tobin Jonathan N.1011,Gidengil Courtney4

Affiliation:

1. RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California

2. RAND Corporation, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

3. Section of General Internal Medicine, Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts

4. RAND Corporation, Boston, Massachusetts

5. Department of Research & Evaluation, Southern California Kaiser Permanente, Pasadena

6. National Center for PTSD, White River Junction, Vermont

7. Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, New Hampshire

8. RAND Corporation, Arlington, Virginia

9. Vizient Inc, Irving, Texas

10. Clinical Directors Network, New York, New York

11. The Rockefeller University Center for Clinical and Translational Science, New York, New York

Abstract

ImportanceStress First Aid is an evidence-informed peer-to-peer support intervention to mitigate the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the well-being of health care workers (HCWs).ObjectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness of a tailored peer-to-peer support intervention compared with usual care to support HCWs’ well-being at hospitals and federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) during the COVID-19 pandemic.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis cluster randomized clinical trial comprised 3 cohorts of HCWs who were enrolled from March 2021 through July 2022 at 28 hospitals and FQHCs in the US. Participating sites were matched as pairs by type, size, and COVID-19 burden and then randomized to the intervention arm or usual care arm (any programs already in place to support HCW well-being). The HCWs were surveyed before and after peer-to-peer support intervention implementation. Intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis was used to evaluate the intervention’s effect on outcomes, including general psychological distress and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).InterventionThe peer-to-peer support intervention was delivered to HCWs by site champions who received training and subsequently trained the HCWs at their site. Recipients of the intervention were taught to respond to their own and their peers’ stress reactions.Main Outcomes and MeasuresPrimary outcomes were general psychological distress and PTSD. General psychological distress was measured with the Kessler 6 instrument, and PTSD was measured with the PTSD Checklist.ResultsA total of 28 hospitals and FQHCs with 2077 HCWs participated. Both preintervention and postintervention surveys were completed by 2077 HCWs, for an overall response rate of 28% (41% at FQHCs and 26% at hospitals). A total of 862 individuals (696 females [80.7%]) were from sites that were randomly assigned to the intervention arm; the baseline mean (SD) psychological distress score was 5.86 (5.70) and the baseline mean (SD) PTSD score was 16.11 (16.07). A total of 1215 individuals (947 females [78.2%]) were from sites assigned to the usual care arm; the baseline mean (SD) psychological distress score was 5.98 (5.62) and the baseline mean (SD) PTSD score was 16.40 (16.43). Adherence to the intervention was 70% for FQHCs and 32% for hospitals. The ITT analyses revealed no overall treatment effect for psychological distress score (0.238 [95% CI, −0.310 to 0.785] points) or PTSD symptom score (0.189 [95% CI, −1.068 to 1.446] points). Post hoc analyses examined the heterogeneity of treatment effect by age group with consistent age effects observed across primary outcomes (psychological distress and PTSD). Among HCWs in FQHCs, there were significant and clinically meaningful treatment effects for HCWs 30 years or younger: a more than 4-point reduction for psychological distress (−4.552 [95% CI, −8.067 to −1.037]) and a nearly 7-point reduction for PTSD symptom scores (−6.771 [95% CI, −13.224 to −0.318]).Conclusions and RelevanceThis trial found that this peer-to-peer support intervention did not improve well-being outcomes for HCWs overall but had a protective effect against general psychological distress and PTSD in HCWs aged 30 years or younger in FQHCs, which had higher intervention adherence. Incorporating this peer-to-peer support intervention into medical training, with ongoing support over time, may yield beneficial results in both standard care and during public health crises.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04723576

Publisher

American Medical Association (AMA)

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3