Psychological well-being of hospice staff: systematic review

Author:

Papworth AndrewORCID,Ziegler Lucy,Beresford Bryony,Mukherjee Suzanne,Fraser LornaORCID,Fisher VictoriaORCID,O'Neill Mark,Golder Su,Bedendo AndreORCID,Taylor JohannaORCID

Abstract

BackgroundPoor psychological well-being among healthcare staff has implications for staff sickness and absence rates, and impacts on the quality, cost and safety of patient care. Although numerous studies have explored the well-being of hospice staff, study findings vary and the evidence has not yet been reviewed and synthesised. Using job demands-resources (JD-R) theory, this review aimed to investigate what factors are associated with the well-being of hospice staff.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, CINAHL and PsycINFO for peer-reviewed quantitative, qualitative or mixed-methods studies focused on understanding what contributes to the well-being of hospice staff who provide care to patients (adults and children). The date of the last search was 11 March 2022. Studies were published from 2000 onwards in the English language and conducted in Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries. Study quality was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Data synthesis was conducted using a result-based convergent design, which involved an iterative, thematic approach of collating data into distinct factors and mapping these to the JD-R theory.ResultsA total of 4016 unique records were screened by title and abstract, 115 full-text articles were retrieved and reviewed and 27 articles describing 23 studies were included in the review. The majority of the evidence came from studies of staff working with adult patients. Twenty-seven individual factors were identified in the included studies. There is a strong and moderate evidence that 21 of the 27 identified factors can influence hospice staff well-being. These 21 factors can be grouped into three categories: (1) those that are specific to the hospice environment and role, such as the complexity and diversity of the hospice role; (2) those that have been found to be associated with well-being in other similar settings, such as relationships with patients and their families; and (3) those that affect workers regardless of their role and work environment, that is, that are not unique to working in a healthcare role, such as workload and working relationships. There was strong evidence that neither staff demographic characteristics nor education level can influence well-being.DiscussionThe factors identified in this review highlight the importance of assessing both positive and negative domains of experience to determine coping interventions. Hospice organisations should aim to offer a wide range of interventions to ensure their staff have access to something that works for them. These should involve continuing or commencing initiatives to protect the factors that make hospices good environments in which to work, as well as recognising that hospice staff are also subject to many of the same factors that affect psychological well-being in all work environments. Only two studies included in the review were set in children’s hospices, suggesting that more research is needed in these settings.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019136721 (Deviations from the protocol are noted in Table 8, Supplementary material).

Funder

Martin House Research Centre

University of York

Publisher

BMJ

Subject

Medical–Surgical Nursing,Oncology (nursing),General Medicine,Medicine (miscellaneous)

Reference154 articles.

1. Department of Health . Our commitment to you for end of life care: the government response to the review of choice in end of life care. London: Department of Health, 2016.

2. Taylor J , Aldridge J . Exploring the rewards and challenges of paediatric palliative care work-a qualitative study of a multi-disciplinary children's’hospice care team. BMC Palliat Care 2017;16:73. doi:10.1186/s12904-017-0254-4

3. Nuffield Trust . Support at the end of life: the role of hospice services in the UK. 2022. Available: https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/research/support-at-the-end-of-life [Accessed 21 Jul 2022].

4. World Health Organization . Palliative care: key facts. 2020. Available: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/palliative-care [Accessed 20 May 2022].

5. UK . Facts and figures about hospice care. 2020. Available: https://professionals.hospiceuk.org/about-hospice-care/media-centre/facts-and-figures [Accessed 3 Aug 2020].

Cited by 6 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