Search

Background: The unprecedented rapid re-deployment of healthcare workers from different care pathways into newly created and fluid COVID-19 teams provides a unique opportunity to examine the interaction of many of the established non-technical factors for successful delivery of clinical care and teamwork in healthcare settings. This research paper therefore aims to address these gaps by qualitatively exploring the impact of COVID work throughout the pandemic on permanent and deployed personnel's experiences, their ability to effectively work together, and the effect of social dynamics (e.g., cohesion, social support) on teamwork and mental health. Methods: Seventy-five interviews were conducted across the UK between March and December 2021 during wave 2 and 3 of COVID-19 with 75 healthcare workers who were either permanent staff on Intensive Care/High Dependency Units used as COVID wards, had been rapidly deployed to such a ward, or had managed such wards. Work Life Balance was measured using the WLB Scale. Interview transcripts were qualitatively coded and thematic codes were compared using network graph modeling. Results: Using thematic network analysis, four overarching thematic clusters were found, (1) teamwork, (2) organizational support and management, (3) cohesion and social support, and (4) psychological strain. The study has three main findings. First, the importance of social factors for teamwork and mental health, whereby team identity may influence perceptions of preparedness, collaboration and communication, and impact on the collective appraisal of stressful events and work stressors. Secondly, it demonstrates the positive and negative impact of professional roles and skills on the development of teamwork and team identity. Lastly the study identifies the more pronounced negative impact of COVID work on deployed personnel's workload, mental health, and career intentions, exacerbated by reduced levels of social support during, and after, their deployment. Conclusion: The thematic network analysis was able to highlight that many of the traditional factors associated with the successful delivery of patient care were impeded by pandemic constraints, markedly influencing personnel's ability to work together and cope with pandemic work stressors. In this environment teamwork, delivery of care and staff well-being appear to depend on relational and organizational context, social group membership, and psycho-social skills related to managing team identity. While results hold lessons for personnel selection, training, co-location, and organizational support during and after a pandemic, further research is needed into the differential impact of pandemic deployment on HCWs mental health and teamwork. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The acceptability of digital health interventions is a multifaceted concept that is central to user engagement. It is influenced by cultural and social norms and it is, also, a key consideration for intervention development and evaluation. For this reason, it is important to have a clear overview of how research in digital interventions' acceptability has evolved, what type of measures or assessments have been most frequently utilised, and what may be the implications for the knowledge area and future research directions. The purpose of this bibliometric and network visualization analysis was to explore the main research patterns in the study of the acceptability of digital mental health interventions and highlight the key characteristics of knowledge production on this topic. The Web of Science was searched for relevant primary studies, with 990 documents selected for inclusion in this bibliometric analysis. Publications' metrics, text and author keyword analysis, and bibliographical coupling of the documents provided insights into how technological developments, specific research interests, research priorities, and contexts have shaped research in the field. The main differentiation in acceptability approaches emanated from the studies' research designs, the stage of intervention development and evaluation, and the extent to which there was a focus on user attitudes, experience, and engagement. These differentiations further indicate the importance of having clarity as to what concepts or elements of acceptability a study addresses as well as approaches that have the potential to address the complexities of acceptability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Digital psychological interventions can target deficit-oriented and asset-oriented psychological outcomes in the workplace. This review examined: (a) the effectiveness of digital interventions for psychological well-being at work, (b) associations with workplace outcomes, and (c) associations between interventions' effectiveness and their theory-base. Methods: six electronic databases were searched for randomised controlled trials (RCT) and quasi-experimental studies. The methodological quality of studies that used randomisation was conducted with the "Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias" tool, while the "JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist" was used for non-randomised studies. Studies' theory-base was evaluated using an adaptation of the "theory coding scheme" (TSC). Due to heterogeneity, narrative synthesis was performed. Results: 51 studies were included in a synthesis describing four clusters of digital interventions: (a) cognitive behavioural therapy, (b) stress-management interventions and workplace well-being promotion, (c) meditation training and mindfulness-based interventions, and (d) self-help interventions. Studies demonstrated a high risk of contamination effects and high attrition bias. Theory-informed interventions demonstrated greater effectiveness. Cognitive behavioural therapy demonstrated the most robust evidence for reducing depression symptoms among healthy employees. With the exception of the Headspace application, there was weak evidence for meditation training apps, while relaxation training was a key component of effective stress-management interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The rapid increase of acute and intensive care capacities in hospitals needed during the response to COVID-19 created an urgent demand for skilled healthcare staff across the globe. To upscale capacity, many hospitals chose to increase their teams in these departments with rapidly re-deployed inter-professional healthcare personnel, many of whom had no prior experience of working in a high-risk environment and were neither prepared nor trained for work on such wards. This systematic review of reviews examines the current evidence base for successful teamwork in rapidly deployed interprofessional teams in intensive and acute care settings, by assessing systematic reviews of empirical studies to inform future deployments and support of rapidly formed clinical teams. This study identified 18 systematic reviews for further analysis. Utilising an integrative narrative synthesis process supported by thematic coding and graphical network analysis, 13 themes were found to dominate the literature on teams and teamwork in inter-professional and inter-disciplinary teams. This approach was chosen to make the selection process more transparent and enable the thematic clusters in the reviewed papers to be presented visually and codifying four factors that structure the literature on inter-professional teams (i.e., team-internal procedures and dynamics, communicative processes, organisational and team extrinsic influences on teams, and lastly patient and staff outcomes). Practically, the findings suggest that managers and team leaders in fluid and ad-hoc inter-professional healthcare teams in an intensive care environment need to pay attention to reducing pre-existing occupational identities and power-dynamics by emphasizing skill mix, establishing combined workspaces and break areas, clarifying roles and responsibilities, facilitating formal information exchange and developing informal opportunities for communication. The results may guide the further analysis of factors that affect the performance of inter-professional teams in emergency and crisis deployment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Dupuytren's contracture is a fibro-proliferative disease of the hands affecting over 2 million UK adults, particularly the white, male population. Surgery is the traditional treatment; however, recent studies have indicated that an alternative to surgery-collagenase clostridium histolyticum (collagenase)-is better than a placebo in the treatment of Dupuytren's contracture. There is however no robust randomised controlled trial that provides a definitive answer on the clinical effectiveness of collagenase compared with limited fasciectomy surgery. Dupuytren's intervention surgery vs collagenase trial (DISC) trial was therefore designed to fill this evidence gap.Methods/design: The DISC trial is a multi-centre pragmatic two-arm parallel-group, randomised controlled trial. Participants will be assigned 1:1 to receive either collagenase injection or surgery (limited fasciectomy). We aim to recruit 710 adult participants with Dupuytren's contracture. Potential participants will be identified in primary and secondary care, screened by a delegated clinician and if eligible and consenting, baseline data will be collected and randomisation completed. The primary outcome will be the self-reported patient evaluation measure assessed 1 year after treatment. Secondary outcome measures include the Unité Rhumatologique des Affections de la Main Scale, the Michigan Hand Questionnaire, EQ-5D-5L, resource use, further procedures, complications, recurrence, total active movement and extension deficit, and time to return to function. Given the limited evidence comparing recurrence rates following collagenase injection and limited fasciectomy, and the importance of a return to function as soon as possible for patients, the associated measures for each will be prioritised to allow treatment effectiveness in the context of these key elements to be assessed. An economic evaluation will assess the cost-effectiveness of treatments, and a qualitative sub-study will assess participants' experiences and preferences of the treatments.Discussion: The DISC trial is the first randomised controlled trial, to our knowledge, to investigate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of collagenase compared to limited fasciectomy surgery for patients with Dupuytren's contracture.Trial Registration: Clinical.Trials.gov ISRCTN18254597 . Registered on April 11, 2017. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives Employment following illness is associated with better physical and psychological functioning. This study aimed to assess the feasibility and acceptability of a theoretically led workbook intervention designed to support patients with cancer returning to work. Design Parallel-group randomised controlled trial with embedded qualitative interviews. Setting Oncology clinics within four English National Health Service Trusts. Participants Patients who had received a diagnosis of breast, gynaecological, prostate or colorectal cancer and who had been receiving treatment for a minimum of two weeks. Intervention A self-guided WorkPlan workbook designed to support patients with cancer to return to work with fortnightly telephone support calls to discuss progress. The control group received treatment as usual and was offered the workbook at the end of their 12-month follow-up. Outcome measures We assessed aspects of feasibility including eligibility, recruitment, data collection, attrition, feasibility of the methodology, acceptability of the intervention and potential to calculate cost-effectiveness. Results The recruitment rate of eligible patients was 44%; 68 participants consented and 58 (85%) completed baseline measures. Randomisation procedures were acceptable, data collection methods (including costeffectiveness data) were feasible and the intervention was acceptable to participants. Retention rates at 6-month and 12-month follow-up were 72% and 69%, respectively. At 6-month follow-up, 30% of the usual care group had returned to full-time or part-time work (including phased return to work) compared with 43% of the intervention group. At 12 months, the percentages were 47% (usual care) and 68% (intervention). Conclusions The findings confirm the feasibility of a definitive trial, although further consideration needs to be given to increasing the participation rates among men and black and ethnic minority patients diagnosed with cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]