Effects of mindfulness-based stress reduction on psychological distress in health workers: A three-arm parallel randomized controlled trial

Addressing Health Care Workers' Mental Health: A Systematic Review of Evidence-Based Interventions and Current Resources

Background. Mental health is declining in health care workers. Objectives. To provide a comprehensive assessment of intervention literature focused on the support and treatment of mental health within the health care workforce. Search Methods. We searched online databases (e.g., Medline, PsycINFO). Selection Criteria. We selected manuscripts published before March 2022 that evaluated the target population (e.g., nurses), mental health outcomes (e.g., burnout, depression), and intervention category (e.g., mindfulness). Data Collection and Analysis. Of 5158 publications screened, 118 interventions were included. We extracted relevant statistics and information. Main Results. Twenty (17%) earned study quality ratings indicating design, analysis, and implementation strengths. Randomized controlled trials were used by 52 studies (44%). Thirty-eight percent were conducted in the United States (n = 45). Ninety (76%) reported significant changes, and 46 (39%) reported measurable effect sizes. Multiple interventions significantly reduced stress (n = 29; 24%), anxiety (n = 20; 17%), emotional exhaustion or compassion fatigue (n = 16; 14%), burnout (n = 15; 13%), and depression (n = 15; 13%). Authors' Conclusions. Targeted, well-designed mental health interventions can improve outcomes among health care workers. Public Health Implications. Targeted health care‒focused interventions to address workers' mental health could improve outcomes within this important and vulnerable workforce. (Am J Public Health. 2024;114(S2):S213-S226. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2023.307556).

Effectiveness of stress management interventions to change cortisol levels: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Stress has a damaging impact on our mental and physical health, and as a result, there is an on-going demand for effective stress management interventions. However, there are no reviews or meta-analyses synthesising the evidence base of randomised controlled trials testing the effectiveness of psychological interventions on changing cortisol levels (the stress hormone) in non-patient groups. Therefore, the primary aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to address this gap. Six databases (Medline, PsychInfo, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane and Web of Science) were searched (1171 studies identified) with 58 studies (combined N = 3508) included in the meta-analysis. The interventions were coded into one of four categories; mind body therapies, mindfulness, relaxation or talking therapies. A random effects meta-analysis on cortisol as measured in blood, saliva or hair found that stress management interventions outperformed pooled control conditions with a medium positive effect size (g = 0.282). The studies that utilised cortisol awakening measures (g = 0.644) revealed larger effects of stress management interventions than those that measured diurnal cortisol (g = 0.255). Mindfulness and meditation (g = 0. 345) and relaxation (g = 0. 347) interventions were most effective at changing cortisol levels, while mind body therapies (g = 0. 129) and talking therapies (g = 0.107) were shown to have smaller and non-significant effect sizes. Additionally, studies that utilised an active control group (g = 0. 477) over passive control group (g = 0.129) were found to have stronger effects. Length of the intervention, study quality, risk of bias, age and gender did not influence the effectiveness of interventions and there was no evidence of publication bias. Overall, the current findings confirm that stress management interventions can positively influence cortisol levels. Future research should investigate the longer term implications for health and health outcomes.

The relationship between ethical leadership and nurse well-being: The mediating role of workplace mindfulness

AIM

The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between nurses' well-being and their ethical leadership, and the mediating role of workplace mindfulness in this relationship.

DESIGN

This was a quantitative cross-sectional study.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study was conducted in three tertiary hospitals in central China from May 2022 to July 2022, and the Nurses' Workplace Mindfulness, Ethical Leadership and Well-Being Scale were distributed and collected via the Internet. A total of 1579 nurses volunteered to participate in this study. SPSS 26.0 statistical software was used to analyse the data by Z-test and Spearman's rank correlation; the internal mechanism of workplace mindfulness and ethical leadership on nurses' well-being was completed by AMOS 23.0 statistical software.

RESULTS

The scores of nurses' well-being, workplace mindfulness and ethical leadership were 93.00 (81.00, 108.00), 96.00 (80.00, 112.00) and 73.00 (67.00, 81.00) respectively. The professional title, age and department atmosphere affect their well-being. Spearman's analysis showed that nurses' well-being was positively correlated with ethical leadership (r = .507, p < .01) and workplace mindfulness (r = .600, p < .01); workplace mindfulness partially mediated the relationship between ethical leadership and nurses' well-being accounting for 38.5% of the total effect ratio [p < .001, 95% CI = (0.215, 0.316)].

CONCLUSION

Nurses' well-being was at a medium level, and had a higher score in ethical leadership and workplace mindfulness, and workplace mindfulness played a partial mediating role between ethical leadership and nurses' well-being.

IMPACT

This suggests that nursing managers need to pay attention to clinical nurses' well-being experience, actively focus on the relationship among ethical leadership, workplace mindfulness and well-being and integrate core values such as positivity and morality into nurses' daily routines, so as to improve the work enthusiasm and well-being experience of clinical nurses, enhancing the nursing quality and stabilizing the nursing team.

Effects of Web-Based Mindfulness-Based Interventions on Anxiety, Depression, and Stress Among Frontline Health Care Workers During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Since 2019, the COVID-19 outbreak has spread around the world, and health care workers, as frontline workers, have faced tremendous psychological stress.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to explore whether web-based mindfulness-based interventions continue to have a positive impact on anxiety, depression, and stress among health care workers during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

The inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) participants were frontline health care workers during the COVID-19 pandemic; (2) the experimental group was a web-based mindfulness-based intervention; (3) the control group used either general psychological intervention or no intervention; (4) outcome indicators included scales to assess anxiety, depression, and stress; and (5) the study type was a randomized controlled study. Studies that did not meet the above requirements were excluded. We searched 9 databases, including Web of Science, Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, ScienceDirect, SinoMed, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Wanfang Database, for randomized controlled studies on the effects of web-based mindfulness-based interventions on common mental disorder symptoms among health care workers from January 1, 2020, to October 20, 2022. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database scale. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to assess the risk of bias. Subgroup analysis was used to look for sources of heterogeneity and to explore whether the results were the same for subgroups under different conditions. Sensitivity analysis was used to verify the stability of the pooled results.

RESULTS

A total of 10 randomized controlled studies with 1311 participants were included. The results showed that web-based mindfulness-based interventions were effective in reducing the symptoms of anxiety (standard mean difference [SMD]=-0.63, 95% CI -0.96 to -0.31, P<.001, I2=87%), depression (SMD=-0.52, 95% CI -0.77 to -0.26, P<.001, I2=75%), and stress (SMD=-0.20, 95% CI -0.35 to -0.05, P=.01, I2=58%) among health care workers during the COVID-19 pandemic, but with wide CIs and high heterogeneity.

CONCLUSIONS

Web-based mindfulness-based interventions may be effective in reducing the symptoms of anxiety, depression, and stress among frontline health care workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, this effect is relatively mild and needs to be further explored by better studies in the future.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42022343727; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=343727.

Prevalence and Risk Factors Underlying Occupational Stress and Depression Among Clinical Nurses in Secondary and Tertiary Hospitals of China During COVID-19 Setting

Aim

This study was designed to develop an effective measurement tool for occupational stress among medical staff and to identify the underlying risk factors among clinical nurses in China under depression during and after COVID-19.

Methods

In the first stage, an occupational stress scale was developed for medical staff based on qualitative and quantitative methods. The dimensions of the scale were based on childhood stress and seven other parameters of working stress. In the second stage, a provincial survey was conducted among clinical nurses in Hainan. The structure of Medical Staff Occupational Stress Scale was tested in secondary and tertiary hospitals. The socio-demographic information, occupational stress (measured using the developed scale), and current depression symptoms (assessed with the nine-item Patient Health Questionnaire) were evaluated. The risk factors for occupational stress-induced depression were tested using multivariate logistic regression.

Results

The Medical Staff Occupational Stress Scale consisted of 42 items under eight dimensions with strong reliability and validity. Almost 80% of the clinical nurses reported obvious symptoms of depression. Based on multivariate logistical regression analysis, the significant risk factors for depression in nurses at secondary hospitals and tertiary hospitals were childhood stress, teaching stress, relationship with patient stress, and administration stress.

Conclusion

The Medical Staff Occupational Stress Scale utilized in nursing population is based on strong psychometric features. Childhood stress contributes to occupational stress in nurses. The selection of nurses for clinical work may require evaluation of past history for childhood stress to prevent occupational depression. Teaching stress, relationship with patient stress and administration stress play significant roles in the prevention of depression among clinical nurses.

Individual participant data systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials assessing adult mindfulness-based programmes for mental health promotion in non-clinical settings

Introduction

Mindfulness-based programmes (MBPs) are widely used to prevent mental ill-health that is becoming the leading global cause of morbidity. Evidence suggests beneficial average effects but wide variability. We aimed to confirm the effect of MBPs on psychological distress, and to understand whether and how baseline distress, gender, age, education, and dispositional mindfulness modify the effect of MBPs on distress among adults in non-clinical settings.

Methods

We conducted a pre-registered systematic review and individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis (PROSPERO CRD42020200117). Thirteen databases were searched in December 2020 for randomised controlled trials satisfying a quality threshold and comparing in-person, expert-defined MBPs in non-clinical settings with passive control groups. Two researchers independently selected, extracted, and appraised trials using the revised Cochrane Risk-of-Bias Tool (RoB2). Anonymised IPD of eligible trials were sought from collaborating authors. The primary outcome was psychological distress (unpleasant mental or emotional experiences including anxiety and depression) at 1 to 6 months after programme completion. Data were checked and imputed if missing. Pairwise, random-effects, two-stage IPD meta-analyses were conducted. Effect modification analyses followed a within-studies approach. Public and professional stakeholders were involved in the planning, conduct and dissemination of this study.

Results

Fifteen trials were eligible, 13 trialists shared IPD (2,371 participants representing 8 countries, median age 34 years-old, 71% women, moderately distressed on average, 20% missing outcome data). In comparison with passive control groups, MBPs reduced average distress between one- and six-months post-intervention with a small to moderate effect size (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.32; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.41 to -0.24; p-value < 0.001; 95% prediction interval (PI) -0.41 to -0.24 (no heterogeneity)). Results were robust to sensitivity analyses, and similar for the other psychological distress time point ranges. Confidence in the primary outcome result is high. We found no clear indication that this effect is modified by baseline psychological distress, gender, age, education level, or dispositional mindfulness.

Conclusions

Group-based teacher-led MBPs generally reduce psychological distress among community adults who volunteer to receive this type of intervention. More research is needed to identify sources of variability in outcomes at an individual level.

Effectiveness of Workplace Interventions to Improve Health and Well-Being of Health and Social Service Workers: A Narrative Review of Randomised Controlled Trials

Health and social service workers face high levels of workload and job stressors, which can affect their health and well-being. Therefore, it is important to evaluate the effectiveness of workplace interventions that aim to improve their mental and physical health outcomes. This review summarizes the findings of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examined the impact of different types of workplace interventions on various health indicators among health and social service workers. The review searched the PubMed database from its inception to December 2022 and included RCTs that reported on the effectiveness of organizational-level interventions and qualitative studies that explored barriers and facilitators to participation in such interventions. A total of 108 RCTs were included in the review, covering job burnout (N = 56 RCTs), happiness or job satisfaction (N = 35), sickness absence (N = 18), psychosocial work stressors (N = 14), well-being (N = 13), work ability (N = 12), job performance or work engagement (N = 12), perceived general health (N = 9), and occupational injuries (N = 3). The review found that several workplace interventions were effective in improving work ability, well-being, perceived general health, work performance, and job satisfaction and in reducing psychosocial stressors, burnout, and sickness absence among healthcare workers. However, the effects were generally modest and short-lived. Some of the common barriers to participation in workplace interventions among healthcare workers were inadequate staff, high workload, time pressures, work constraints, lack of manager support, scheduling health programs outside work hours, and lack of motivation. This review suggests that workplace interventions have small short-term positive effects on health and well-being of healthcare workers. Workplace interventions should be implemented as routine programs with free work hours to encourage participation or integrate intervention activities into daily work routines.

Individual-level interventions for reducing occupational stress in healthcare workers

BACKGROUND

Healthcare workers can suffer from work-related stress as a result of an imbalance of demands, skills and social support at work. This may lead to stress, burnout and psychosomatic problems, and deterioration of service provision. This is an update of a Cochrane Review that was last updated in 2015, which has been split into this review and a review on organisational-level interventions.  OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of stress-reduction interventions targeting individual healthcare workers compared to no intervention, wait list, placebo, no stress-reduction intervention or another type of stress-reduction intervention in reducing stress symptoms.  SEARCH METHODS: We used the previous version of the review as one source of studies (search date: November 2013). We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science and a trials register from 2013 up to February 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCT) evaluating the effectiveness of stress interventions directed at healthcare workers. We included only interventions targeted at individual healthcare workers aimed at reducing stress symptoms.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We categorised interventions into ones that: 1. focus one's attention on the (modification of the) experience of stress (thoughts, feelings, behaviour);  2. focus one's attention away from the experience of stress by various means of psychological disengagement (e.g. relaxing, exercise);  3. alter work-related risk factors on an individual level; and ones that 4. combine two or more of the above.  The crucial outcome measure was stress symptoms measured with various self-reported questionnaires such as the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI), measured at short term (up to and including three months after the intervention ended), medium term (> 3 to 12 months after the intervention ended), and long term follow-up (> 12 months after the intervention ended).  MAIN RESULTS: This is the second update of the original Cochrane Review published in 2006, Issue 4. This review update includes 89 new studies, bringing the total number of studies in the current review to 117 with a total of 11,119 participants randomised.  The number of participants per study arm was ≥ 50 in 32 studies. The most important risk of bias was the lack of blinding of participants.  Focus on the experience of stress versus no intervention/wait list/placebo/no stress-reduction intervention Fifty-two studies studied an intervention in which one's focus is on the experience of stress. Overall, such interventions may result in a reduction in stress symptoms in the short term (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.37, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.52 to -0.23; 41 RCTs; 3645 participants; low-certainty evidence) and medium term (SMD -0.43, 95% CI -0.71 to -0.14; 19 RCTs; 1851 participants; low-certainty evidence). The SMD of the short-term result translates back to 4.6 points fewer on the MBI-emotional exhaustion scale (MBI-EE, a scale from 0 to 54). The evidence is very uncertain (one RCT; 68 participants, very low-certainty evidence) about the long-term effect on stress symptoms of focusing one's attention on the experience of stress. Focus away from the experience of stress versus no intervention/wait list/placebo/no stress-reduction intervention  Forty-two studies studied an intervention in which one's focus is away from the experience of stress. Overall, such interventions may result in a reduction in stress symptoms in the short term (SMD -0.55, 95 CI -0.70 to -0.40; 35 RCTs; 2366 participants; low-certainty evidence) and medium term (SMD -0.41 95% CI -0.79 to -0.03; 6 RCTs; 427 participants; low-certainty evidence). The SMD on the short term translates back to 6.8 fewer points on the MBI-EE. No studies reported the long-term effect. Focus on work-related, individual-level factors versus no intervention/no stress-reduction intervention Seven studies studied an intervention in which the focus is on altering work-related factors. The evidence is very uncertain about the short-term effects (no pooled effect estimate; three RCTs; 87 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and medium-term effects and long-term effects (no pooled effect estimate; two RCTs; 152 participants, and one RCT; 161 participants, very low-certainty evidence) of this type of stress management intervention.  A combination of individual-level interventions versus no intervention/wait list/no stress-reduction intervention Seventeen studies studied a combination of interventions. In the short-term, this type of intervention may result in a reduction in stress symptoms (SMD -0.67 95%, CI -0.95 to -0.39; 15 RCTs; 1003 participants; low-certainty evidence). The SMD translates back to 8.2 fewer points on the MBI-EE. On the medium term, a combination of individual-level interventions may result in a reduction in stress symptoms, but the evidence does not exclude no effect (SMD -0.48, 95% CI -0.95 to 0.00; 6 RCTs; 574 participants; low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the long term effects of a combination of interventions on stress symptoms (one RCT, 88 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Focus on stress versus other intervention type  Three studies compared focusing on stress versus focusing away from stress and one study a combination of interventions versus focusing on stress. The evidence is very uncertain about which type of intervention is better or if their effect is similar.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review shows that there may be an effect on stress reduction in healthcare workers from individual-level stress interventions, whether they focus one's attention on or away from the experience of stress. This effect may last up to a year after the end of the intervention. A combination of interventions may be beneficial as well, at least in the short term. Long-term effects of individual-level stress management interventions remain unknown. The same applies for interventions on (individual-level) work-related risk factors. The bias assessment of the studies in this review showed the need for methodologically better-designed and executed studies, as nearly all studies suffered from poor reporting of the randomisation procedures, lack of blinding of participants and lack of trial registration. Better-designed trials with larger sample sizes are required to increase the certainty of the evidence. Last, there is a need for more studies on interventions which focus on work-related risk factors.

The effect of the Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction program on the level of perceived stress and geriatric depression in older adults: a randomised controlled study

BACKGROUND

This study aims to reveal the effect of the Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR) program on the perceived stress and geriatric depression levels of older adults.

METHODS

The data of this randomised controlled experimental study were obtained from older adults living in a nursing home in Turkey, between May and November, 2021. The target population consisted of 54 older adults living in the specified nursing home, and the sample consisted of 48 older adults who met the inclusion criteria (n = 24 intervention group, n = 24 control group). The MBSR program was applied to the older adults in the intervention group. Data were collected using the Personal Information Form, the Perceived Stress Scale, and the Geriatric Depression Scale-Short Form.

RESULTS

It was revealed that the MBSR program led to a 54.7% decrease in the perceived stress total scores of the participants, and a 49.9% and 49.8% decrease in the sub-dimensions of perceived insufficient self-efficacy and perceived stress/distress, respectively. It was also found that the program reduced geriatric depression scores by 14.1% and created a significant effect (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

It can be concluded that the MBSR program is an effective method in reducing the perceived stress and geriatric depression levels of older adults. This effect has been maintained 1 month after the completion of the program.

Assessment of Virtual Mindfulness-Based Training for Health Care Professionals: Improved Self-Reported Respiration Rates, Perceived Stress, and Resilience

Background

Mindfulness in Motion (MIM) is a workplace resilience-building intervention that has shown reductions in perceived stress and burnout, as well as increased resilience and work engagement in health care workers.

Objective

To evaluate effects of MIM delivered in a synchronous virtual format on self-reported respiratory rates (RR), as well as perceived stress and resiliency of health care workers.

Methods

Breath counts were self-reported by 275 participants before and after 8 weekly MIM sessions. MIM was delivered virtually in a group format as a structured, evidence-based workplace intervention including a variety of mindfulness, relaxation, and resilience-building techniques. Participants counted their breaths for 30 seconds, which was then multiplied by 2 to report RR. Additionally, participants completed Perceived Stress Scale and Connor-Davidson Resiliency Scale.

Results

According to mixed effect analyses there were main effects of MIM Session (P < .001) and Weeks (P < .001), but no Session by Week interaction (P = .489) on RR. On average, RR prior to MIM sessions were reduced from 13.24 bpm (95% CI = 12.94, 13.55 bpm) to 9.69 bpm (95% CI = 9.39, 9.99 bpm). When comparing average Pre-MIM and Post-MIM RR throughout the MIM intervention, Week-2 (mean = 12.34; 95% CI = 11.89, 12.79 bpm) was not significantly different than Week-1 (mean = 12.78; 95% CI = 12.34, 13.23 bpm), but Week-3 through Week-8 demonstrated significantly lower average Pre-MIM and Post-MIM RR compared to Week-1 (average weekly difference range: 1.36 to 2.48 bpm, P < .05). Perceived stress was reduced from Week-1 (17.52 ± 6.25) to after Week-8 (13.52 ± 6.04; P < .001), while perceived resiliency was increased from Week-1 (11.30 ± 5.14) to after Week-8 (19.29 ± 2.58); P < .001).

Conclusion

Thus far, completion of MIM sessions has shown acute and long-term effects on self-reported RR, but more research is required to determine the extent of improved parasympathetic (relaxed) states. Collectively, this work has shown value for mind-body stress mitigation and resiliency-building in high stress acute health care environments.

A Telephone-Adapted Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction Program: Preliminary Effects among Healthcare Employees

Healthcare employees often experience high stress and may benefit from accessible psychosocial interventions. In this pilot study, we explored preliminary feasibility, acceptability, and psychological effects of a telephone-based adaption of mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) for healthcare employees. Eleven participants (M age = 49.9; 27.3% ethnic/racial minority) were enrolled in an eight-session group-based MBSR program adapted for telephone delivery. Feasibility was assessed using rates of program attrition and session completion; acceptability was explored qualitatively via participants' responses to an open-ended item about their program experience. Participants also completed pre-and post-program assessments on psychosocial outcomes (distress (overall distress, depression, anxiety, somatization), mindfulness, and self-compassion). We characterized mean change scores, 95% confidence intervals, and effect sizes to explore preliminary program effects. With regard to preliminary feasibility, one participant dropped out prior to the intervention; of the remaining 10 participants, 90% completed at least half (≥4) of the sessions; 70% completed at least three-quarters (≥6 sessions). Feedback reflected positive experiences and included suggestions for program delivery. Participants reported reductions in distress post-program (M difference range = -5.0 to -9.4), showing medium to large effect sizes (d range = 0.68 to 1.11). Mindfulness scores increased from pre- to post-intervention (M difference range = 1.0 to 10.4), with small-to-medium effects (d range = 0.18 to 0.55). Almost all aspects of self-compassion remained stable over time, with the exception of common humanity, which increased post-program (M difference = 2.9, CI 95% 0.5 to 5.4, d = 0.91). Preliminary findings from our small pilot trial suggest that telephone-based adaptations of MBSR may be a useful mode of delivery for healthcare employees; however, larger studies are needed to provide further evidence of feasibility, acceptability, and program effects.