Effectiveness of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) in Professional Dementia Caregivers Burnout

Barriers and enablers to the moderation of self-harm content for a young person's online forum

BACKGROUND

Self-harm amongst young people in the United Kingdom is higher than in other European countries. Young people who self-harm are often reluctant to seek professional help, turning increasingly to the internet for support, including online forums. There are concerns about misinformation or harmful content being shared, potentially leading to self-harm contagion. Moderation of online forums can reduce risks, improving forum safety. Moderation of self-harm content, however, is an under-researched area.

AIMS

Using the Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW), this study examines the barriers and enablers to moderation of self-harm content and suggests behaviour change techniques (BCTs) to address barriers.

METHOD

Qualitative interviews with 8 moderators (of a total of 16) from the UK's leading young people's support service for under 25s, The Mix, were conducted.

RESULTS

Thematic analysis identified eleven enablers, four barriers and one both an enabler and a barrier. Barriers included emotional exhaustion, working with partial information, access to timely support, vagueness within the guidelines and influence of community users. BCTs selected included increasing social support through a moderation buddy.

CONCLUSIONS

Optimisation strategies focus on increasing the support and level of information available to moderators and could be considered by other organisations providing similar services.

Organizational and Individual Interventions for Managing Work-Related Stress in Healthcare Professionals: A Systematic Review

The workplace represents a relevant source of stress for workers, being a risk factor for many mental disorders and psychological difficulties, including burn-out syndrome. Healthcare workers and other help-professions are particularly susceptible to work-related stress. The present systematic review aims to (1) identify available interventions for managing workplace-related stress symptoms; (2) assess their efficacy; and (3) discuss the current limitations of available interventions. A systematic review has been conducted, searching on PubMed, APA PsycInfo, and Scopus databases. Eighteen papers have been identified, which included different interventions for the management of work-related stress in healthcare professionals. These approaches can be grouped as follows: (1) interventions focusing on the individual level using cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) approaches; (2) interventions focusing on the individual level using relaxation techniques; and (3) interventions focusing on the organizational level. As regards interventions targeting the individual level using CBT approaches, mindfulness-based interventions were effective in reducing levels of burn-out, stress, and anxiety and in improving quality of life. As regards intervention using relaxation techniques, including art therapy, Emotional Freedom Techniques (ECT) and brief resilience retreats had a positive effect on the levels of anxiety, stress, and burnout. As regards interventions at the organizational level, we found no evidence for supporting its effectiveness in reducing the levels of burnout. Furthermore, available studies are heterogeneous in terms of assessment tools, target populations, and type of interventions, which limits the generalizability of findings.

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.

Feasibility of RESTORE: An online Acceptance and Commitment Therapy intervention to improve palliative care staff wellbeing

BACKGROUND

Acceptance and Commitment Therapy is a form of Cognitive Behavioural Therapy which uses behavioural psychology, values, acceptance and mindfulness techniques to improve mental health and wellbeing. Acceptance and Commitment Therapy is efficacious in treating stress, anxiety and depression in a broad range of settings including occupational contexts where emotional labour is high. This approach could help palliative care staff to manage work-related stress and promote wellbeing.

AIM

To develop, and feasibility test, an online Acceptance and Commitment Therapy intervention to improve wellbeing of palliative care staff.

DESIGN

A single-arm feasibility trial of an 8-week Acceptance and Commitment Therapy based intervention for staff, consisting of three online facilitated group workshops and five online individual self-directed learning modules. Data was collected via online questionnaire at four time-points and online focus groups at follow-up.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Participants were recruited from Marie Curie hospice and nursing services in Scotland.

RESULTS

Twenty five staff commenced and 23 completed the intervention (93%). Fifteen participated in focus groups. Twelve (48%) completed questionnaires at follow-up. Participants found the intervention enjoyable, informative and beneficial. There was preliminary evidence for improvements in psychological flexibility (Cohen's d = 0.7) and mental wellbeing (Cohen's d = 0.49) between baseline and follow-up, but minimal change in perceived stress, burnout or compassion satisfaction.

CONCLUSION

Online Acceptance and Commitment Therapy for wellbeing is acceptable to palliative care staff and feasible to implement using Microsoft Teams in a palliative care setting. Incorporating ways to promote long-term maintenance of behaviour changes, and strategies to optimise data collection at follow-up are key considerations for future intervention refinement and evaluation.

Effect of a group-based acceptance and commitment therapy program on the mental health of clinical nurses during the COVID-19 sporadic outbreak period

Aim

To develop and implement of a group‐based acceptance and commitment therapy programme in helping clinical nurses with mental health problems during the sporadic COVID‐19 outbreak period.

Background

In the face of the continuing COVID‐19 pandemic, clinical nurses have a high risk of mental health issues.

Methods

A quasi‐experimental design was used. Two hundred twenty‐six nurses were recruited from four general hospitals to receive 10 sessions of acceptance and commitment therapy programme. The Symptom Checklist‐90, Perceived Stress Scale and Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale were used to assess nurses' mental health symptom, perceived stress and psychological resilience at pre‐intervention and 4‐week post‐intervention.

Results

The mean attendance sessions was 5.78. The Symptom Checklist‐90 score was significantly lower at post‐intervention than pre‐intervention (P < 0.01), and there were no significant changes of perceived stress and psychological resilience. There were significant correlations among the changed rates of mental health, perceived stress and psychological resilience (P < 0.01).

Conclusion

The acceptance and commitment therapy programme was effective in relieving mental health symptoms for clinical nurses and could protect clinical nurses' perceived stress and psychological resilience. However, a randomized controlled trial is needed to confirm the findings.

Implication for Nursing Management

To facilitate clinical nurses' psychological health in crisis situation, nursing management team should provide and allocated appropriate resources to support the healthcare providers.