Difficulties in Balint groups: a qualitative study of leaders' experiences

A mixed-methods SWOT analysis of a medical student Balint group programme

BACKGROUND

Balint groups use case-based discussions to explore, reflect on, and enhance the clinician-patient relationship. They facilitate the development of empathy and reflective practice and reduce burnout. This study aimed to explore how the benefits of a traditional Balint group format can be accessed and optimised for medical students during a one-year pilot programme.

METHODS

Eight medical student Balint groups ran for six weeks during 2022-2023, with 90 students participating. Themes were identified from student feedback using qualitative content analysis. Group leaders kept reflective session notes and used these alongside student feedback to undertake a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats analysis.

RESULTS

Strengths of the programme were emotional containment, learning to reflect, and community identity. Weaknesses were themed as strange situations, dragging along, and facilitator as an object. Opportunities were identified in expanding the scope and sharpening focus. Psychological defences and the engagement dilemma threatened the future success of the Balint group programme.

DISCUSSION

Medical student Balint groups provide a unique space to combine learning and emotional support with personal, professional and community development. However, the traditional Balint group format may need adapting to be widely accessible to undergraduate learners. Sustainably integrating Balint groups into the medical school curriculum requires ongoing engagement work at both an individual and organisational level.

Effectiveness of a modified Balint group process on empathy and psychological skills employing Kirkpatrick's evaluation framework

Background

To evaluate, using Kirkpatrick's evaluation model, a modified Balint group (BG) by adding 5-10 min at the end of the session, where the facilitators will debrief the residents about critical themes mentioned in the session.

Methods

A quasi-experimental study with a mixed-method design was conducted among family medicine residents over 1 year, using focus groups and validated tools filled by residents and their corresponding patients. The residents' empathy through self and patient evaluation, psychological skills, and satisfaction with the educational activity were measured.

Results

The focus group revealed that the residents were aware of the change and considered it a closure to the encounter, helping decrease some uncertainty. Most of the residents did not consider the change helpful. Using validated instruments, BG was ineffective at improving the residents' empathy and psychological skills. There was a statistically significant main effect of time on Psychological Medicine Inventory (PMI) scores, F (1,13) = 7.709, p = 0.016.

Conclusion

Debriefing at the end of BG by the facilitators about key themes may help give the residents closure, decrease the uncertainty, and make them more aware of their feelings. Nevertheless, Balint groups are still not very well accepted by the residents, and they prefer direct feedback and support groups.

Becoming the kind of doctor that you want to be. A qualitative study about participation in Balint group work

OBJECTIVE

Although wide-spread and appreciated, the benefit of Balint group work has been difficult to determine. Qualitative studies provide new angles for research. The aim of this study is to explore how participants in a Balint group for at least 1.5 years experienced the group work and how they were affected by their participation.

METHOD

Focus group interviews were conducted with a total of 19 members of four different Balint groups. The participants were experienced residents or younger specialists in general practice as well as from hospital specialities. A thematic analysis was performed.

RESULTS

The main themes that emerged were: Investigating emotions, Development of the physician's identity as well as Safety in the group and with the leader. The participants reported relief from stress as well as increased ability to understand the emotional side of patient encounters. They struggled to find their identity as doctors and specialists, often gaining a sense of pride in their work and becoming more secure. The group with a certified Balint leader felt like a safe place.

CONCLUSIONS

For younger doctors, participation in a Balint group for at least 1.5 years can help them build their professional identity by means of a deeper understanding of doctor-patient relationships. The role of Balint group work in relation to professional identity warrants further study.

Challenges and potential solutions for physician suicide risk factors in the COVID-19 era: psychiatric comorbidities, judicialization of medicine, and burnout

INTRODUCTION

Suicide among physicians constitutes a public health problem that deserves more consideration. A recently performed meta-analysis and systematic review evaluated suicide mortality in physicians by gender and investigated several related risk factors. It showed that the post-1980 suicide mortality was 46% higher in female physicians than among women in the general population, while the risk in male physicians was 33% lower than among men in general, despite an overall contraction in physician mortality rates in both genders.

METHODS

This narrative review was conducted by searching and analyzing articles/databases that were relevant to addressing questions raised by a prior meta-analysis and how they might be affected by COVID-19. This process included unstructured searches on Pubmed for physician suicide, burnout, judicialization of medicine, healthcare organizations, and COVID-19, and Google searches for relevant databases and medical society, expert, and media commentaries on these topics. We focus on three factors critical to addressing physician suicides: epidemiological data limitations, psychiatric comorbidities, and professional overload.

RESULTS

We found relevant articles on suicide reporting, physician mental health, the effects of healthcare judicialization, and organizational involvement on physician and patient health, and how COVID-19 may impact such factors. This review addresses information sources, underreporting/misreporting of physician suicide rates, inadequate diagnosis and management of psychiatric comorbidities and the chronic effects on physicians' work capacity, and, finally, judicialization of medicine and organizational failures increasing physician burnout. We discuss these factors in general and in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic.

CONCLUSIONS

We present an overview of the above factors, discuss possible solutions, and specifically address how COVID-19 may impact such factors.

Implementation of multidisciplinary reflective rounds within a children's hospital before and during the COVID-19 pandemic

AIM

Regular reflective practice within a large group setting has been shown to reduce levels of burnout in healthcare professionals. We describe how regular reflective rounds were designed and implemented within an existing educational program at a UK children's hospital and report on the feedback received from participants.

METHODS

Eight face-to-face reflective rounds took place in Southampton Children's Hospital, UK, from September 2017 to February 2020 with a further virtual round in July 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic. Each round was facilitated by a clinical psychologist and consultant. For each round, up to three volunteer panellists from different staff groups were invited to share their personal experiences on a pre-selected subject to the large group. The group would then contribute to the discussion by offering their own reflections. Feedback forms were distributed to attendees and collated.

RESULTS

Eight rounds were held with mean attendance of 32 (range 19-47). Across the eight rounds, the total attendance was 256 staff members. The virtual round had 20 participants. Feedback was received from 202 participants. The majority (98%) would recommend the rounds to colleagues with 64 participants (32%) rating the rounds as 'exceptional' and 91 (45%) as 'excellent'. The virtual round received similar positive feedback.

CONCLUSION

Large group reflective practice can be implemented within an existing regular educational program. Rounds have been well received by participants and are likely to be of relevance and value to other healthcare groups. The rounds can also be delivered effectively virtually, which may increase participation.

Psychiatric residents' experience about Balint groups: A qualitative study using phenomenological approach in Iran

INTRODUCTION

Previous research has shown that Balint group is effective in the professional and personal development of residents. The aim of this study was to investigate the experience of psychiatric residents about Balint groups.

METHODS

This is a qualitative study using a phenomenological approach. Seven sessions of the Balint groups were held with a number of psychiatric residents at Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences. Two of the leaders were psychoanalytic psychotherapist. Finally, eight in-depth semi-structured interviews and focused group interview were conducted. Data were collected by tape recorded interviews. Data were analyzed using MAXQDA-10 software.

RESULTS

Three main themes were obtained from the interviews that included "Early experiences", "Touching the Balint group" and "Relationship with Balint group". The category of "Early experiences" included three categories of "defenseless", "fire under the ashes" and "deep feeling". Touching the Balint group theme included categories such as "Empathetic", "I am not the only one ...", "Releasing", "Reading story", "This patient", and "Getting closer". The relationship with Balint group theme included three categories of "first of all", "attachment" and "courage and time".

CONCLUSION

Based on the findings of this study, while some aspects of Balint group are stressful but ultimately improve the emotions and better understanding of the patient. This research shows incorporating Balint group into the educational program and curriculum of psychiatric residents in Iran might be helpful, but more qualitative and quantitative research is necessary.

Effect of group leaders on doctors' learning in Balint groups

OBJECTIVE

Although effective Balint leadership is viewed as essential for good Balint practice, nearly no quantitative research is available regarding the importance of the person of the group leader in Balint group outcome. This study aims to identify Balint group leaders' impact on "typical Balint" learning processes in Balint groups.

METHOD

A total of 1460 medical doctors in 352 Balint groups in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland were investigated. Based on the three learning dimensions of the Balint Group Session Questionnaire, statistical analyses were conducted to identify differential effectiveness in Balint leadership.

RESULTS

On the basis of the mean scores of the Balint Group Session Questionnaire items across all group participants of each group leader, the 80 certified Balint group leaders were clustered into two groups of more and less effective leaders by a hierarchichal cluster analysis. Mixed model analyses revealed that the effectiveness of the person of the Balint group leader was the most predictive factor for learning effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Training for Balint group leaders should take into account that effective learning processes in Balint groups are strongly related not only to the method itself but also to the person of the group leader.

A realist informed mixed-methods evaluation of Schwartz Center Rounds® in England

Background

Schwartz Center Rounds®(Rounds) were introduced into the UK in 2009 to support health-care staff to deliver compassionate care, something the Francis report (Francis R.Report of the Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust Public Inquiry. London: The Stationery Office; 2013) identified as lacking. Rounds are organisation-wide forums that prompt reflection and discussion of the emotional, social and ethical challenges of health-care work, with the aim of improving staff well-being and patient care.

Objectives

How, in which contexts and for whom Rounds participation affects staff well-being at work, increases social support for staff and improves patient care.

Design

(1) A scoping review of Rounds literature and comparison with alternative interventions; (2) mapping Rounds providers via a survey, telephone interviews and secondary data; (3) a two-wave survey of (i) new attenders/non-attenders in 10 sites to determine the impact on staff engagement and well-being; and (ii) interviews with Rounds attenders, non-attenders, facilitators, clinical leads, steering group members, board members and observations in nine case study sites to (4) describe experiences and (5) test candidate programme theories by which Rounds ‘work’ (realist evaluation).

Setting

(1) International literature (English); (2) all Rounds providers (acute/community NHS trusts and hospices) at 1 September 2014 (survey/interview) and 15 July 2015 (secondary data); (3) 10 survey sites; and (4 and 5) nine organisational case study sites (six of which also took part in the survey).

Participants

(1) Ten papers were reviewed for Rounds and 146 were reviewed for alternative interventions. (2) Surveys were received from 41 out of 76 (54%) providers and interviews were conducted with 45 out of 76 (59%) providers. (3) Surveys were received from 1140 out of 3815 (30%) individuals at baseline and from 500 out of 1140 (44%) individuals at follow-up. (4 and 5) A total of 177 interviews were conducted, as were observations of 42 Rounds, 29 panel preparations and 28 steering group meetings.

Results

(1) The evidence base is limited; compared with 11 alternative interventions, Rounds offer a unique organisation-wide ‘all staff’ forum in which disclosure/contribution is not essential. (2) Implementation rapidly increased between 2013 and 2015; Rounds were implemented variably; challenges included ward staff attendance and the workload and resources required to sustain Rounds; and costs were widely variable. (3) There was no change in engagement, but poor psychological well-being (12-item General Health Questionnaire) reduced significantly (p < 0.05) in Rounds attenders (25% to 12%) compared with non-attenders (37% to 34%). (4 and 5) Rounds were described as interesting, engaging and supportive; four contextual layers explained the variation in Rounds implementation. We identified four stages of Rounds, ‘core’ and ‘adaptable’ components of Rounds fidelity, and nine context–mechanism–outcome configurations: (i) trust, emotional safety and containment and (ii) group interaction were prerequisites for creating (iii) a countercultural space in Rounds where staff could (iv) tell stories, (v) self-disclose their experiences to peers and (vi) role model vulnerability; (vii) provide important context for staff and patient behaviour; (viii) shining a spotlight on hidden staff and patient stories reduced isolation and enhanced support/teamwork; and (ix) staff learned through reflection resulting in ripple effects and outcomes. Reported outcomes included increased empathy and compassion for colleagues and patients, support for staff and reported changes in practice. The impact of Rounds is cumulative and we have identified the necessary conditions for Rounds to work.

Limitations

Rounds outcomes relied on self-report, fewer regular attenders were recruited than desired, and it was not possible to observe staff post Rounds.

Conclusion

Rounds offer unique support for staff and positively influence staff well-being, empathy and compassion for patients and colleagues.

Future work

The adaptation of Rounds to new contexts and to increase reach needs evaluation.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

How effective and acceptable is Web 2.0 Balint group participation for general practitioners and general practitioner registrars in regional Australia? A pilot study

Objective

General practitioners (GPs) and general practice registrars report work‐related stress. Balint groups may improve coping mechanisms. However, attendance at a face‐to‐face Balint group is difficult for rural doctors due to distance constraints. The study aim was to evaluate online Balint groups for rural doctors and determine effect size for a full‐scale trial.

Design

A mixed‐methods approach, including a pre–post controlled trial and thematic analysis of qualitative data.

Setting

Rural primary care.

Participants

Thirteen GPs and 8 general practice registrars completed the study.

Interventions

Balint groups were delivered over 8–9 fortnightly online sessions. GPs and GP registrars participated in separate groups. Data were collected on work‐related affect, psychological medicine skills and professional isolation using the Warr's Work‐Related Affect Scale, the Psychological Medicine Inventory, and a professional isolation scale.

Main outcome measures

Change scores on Warr's Work‐Related Affect Scale, the Psychological Medicine Inventory, and a professional isolation scale.

Results

Balint participants' scores were significantly higher post‐intervention on the Psychological Medicine Inventory (mean 6.49 (±0.20) versus 5.43 (±0.26); P < 0.01) and Warr's Work‐Related Affect (mean 4.09 (±0.09) versus 3.60 (±0.12); P < 0.01) scales than control group scores. Effect size on these scales ranged from 0.46 to 0.50. The greatest challenge was technical problems related to insufficient broadband speed.

Conclusions

Online Balint groups appear to improve rural doctors' psychological medicine skills and work‐related affect. New data on effect size will inform a full‐scale trial. Improved national broadband infrastructure may enhance online support opportunities for rural doctors.

Research on Balint groups: A literature review

OBJECTIVE

As the scientific literature on Balint groups (BGs) is scattered, this paper provides an overview of the literature on BGs published in peer-reviewed journals. Study characteristics are analyzed and the principal research topics are discussed.

METHODS

'Web of Science' and 'Pubmed' databases were searched and all English-language studies on BGs (empirical and non-empirical) were included.

RESULTS

Of the 94 articles included, 35 are empirical studies adopting a qualitative, quantitative or mixed methodology. The research topics that emerged include outcome, characteristics of BG participants, themes addressed in BGs, BG processes, leadership and BG evaluations. The remaining articles were classified as historical articles, reports and reflective articles, for which the main discussion themes are presented.

CONCLUSION

Research on BGs proves to be diverse, scarce and often methodologically weak. However, indications of the value of BG work were found. Therefore, further research is strongly indicated.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Points of interest that could to be further considered by BG workers and researchers are for instance long-term BG participation and 'modified Balint groups'. Recommendations for future research on BGs are provided.

Ethicality and confidentiality: is there an inverse-care issue in general practice ethics?

This paper discusses confidentiality as a routine issue of concern to British general practitioners participating in a qualitative study as well as in contemporaneous practice literature. While keen to reflect on routine issues, such as confidentiality, participants who professed a lack of expertise in medical ethics also perceived reluctance or inability to access educational resources or ethics support. Such lack of ability might include a perception of non-entitlement to access advice and support, a fear of criticism, or simply that resources fail to be advertised. Participants' insights are set alongside a concurrent debate in the professional literature over whether problems with maintaining confidentiality should be rigorously discussed in a public forum. A preliminary suggestion is that confidentiality may be emblematic of the negotiation between academic and professional ethics.