Cargando…
The kindness COVID-19 toolkit: a mixed-methods evaluation of a programme designed by doctors in training for doctors in training
OBJECTIVES: The impact of a coronavirus disease (COVID-19)-specific professional development programme on the well-being of obstetrics and gynaecology (O&G) doctors in training (DiT) working during the pandemic. DESIGN: A mixed-method evaluation of a single group pre–post test design study. SETT...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9684278/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36414290 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-060575 |
_version_ | 1784835249414340608 |
---|---|
author | Ward, Madeleine C Crinall, Karen McDonald, Rebecca Crinall, William Aridas, James Leung, Cheryl Quittner, Danielle Hodges, Ryan J Rolnik, Daniel L |
author_facet | Ward, Madeleine C Crinall, Karen McDonald, Rebecca Crinall, William Aridas, James Leung, Cheryl Quittner, Danielle Hodges, Ryan J Rolnik, Daniel L |
author_sort | Ward, Madeleine C |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: The impact of a coronavirus disease (COVID-19)-specific professional development programme on the well-being of obstetrics and gynaecology (O&G) doctors in training (DiT) working during the pandemic. DESIGN: A mixed-method evaluation of a single group pre–post test design study. SETTING: Melbourne, Australia between September 2020 and April 2021. PARTICIPANTS: 55 O&G DiT working across four healthcare sites of a major tertiary hospital in Victoria, Australia, were included in the programme. INTERVENTIONS: The delivery of a codesigned peer-to-peer programme, which identified and addressed the well-being goals of O&G DiT. Seven interactive workshops were run alongside the implementation of a number of participant-led wellness initiatives. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Repeated-measures analysis of WHO Well-being Index (WHO-5) and Copenhagen Burnout Innovatory (CBI) scores across three time points during the programme. Multilevel generalised linear mixed-effects models with random intercept were fit to the data, both in the entire population (intention-to-treat) and restricted to those who attended the workshop (‘per-protocol’ analysis). Participatory experiences and programme learning were captured using the Most Significant Change (MSC) technique, which included inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: We demonstrated an overall 31.9% improvement in well-being scores (p=0.006). The MSC evaluation captured a shift in workplace culture as a result of the programme, with improvement across the domains of connection, caring, communication, confidence and cooperation. CONCLUSIONS: We have successfully used a mixed-method approach to contextualise a productive programme to improve the well-being of COVID-19 front-line healthcare workers. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9684278 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-96842782022-11-25 The kindness COVID-19 toolkit: a mixed-methods evaluation of a programme designed by doctors in training for doctors in training Ward, Madeleine C Crinall, Karen McDonald, Rebecca Crinall, William Aridas, James Leung, Cheryl Quittner, Danielle Hodges, Ryan J Rolnik, Daniel L BMJ Open Obstetrics and Gynaecology OBJECTIVES: The impact of a coronavirus disease (COVID-19)-specific professional development programme on the well-being of obstetrics and gynaecology (O&G) doctors in training (DiT) working during the pandemic. DESIGN: A mixed-method evaluation of a single group pre–post test design study. SETTING: Melbourne, Australia between September 2020 and April 2021. PARTICIPANTS: 55 O&G DiT working across four healthcare sites of a major tertiary hospital in Victoria, Australia, were included in the programme. INTERVENTIONS: The delivery of a codesigned peer-to-peer programme, which identified and addressed the well-being goals of O&G DiT. Seven interactive workshops were run alongside the implementation of a number of participant-led wellness initiatives. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Repeated-measures analysis of WHO Well-being Index (WHO-5) and Copenhagen Burnout Innovatory (CBI) scores across three time points during the programme. Multilevel generalised linear mixed-effects models with random intercept were fit to the data, both in the entire population (intention-to-treat) and restricted to those who attended the workshop (‘per-protocol’ analysis). Participatory experiences and programme learning were captured using the Most Significant Change (MSC) technique, which included inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: We demonstrated an overall 31.9% improvement in well-being scores (p=0.006). The MSC evaluation captured a shift in workplace culture as a result of the programme, with improvement across the domains of connection, caring, communication, confidence and cooperation. CONCLUSIONS: We have successfully used a mixed-method approach to contextualise a productive programme to improve the well-being of COVID-19 front-line healthcare workers. BMJ Publishing Group 2022-11-22 /pmc/articles/PMC9684278/ /pubmed/36414290 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-060575 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Obstetrics and Gynaecology Ward, Madeleine C Crinall, Karen McDonald, Rebecca Crinall, William Aridas, James Leung, Cheryl Quittner, Danielle Hodges, Ryan J Rolnik, Daniel L The kindness COVID-19 toolkit: a mixed-methods evaluation of a programme designed by doctors in training for doctors in training |
title | The kindness COVID-19 toolkit: a mixed-methods evaluation of a programme designed by doctors in training for doctors in training |
title_full | The kindness COVID-19 toolkit: a mixed-methods evaluation of a programme designed by doctors in training for doctors in training |
title_fullStr | The kindness COVID-19 toolkit: a mixed-methods evaluation of a programme designed by doctors in training for doctors in training |
title_full_unstemmed | The kindness COVID-19 toolkit: a mixed-methods evaluation of a programme designed by doctors in training for doctors in training |
title_short | The kindness COVID-19 toolkit: a mixed-methods evaluation of a programme designed by doctors in training for doctors in training |
title_sort | kindness covid-19 toolkit: a mixed-methods evaluation of a programme designed by doctors in training for doctors in training |
topic | Obstetrics and Gynaecology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9684278/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36414290 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-060575 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT wardmadeleinec thekindnesscovid19toolkitamixedmethodsevaluationofaprogrammedesignedbydoctorsintrainingfordoctorsintraining AT crinallkaren thekindnesscovid19toolkitamixedmethodsevaluationofaprogrammedesignedbydoctorsintrainingfordoctorsintraining AT mcdonaldrebecca thekindnesscovid19toolkitamixedmethodsevaluationofaprogrammedesignedbydoctorsintrainingfordoctorsintraining AT crinallwilliam thekindnesscovid19toolkitamixedmethodsevaluationofaprogrammedesignedbydoctorsintrainingfordoctorsintraining AT aridasjames thekindnesscovid19toolkitamixedmethodsevaluationofaprogrammedesignedbydoctorsintrainingfordoctorsintraining AT leungcheryl thekindnesscovid19toolkitamixedmethodsevaluationofaprogrammedesignedbydoctorsintrainingfordoctorsintraining AT quittnerdanielle thekindnesscovid19toolkitamixedmethodsevaluationofaprogrammedesignedbydoctorsintrainingfordoctorsintraining AT hodgesryanj thekindnesscovid19toolkitamixedmethodsevaluationofaprogrammedesignedbydoctorsintrainingfordoctorsintraining AT rolnikdaniell thekindnesscovid19toolkitamixedmethodsevaluationofaprogrammedesignedbydoctorsintrainingfordoctorsintraining AT wardmadeleinec kindnesscovid19toolkitamixedmethodsevaluationofaprogrammedesignedbydoctorsintrainingfordoctorsintraining AT crinallkaren kindnesscovid19toolkitamixedmethodsevaluationofaprogrammedesignedbydoctorsintrainingfordoctorsintraining AT mcdonaldrebecca kindnesscovid19toolkitamixedmethodsevaluationofaprogrammedesignedbydoctorsintrainingfordoctorsintraining AT crinallwilliam kindnesscovid19toolkitamixedmethodsevaluationofaprogrammedesignedbydoctorsintrainingfordoctorsintraining AT aridasjames kindnesscovid19toolkitamixedmethodsevaluationofaprogrammedesignedbydoctorsintrainingfordoctorsintraining AT leungcheryl kindnesscovid19toolkitamixedmethodsevaluationofaprogrammedesignedbydoctorsintrainingfordoctorsintraining AT quittnerdanielle kindnesscovid19toolkitamixedmethodsevaluationofaprogrammedesignedbydoctorsintrainingfordoctorsintraining AT hodgesryanj kindnesscovid19toolkitamixedmethodsevaluationofaprogrammedesignedbydoctorsintrainingfordoctorsintraining AT rolnikdaniell kindnesscovid19toolkitamixedmethodsevaluationofaprogrammedesignedbydoctorsintrainingfordoctorsintraining |