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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ward, Madeleine C, Crinall, Karen, McDonald, Rebecca, Crinall, William, Aridas, James, Leung, Cheryl, Quittner, Danielle, Hodges, Ryan J, Rolnik, Daniel L
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