Cargando…
Impact of intrawork rest breaks on doctors’ performance and well-being: systematic review
OBJECTIVES: To summarise evidence on intrawork breaks and their associated effect on doctors’ well-being and/or performance at work. DESIGN: Systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 statement guidelines DATA SOURCES: Embase, PubMed, Web of S...
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/PMC9756173/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36517098 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-062469 |
_version_ | 1784851576214519808 |
---|---|
author | O'Neill, Aimee Baldwin, David Cortese, Samuele Sinclair, Julia |
author_facet | O'Neill, Aimee Baldwin, David Cortese, Samuele Sinclair, Julia |
author_sort | O'Neill, Aimee |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: To summarise evidence on intrawork breaks and their associated effect on doctors’ well-being and/or performance at work. DESIGN: Systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 statement guidelines DATA SOURCES: Embase, PubMed, Web of Science (Core Collection) and PsychINFO were systematically searched on 6 June 2021. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: No restrictions were placed on language, study design or date of publication. DATA EXTRACTION AND ANALYSIS: Methodological quality was appraised using Cochrane’s Risk of Bias (ROB-2), Cochrane’s Risk of Bias in Non-randomised Studies (ROBINS-I), and the Johanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklists for cross-sectional, cohort and qualitative studies. Quantitative synthesis was not undertaken due to substantial heterogeneity of design and outcomes. Results are presented narratively. RESULTS: Database searches returned 10 557 results and searches of other sources returned two additional records. Thirty-two papers were included in the systematic review, comprised of 29 unique studies, participants and topics and 3 follow-up studies. A variety of well-being and performance outcome measures were used. Overall, findings indicate that intrawork breaks improved some measures of well-being and/or work performance. However, methodological quality was judged to be low with a high risk of bias in most included studies. DISCUSSION: Using existing evidence, it is not possible to conclude with confidence whether intrawork breaks improve well-being and/or work performance in doctors. There is much inconsistency regarding how breaks are defined, measured and the outcomes used to assess effectiveness. Future research should seek to: (a) define and standardise the measurement of breaks, (b) use valid, reliable outcome measures to evaluate their impact on well-being and performance and (c) minimise the risk of bias in studies where possible. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020156924; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=156924. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9756173 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-97561732022-12-17 Impact of intrawork rest breaks on doctors’ performance and well-being: systematic review O'Neill, Aimee Baldwin, David Cortese, Samuele Sinclair, Julia BMJ Open Occupational and Environmental Medicine OBJECTIVES: To summarise evidence on intrawork breaks and their associated effect on doctors’ well-being and/or performance at work. DESIGN: Systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 statement guidelines DATA SOURCES: Embase, PubMed, Web of Science (Core Collection) and PsychINFO were systematically searched on 6 June 2021. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: No restrictions were placed on language, study design or date of publication. DATA EXTRACTION AND ANALYSIS: Methodological quality was appraised using Cochrane’s Risk of Bias (ROB-2), Cochrane’s Risk of Bias in Non-randomised Studies (ROBINS-I), and the Johanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklists for cross-sectional, cohort and qualitative studies. Quantitative synthesis was not undertaken due to substantial heterogeneity of design and outcomes. Results are presented narratively. RESULTS: Database searches returned 10 557 results and searches of other sources returned two additional records. Thirty-two papers were included in the systematic review, comprised of 29 unique studies, participants and topics and 3 follow-up studies. A variety of well-being and performance outcome measures were used. Overall, findings indicate that intrawork breaks improved some measures of well-being and/or work performance. However, methodological quality was judged to be low with a high risk of bias in most included studies. DISCUSSION: Using existing evidence, it is not possible to conclude with confidence whether intrawork breaks improve well-being and/or work performance in doctors. There is much inconsistency regarding how breaks are defined, measured and the outcomes used to assess effectiveness. Future research should seek to: (a) define and standardise the measurement of breaks, (b) use valid, reliable outcome measures to evaluate their impact on well-being and performance and (c) minimise the risk of bias in studies where possible. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020156924; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=156924. BMJ Publishing Group 2022-12-14 /pmc/articles/PMC9756173/ /pubmed/36517098 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-062469 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 | Occupational and Environmental Medicine O'Neill, Aimee Baldwin, David Cortese, Samuele Sinclair, Julia Impact of intrawork rest breaks on doctors’ performance and well-being: systematic review |
title | Impact of intrawork rest breaks on doctors’ performance and well-being: systematic review |
title_full | Impact of intrawork rest breaks on doctors’ performance and well-being: systematic review |
title_fullStr | Impact of intrawork rest breaks on doctors’ performance and well-being: systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | Impact of intrawork rest breaks on doctors’ performance and well-being: systematic review |
title_short | Impact of intrawork rest breaks on doctors’ performance and well-being: systematic review |
title_sort | impact of intrawork rest breaks on doctors’ performance and well-being: systematic review |
topic | Occupational and Environmental Medicine |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9756173/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36517098 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-062469 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT oneillaimee impactofintraworkrestbreaksondoctorsperformanceandwellbeingsystematicreview AT baldwindavid impactofintraworkrestbreaksondoctorsperformanceandwellbeingsystematicreview AT cortesesamuele impactofintraworkrestbreaksondoctorsperformanceandwellbeingsystematicreview AT sinclairjulia impactofintraworkrestbreaksondoctorsperformanceandwellbeingsystematicreview |