Transferability of Psychological Interventions from Disaster-Exposed Employees to Healthcare Workers Working during the COVID-19 Pandemic
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Background
The COVID-19 Pandemic had a significant negative impact on the mental health of healthcare workers. Evidence-based interventions that could be used to mitigate this impact are lacking in the literature. This review aims to evaluate psychological interventions used for employees following previous disasters and assess the transferability of these interventions to a healthcare setting during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Methods
Intervention information from a previously published systematic review of the literature published up to 2015 was extracted, and an additional search of studies published from 2015-2020 was conducted. Studies were assessed for transferability using a checklist derived from the PIET-T process model.
Results
Interventions from eighteen studies were assessed for transferability (including three studies identified in an updated literature search). Interventions established as most transferable included resilience training, meditation/mindfulness interventions, and cognitive behavioural therapy. Psychological debriefing was transferable but as it is contrary to current recommendations is not deemed appropriate for adoption.
Implications
Several existing interventions have the potential to be utilised within the COVID-19 context/pandemic. More research needs to be undertaken in this area to assess these interventions upon transfer.
Article activity feed
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.28.21265604: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:However, strengths and limitations of our approach need to be considered. A checklist was used in this derived from the “PIET-T Process model” which was designed specifically to examine the scope for the potential transferability of healthcare interventions …
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.28.21265604: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:However, strengths and limitations of our approach need to be considered. A checklist was used in this derived from the “PIET-T Process model” which was designed specifically to examine the scope for the potential transferability of healthcare interventions from one context to another. While it is a strength to have a theoretically informed approach, there are no established cut-offs for transferability. We chose to focus on those interventions that were amongst the most highly rated and tried to minimise subjectivity by using multiple scorers. The limited research in the area meant we had to broaden our scope to all workers and not just healthcare workers. Extracting intervention information from a previous systematic review6 allowed for a more thorough search of the literature to be conducted. Studies not written in English were excluded from the search and this may have led to important studies being left out of the review. Only one database was searched for updated relevant literature from 2015 onwards. Only one study gave any information about how the intervention could be transferred to a different context. The target context of this study included frontline HCWs in a hospital setting in Ireland due to the analysts involved being more familiar with this healthcare system, this may limit the generalisability of our findings. Interventions were generally poorly described and therefore replication of the original intervention may be difficult. A thorough examination of rob...
Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.
Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.
Results from rtransparent:- Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- No protocol registration statement was detected.
Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.
-
