No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Sources of moral distress among obstetrician-gynecologists after Dobbs: A qualitative, multi-state study
Purpose of review
This review examines the implications of the 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision on neonatal care and explores how legal restrictions on abortion are influencing medical practices for neonates and the broader healthcare landscape for neonates.
Recent Findings
The Dobbs decision has led to increased uncertainty and challenges in both maternal and neonatal healthcare. Restrictive abortion laws are associated with higher infant mortality rates, increased health disparity, and increased care provider ethical dilemmas and moral distress due to legal uncertainty surrounding the care of infants. However, current changes in federal and state law regarding abortion do not change the previously established standard of care for neonates. Other federal legal statutes potentially addressing the care of neonates have existed for over 20 years and have had minimal effect on the practice of neonatology, because there is no record of federal enforcement actions or federal case law to clarify how the law should be interpreted.
Summary
While restrictive abortion laws primarily affect women and pregnant people's health care, indirect effects on neonatal care are becoming more common. There are other laws and policies with greater potential to regulate care for infants at the federal and state level. Professional medical standards remain the guiding framework in neonatal care. Clinicians can mitigate legal concerns through knowledge and advocacy.
Importance
Following the Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision in June 2022, 17 US states have functionally banned abortion except in narrow circumstances, and physicians found in violation of these laws face felony charges, loss of their medical license, fines, and prison sentences. Patient impacts are being studied closely, but less research has focused on the consequences for obstetrician-gynecologists (OB-GYNs), for whom medically necessary care provision may now carry serious personal and professional consequences.
Objective
To characterize perceptions of the impact of abortion restrictions on clinical practice, moral distress, mental health, and turnover intention among US OB-GYNs practicing in states with functional bans on abortion.
Design, Setting, and Participants
This qualitative study included semistructured, remote interviews with OB-GYNs from 13 US states with abortion bans. Volunteer sample of 54 OB-GYNs practicing in states that had banned abortion as of March 2023.
Exposure
State abortion bans enacted between June 2022 and March 2023.
Main Outcomes and Measures
OB-GYNs’ perceptions of clinical and personal impacts of abortion bans.
Results
This study included 54 OB-GYNs (mean [SD] age, 42 [7] years; 44 [81%] female participants; 3 [6%] non-Hispanic Black or African American participants; 45 [83%] White participants) who practiced in general obstetrics and gynecology (39 [72%]), maternal-fetal medicine (7 [13%]), and complex family planning (8 [15%]). Two major domains were identified in which the laws affected OB-GYNs: (1) clinical impacts (eg, delays in care until patients became more sick or legal sign-off on a medical exception to the ban was obtained; restrictions on counseling patients on pregnancy options; inability to provide appropriate care oneself or make referrals for such care); and (2) personal impacts (eg, moral distress; fears and perceived consequences of law violation; intention to leave the state; symptoms of depression and anxiety).
Conclusions and relevance
In this qualitative study of OB-GYNs practicing under abortion bans, participants reported deep and pervasive impacts of state laws, with implications for workforce sustainability, physician health, and patient outcomes. In the context of public policies that restrict physicians’ clinical autonomy, organization-level supports for physicians are essential to maintain workforce sustainability, clinician health and well-being, and availability of timely and accessible health care throughout the US.
Background:
The oncology setting is characterized by various complexities, and healthcare professionals may experience stressful conditions associated with ethical decisions during daily clinical practice. Moral distress (MD) is a condition of distress that is generated when an individual would like to take action in line with their ethical beliefs but in conflict with the healthcare facility's customs and/or organization. This study aims to describe the MD of oncology health professionals in different care settings.
Methods:
Descriptive quantitative study was conducted in the Operating Units of the Istituti Fisioterapici Ospitalieri in Rome between January and March 2022. The investigated sample consisted of the medical and nursing staff on duty at the facility, who were given a questionnaire through a web survey. Besides a brief sociodemographic form, the MD Scale-Revised questionnaire was used for data collection.
Results:
The sample consisted of nurses (51%) and physicians (49%), predominantly working in surgeries (48%), and having 20-30 years of service (30%). MD was higher among healthcare professionals, in medicine than that ing in corporate organizations, surgeries, or outpatient clinics (p = 0.007). It was not related to the profession (p = 0.163), gender (p = 0.103), or years of service (p = 0.610).
Conclusions:
This paper outlines the prevalence of MD in care settings and describes its relationship with profession, gender, and seniority. There is no patient care without the care of health professionals: knowing and fighting MD improves the safety of the treatments provided and the quality perceived by patients.
Background
Working as a neonatologist in a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) is stressful and involves ethically challenging situations. These situations may cause neonatologists to experience high levels of moral distress, especially in the context of caring for extremely premature infants (EPIs). In Greece, moral distress among neonatologists working in NICUs remains understudied and warrants further exploration.
Methods
This prospective qualitative study was conducted from March to August 2022. A combination of purposive and snowball sampling was used and data were collected by semi-structured interviews with twenty neonatologists. Data were classified and analyzed by thematic analysis approach.
Results
A variety of distinct themes and subthemes emerged from the analysis of the interview data. Neonatologists face moral uncertainty. Furthermore, they prioritize their traditional (Hippocratic) role as healers. Importantly, neonatologists seek third-party support for their decisions to reduce their decision uncertainty. In addition, based on the analysis of the interview data, multiple predisposing factors that foster and facilitate neonatologists’ moral distress emerged, as did multiple predisposing factors that are sometimes associated with neonatologists’ constraint distress and sometimes associated with their uncertainty distress. The predisposing factors that foster and facilitate neonatologists’ moral distress thus identified include the lack of previous experience on the part of neonatologists, the lack of clear and adequate clinical practice guidelines/recommendations/protocols, the scarcity of health care resources, the fact that in the context of neonatology, the infant’s best interest and quality of life are difficult to identify, and the need to make decisions in a short time frame. NICU directors, neonatologists’ colleagues working in the same NICU and parental wishes and attitudes were identified as predisposing factors that are sometimes associated with neonatologists’ constraint distress and sometimes associated with their uncertainty distress. Ultimately, neonatologists become more resistant to moral distress over time.
Conclusions
We concluded that neonatologists’ moral distress should be conceptualized in the broad sense of the term and is closely associated with multiple predisposing factors. Such distress is greatly affected by interpersonal relationships. A variety of distinct themes and subthemes were identified, which, for the most part, were consistent with the findings of previous research. However, we identified some nuances that are of practical importance. The results of this study may serve as a starting point for future research.
Unlabelled:
Moral distress is common among critical care physicians and can impact negatively healthcare individuals and institutions. Better understanding inter-individual variability in moral distress is needed to inform future wellness interventions.
Objectives:
To explore when and how critical care physicians experience moral distress in the workplace and its consequences, how physicians' professional interactions with colleagues affected their perceived level of moral distress, and in which circumstances professional rewards were experienced and mitigated moral distress.
Design:
Interview-based qualitative study using inductive thematic analysis.
Setting and participants:
Twenty critical care physicians practicing in Canadian ICUs who expressed interest in participating in a semi-structured interview after completion of a national, cross-sectional survey of moral distress in ICU physicians.
Results:
Study participants described different ways to perceive and resolve morally challenging clinical situations, which were grouped into four clinical moral orientations: virtuous, resigned, deferring, and empathic. Moral orientations resulted from unique combinations of strength of personal moral beliefs and perceived power over moral clinical decision-making, which led to different rationales for moral decision-making. Study findings illustrate how sociocultural, legal, and clinical contexts influenced individual physicians' moral orientation and how moral orientation altered perceived moral distress and moral satisfaction. The degree of dissonance between individual moral orientations within care team determined, in part, the quantity of "negative judgments" and/or "social support" that physicians obtained from their colleagues. The levels of moral distress, moral satisfaction, social judgment, and social support ultimately affected the type and severity of the negative consequences experienced by ICU physicians.
Conclusions and relevance:
An expanded understanding of moral orientations provides an additional tool to address the problem of moral distress in the critical care setting. Diversity in moral orientations may explain, in part, the variability in moral distress levels among clinicians and likely contributes to interpersonal conflicts in the ICU setting. Additional investigations on different moral orientations in various clinical environments are much needed to inform the design of effective systemic and institutional interventions that address healthcare professionals' moral distress and mitigate its negative consequences.
The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling in Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization held that the U.S. Constitution does not confer the right to an abortion, which set into motion an overhaul of reproductive health care services in certain states. Health care professionals are now operating within a rapidly changing landscape of clinical practice in which they may experience conflict between personal and professional morals (eg, bodily autonomy, patient advocacy), uncertainty regarding allowable practices, and fear of prosecution (eg, loss of medical license) related to reproductive health care services. The ethical dilemmas stemming from Dobbs create a context for exposure to potentially morally injurious events, moral distress, and moral injury (ie, functional impairment stemming from exposure to moral violations) among health care professionals. Considerations related to clinical intervention and approaches to policy are reviewed. Early identification of health care professionals' potentially morally injurious event exposure related to restricted reproductive services is critical for preventing and intervening on moral injury, with implications for improving functioning and retention within the medical field.
We draw artificial boundaries between our lives at work, at home, and in the community. Each person is living an integrated life where all of their environments (resources, physical environment, psychosocial environment, responsibilities/demands) interact to impact their safety, health, and well-being. Total Worker Health® is an approach developed by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) to address such interactions, and to advance science and practice for protecting workers’ safety, health, and well-being. The Total Worker Health (TWH) approach represents an expansion of traditional occupational safety and health research and practice, with strong safety protections for workers as its foundation. The current paper provides an introduction to TWH, including: (1) Significance, (2) Historical Background, (3) Hierarchy of Controls, (4) Review of TWH Interventions, and (5) Future Opportunities. The reciprocal and interactive perspective of TWH is consistent with Skinnerian and other approaches to behavioral science, as well as organizational systems analysis approaches. With its behavioral and systems analysis roots, and associated historical emphasis on environmental conditions and interventions, the Organizational Behavior Management community can make great and important contributions in the TWH domain.
Background
Concepts of moral distress (MD) among physicians have evolved and extend beyond the notion of psychological distress caused by being in a situation in which one is constrained from acting on what one knows to be right. With many accounts involving complex personal, professional, legal, ethical and moral issues, we propose a review of current understanding of MD among physicians.
Methods
A systematic evidence-based approach guided systematic scoping review is proposed to map the current concepts of MD among physicians published in PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science, SCOPUS, ERIC and Google Scholar databases. Concurrent and independent thematic and direct content analysis (split approach) was conducted on included articles to enhance the reliability and transparency of the process. The themes and categories identified were combined using the jigsaw perspective to create domains that form the framework of the discussion that follows.
Results
A total of 30 156 abstracts were identified, 2473 full-text articles were reviewed and 128 articles were included. The five domains identified were as follows: (1) current concepts, (2) risk factors, (3) impact, (4) tools and (5) interventions.
Conclusions
Initial reviews suggest that MD involves conflicts within a physician’s personal beliefs, values and principles (personal constructs) caused by personal, ethical, moral, contextual, professional and sociocultural factors. How these experiences are processed and reflected on and then integrated into the physician’s personal constructs impacts their self-concepts of personhood and identity and can result in MD. The ring theory of personhood facilitates an appreciation of how new experiences create dissonance and resonance within personal constructs. These insights allow the forwarding of a new broader concept of MD and a personalised approach to assessing and treating MD. While further studies are required to test these findings, they offer a personalised means of supporting a physician’s MD and preventing burn-out.
This study aims to understand professionalism dilemmas medical students have experienced during clinical clerkships and the resulting moral distress using an explanatory mixed-method sequential design—an anonymous survey followed by in-depth interviews. A total of 153 students completed and returned the survey, with a response rate of 21.7% (153/706). The top three most frequently occurring dilemmas were the healthcare team answering patients’ questions inadequately (27.5%), providing fragmented care to patients (17.6%), and withholding information from a patient who requested it (13.7%). Students felt moderately to severely distressed when they observed a ward mate make sexually inappropriate remarks (81.7%), were pressured by a senior doctor to perform a procedure they did not feel qualified to do (77.1%), and observed a ward mate inappropriately touching a patient, family member, other staff, or student (71.9%). The thematic analysis based on nine in-depth interviews revealed the details of clinicians’ unprofessional behaviors towards patients, including verbal abuse, unconsented physical examinations, bias in clinical decisions, students’ inaction towards the dilemmas, and students’ perceived need for more guidance in applying bioethics and professionalism knowledge. Study findings provide medical educators insights into designing a professional development teaching that equips students with coping skills to deal with professionalism dilemmas.
Background
Characterised by feelings of helplessness in the face of clinical, organization and societal demands, medical students are especially prone to moral distress (MD). Despite risks of disillusionment and burnout, efforts to support them have been limited by a dearth of data and understanding of MD in medical students. Yet, new data on how healthcare professionals confront difficult care situations suggest that MD could be better understood through the lens of the Ring Theory of Personhood (RToP). A systematic scoping review (SSR) guided by the RToP is proposed to evaluate the present understanding of MD amongst medical students.
Methods
The Systematic Evidence-Based Approach (SEBA) is adopted to map prevailing accounts of MD in medical students. To enhance the transparency and reproducibility, the SEBA methodology employs a structured search approach, concurrent and independent thematic analysis and directed content analysis (Split Approach), the Jigsaw Perspective that combines complementary themes and categories, and the Funnelling Process that compares the results of the Jigsaw Perspective with tabulated summaries to ensure the accountability of these findings. The domains created guide the discussion.
Results
Two thousand six hundred seventy-one abstracts were identified from eight databases, 316 articles were reviewed, and 20 articles were included. The four domains identified include definitions, sources, recognition and, interventions for MD.
Conclusions
MD in medical students may be explained as conflicts between the values, duties, and principles contained within the different aspects of their identity. These conflicts which are characterised as disharmony (within) and dyssynchrony (between) the rings of RToP underline the need for personalised and longitudinal evaluations and support of medical students throughout their training. This longitudinal oversight and support should be supported by the host organization that must also ensure access to trained faculty, a nurturing and safe environment for medical students to facilitate speak-up culture, anonymous reporting, feedback opportunities and supplementing positive role modelling and mentoring within the training program.
The majority of U.S. abortion patients are poor women, and Black and Hispanic women. Therefore, this article encourages bioethicists and equity advocates to consider whether the need for abortion care should be considered a health disparity, and if yes, whether framing it this way would increase the ability of poor women and women of color to get the medical care they need. In order to engage with these critical questions, bioethicists must avoid abortion exceptionalism and respect patients as moral agents. Centering the conscience of pregnant people shifts our analysis away from the ethics of the act of abortion, and toward the ethics of access to abortion care. Because the Supreme Court is on the brink of shifting the question of abortion's legality to state legislatures, this is the moment for all bioethicists to clarify and strengthen their thinking, writing, and teaching in abortion ethics.
Importance:
Burnout is common among physicians and is associated with suboptimal patient outcomes. Little is known about how experiences with patients, families, and visitors differ by physician characteristics or contribute to the risk of burnout.
Objective:
To examine the occurrence of mistreatment and discrimination by patients, families, and visitors by physician characteristics and the association between such interactions and experiencing burnout.
Design, setting, and participants:
This cross-sectional survey was conducted from November 20, 2020, to March 23, 2021, among US physicians.
Exposures:
Mistreatment and discrimination were measured using items adapted from the Association of American Medical College's Graduation Questionnaire with an additional item querying respondents about refusal of care because of the physicians' personal attributes; higher score indicated greater exposure to mistreatment and discrimination.
Main outcomes and measures:
Burnout as measured by the Maslach Burnout Inventory.
Results:
Of 6512 responding physicians, 2450 (39.4%) were female, and 369 (7.2%) were Hispanic; 681 (13.3%) were non-Hispanic Asian, Native Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander; and 3633 (70.5%) were non-Hispanic White individuals. Being subjected to racially or ethnically offensive remarks (1849 [29.4%]), offensive sexist remarks (1810 [28.7%]), or unwanted sexual advances (1291 [20.5%]) by patients, families, or visitors at least once in the previous year were common experiences. Approximately 1 in 5 physicians (1359 [21.6%]) had experienced a patient or their family refusing to allow them to provide care because of the physician's personal attributes at least once in the previous year. On multivariable analyses, female physicians (OR, 2.33; 95% CI, 2.02-2.69) and ethnic and racial minority physicians (eg, Black or African American: OR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.13-2.23) were more likely to report mistreatment or discrimination in the previous year. Experience of mistreatment or discrimination was independently associated with higher odds of burnout (vs score of 0 [no mistreatment], score of 1: OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.04-1.55; score of 2: OR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.38-2.08; score of 3: OR, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.89-2.57). There was no difference in the odds of burnout by gender after controlling for experiencing mistreatment and discrimination score and other demographic factors, specialty, practice setting, work hours, and frequency of overnight call.
Conclusions and relevance:
In this study, mistreatment and discrimination by patients, families, and visitors were common, especially for female and racial and ethnic minority physicians, and associated with burnout. Efforts to mitigate physician burnout should include attention to patient and visitor conduct.
Background
Physician burnout and wellbeing are an ongoing concern. Limited research has reported on the impact of the COVID 19 pandemic on burnout over time among U.S. physicians.
Methods
We surveyed U.S. frontline physicians at two time points (wave one in May–June 2020 and wave two in Dec 2020-Jan 2021) using a validated burnout measure. The survey was emailed to a national stratified random sample of family physicians, internists, hospitalists, intensivists, emergency medicine physicians, and infectious disease physicians. Burnout was assessed with the Professional Fulfillment Index Burnout Composite scale (PFI-BC). Responses were weighted to account for sample design and non-response bias. Random effects and quantile regression analyses were used to estimate change in conditional mean and median PFI-BC scores, adjusting for physician, geographic, and pandemic covariates.
Results
In the random effects regression, conditional mean burnout scores increased in the second wave among all respondents (difference 0.15 (CI: 0.24, 0.57)) and among respondents to both waves (balanced panel) (difference 0.21 (CI: − 0.42, 0.84)). Conditional burnout scores increased in wave 2 among all specialties except for Emergency medicine, with the largest increases among Hospitalists, 0.28 points (CI: − 0.19,0.76) among all respondents and 0.36 (CI: − 0.39,1.11) in the balanced panel, and primary care physicians, 0.21 (CI: − 0.23,0.66) among all respondents and 0.31 (CI: − 0.38,1.00) in the balanced panel. The conditional mean PFI-BC score among hospitalists increased from 1.10 (CI: 0.73,1.46) to 1.38 (CI: 1.02,1.74) in wave 2 in all respondents and from 1.49 (CI: 0.69,2.29) to 1.85 (CI: 1.24,2.46) in the balanced panel, near or above the 1.4 threshold indicating burnout. Findings from quantile regression were consistent with those from random effects.
Conclusions
Rates of physician burnout during the first year of the pandemic increased over time among four of five frontline specialties, with greatest increases among hospitalist and primary care respondents. Our findings, while not statistically significant, were consistent with worsening burnout; both the random effects and quantile regressions produced similar point estimates. Impacts of the ongoing pandemic on physician burnout warrant further research.
Ethical dilemmas for healthcare workers (HCWs) during pandemics highlight the centrality of moral stressors and moral distress (MD) as well as potentially morally injurious events (PMIEs) and moral injury (MI). These constructs offer a novel approach to understanding workplace stressors in healthcare settings, especially in the demanding times of COVID-19, but they so far lack clear identification of causes and consequences. A scoping review of moral stressors, moral distress, PMIEs, and MI of healthcare workers during COVID-19 was conducted using the databases Web of Science Core Collection and PsycINFO based on articles published up to October 2021. Studies were selected based on the following inclusion criteria: (1) the measurement of either moral stress, MD, PMIEs, or MI among HCWs; (2) original research using qualitative or quantitative methods; and (3) the availability of the peer-reviewed original article in English or German. The initial search revealed n = 149,394 studies from Web of Science and n = 34 studies from EBSCOhost. Nineteen studies were included in the review. Conditions representing moral stressors and PMIEs as well as MD and MI as their potential outcomes in healthcare contexts during COVID-19 are presented and discussed. Highlighting MD and MI in HCWs during COVID-19 brings attention to the need for conceptualizing the impact of moral stressors of any degree. Therefore, the development of a common, theoretically founded model of MD and MI is desirable.
Physicians and nurses working in acute care settings, such as tertiary hospitals, are involved in various stages of critical and terminal care, ranging from diagnosis of life-threatening diseases to care for the dying. It is well known that critical and terminal care causes moral distress to healthcare professionals. This study aimed to explore moral distress in critical and terminal care in acute hospital settings by analyzing the experiences of physicians and nurses from various departments. Semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted in two tertiary hospitals in South Korea. The collected data were analyzed using grounded theory. A total of 22 physicians and nurses who had experienced moral difficulties regarding critical and terminal care were recruited via purposive maximum variation sampling, and 21 reported moral distress. The following points were what participants believed to be right for the patients: minimizing meaningless interventions during the terminal stage, letting patients know of their poor prognosis, saving lives, offering palliative care, and providing care with compassion. However, family dominance, hierarchy, the clinical culture of avoiding the discussion of death, lack of support for the surviving patients, and intensive workload challenged what the participants were pursuing and frustrated them. As a result, the participants experienced stress, lack of enthusiasm, guilt, depression, and skepticism. This study revealed that healthcare professionals working in tertiary hospitals in South Korea experienced moral distress when taking care of critically and terminally ill patients, in similar ways to the medical staff working in other settings. On the other hand, the present study uniquely identified that the aspects of saving lives and the necessity of palliative care were reported as those valued by healthcare professionals. This study contributes to the literature by adding data collected from two tertiary hospitals in South Korea.
Background:
Sudden changes in clinical practice and the altered ability to care for patients due to the COVID-19 pandemic have been associated with moral distress and mental health concerns in healthcare workers internationally. This study aimed to investigate the severity, prevalence, and predictors of moral distress experienced by Australian healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Methods:
A nationwide, voluntary, anonymous, single time-point, online survey of self-identified frontline healthcare workers was conducted between 27th August and 23rd October 2020. Participants were recruited through health organisations, professional associations, or colleges, universities, government contacts, and national media.
Results:
7846 complete responses were received from nurses (39.4%), doctors (31.1%), allied health staff (16.7%), or other roles (6.7%). Many participants reported moral distress related to resource scarcity (58.3%), wearing PPE (31.7%) limiting their ability to care for patients, exclusion of family going against their values (60.2%), and fear of letting co-workers down if they were infected (55.0%). Many personal and workplace predictors of moral distress were identified, with those working in certain frontline areas, metropolitan locations, and with prior mental health diagnoses at particular risk of distress. Moral distress was associated with increased risk of anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, and burnout. Conversely, feeling appreciated by the community protected against these risks in healthcare workers.
Conclusions:
Safeguarding healthcare workforces during crises is important for both patient safety and workforce longevity. Targeted interventions are required to prevent or minimise moral distress and associated mental health concerns in healthcare workers during COVID-19 and other crises.
Aims
To explore factors associated with nurses' moral distress during the first COVID-19 surge and their longer-term mental health.
Design
Cross-sectional, correlational survey study.
Methods
Registered nurses were surveyed in September 2020 about their experiences during the first peak month of COVID-19 using the new, validated, COVID-19 Moral Distress Scale for Nurses. Nurses' mental health was measured by recently experienced symptoms. Analyses included descriptive statistics and regression analysis. Outcome variables were moral distress and mental health. Explanatory variables were frequency of COVID-19 patients, leadership communication and personal protective equipment/cleaning supplies access. The sample comprised 307 nurses (43% response rate) from two academic medical centres.
Results
Many respondents had difficulty accessing personal protective equipment. Most nurses reported that hospital leadership communication was transparent, effective and timely. The most distressing situations were the transmission risk to nurses' family members, caring for patients without family members present, and caring for patients dying without family or clergy present. These occurred occasionally with moderate distress. Nurses reported 2.5 days each in the past week of feeling anxiety, withdrawn and having difficulty sleeping. Moral distress decreased with effective communication and access to personal protective equipment. Moral distress was associated with longer-term mental health.
Conclusion
Pandemic patient care situations are the greatest sources of nurses' moral distress. Effective leadership communication, fewer COVID-19 patients, and access to protective equipment decrease moral distress, which influences longer-term mental health.
Impact
Little was known about the impact of COVID-19 on nurses' moral distress. We found that nurses' moral distress was associated with the volume of care for infected patients, access to personal protective equipment, and communication from leaders. We found that moral distress was associated with longer-term mental health. Leaders should communicate transparently to decrease nurses' moral distress and the negative effects of global crises on nurses' longer-term mental health.
Background
Moral distress occurs when constraints prevent healthcare providers from acting in accordance with their core moral values to provide good patient care. The experience of moral distress in nurses might be magnified during the current Covid-19 pandemic.
Objective
To explore causes of moral distress in nurses caring for Covid-19 patients and identify strategies to enhance their moral resiliency.
Research design
A qualitative study using a qualitative content analysis of focus group discussions and in-depth interviews. We purposively sampled 31 nurses caring for Covid-19 patients in the acute care units within large academic medical systems in Maryland and New York City during April to June 2020.
Ethical considerations
We obtained approval from the Institutional Review Board at the University of Maryland, Baltimore.
Results
We identified themes and sub-themes representative of major causes of moral distress in nurses caring Covid-19 patients. These included (a) lack of knowledge and uncertainty regarding how to treat a new illness; (b) being overwhelmed by the depth and breadth of the Covid-19 illness; (c) fear of exposure to the virus leading to suboptimal care; (d) adopting a team model of nursing care that caused intra-professional tensions and miscommunications; (e) policies to reduce viral transmission (visitation policy and PPE policy) that prevented nurses to assume their caring role; (f) practicing within crisis standards of care; and (g) dealing with medical resource scarcity. Participants discussed their coping mechanisms and suggested future strategies.
Discussion/Conclusion
Our study affirms new causes of moral distress related to the Covid-19 pandemic. Institutions need to develop a supportive ethical climate that can restore nurses’ moral resiliency. Such a climate should include non-hierarchical interdisciplinary spaces where all providers can meet together as moral peers to discuss their experiences.
Introduction
The COVID-19 pandemic has taken a significant toll on the health of structurally vulnerable patient populations as well as healthcare workers. The concepts of structural stigma and moral distress are important and interrelated, yet rarely explored or researched in medical education. Structural stigma refers to how discrimination towards certain groups is enacted through policy and practice. Moral distress describes the tension and conflict that health workers experience when they are unable to fulfil their duties due to circumstances outside of their control. In this study, the authors explored how resident physicians perceive moral distress in relation to structural stigma. An improved understanding of such experiences may provide insights into how to prepare future physicians to improve health equity.
Methods
Utilizing constructivist grounded theory methodology, 22 participants from across Canada including 17 resident physicians from diverse specialties and 5 faculty members were recruited for semi-structured interviews from April–June 2020. Data were analyzed using constant comparative analysis.
Results
Results describe a distinctive form of moral distress called structural distress, which centers upon the experience of powerlessness leading resident physicians to go above and beyond the call of duty, potentially worsening their psychological well-being. Faculty play a buffering role in mitigating the impact of structural distress by role modeling vulnerability and involving residents in policy decisions.
Conclusion
These findings provide unique insights into teaching and learning about the care of structurally vulnerable populations and faculty’s role related to resident advocacy and decision-making. The concept of structural distress may provide the foundation for future research into the intersection between resident well-being and training related to health equity.
Objectives To understand the wider factors influencing and impacting upon hospital doctors’ well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic in England.Design Cross-sectional survey and mixed quantitative–qualitative analysis.Setting Acute National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust in England.Participants An online survey was circulated in early June 2020 to all 449 doctors employed by the Trust. 242 doctors completed the survey (54% response rate).Primary outcome measures Questions assessed occupational details, self-reported changes in physical and mental health, satisfaction with working hours and patterns, availability of personal protective equipment (PPE), medication and facilities, communication and sought to identify areas seen as having a significant effect on doctors’ well-being.Results 96% of respondents requiring PPE were able to access it. Nearly half of the respondents felt that their mental health had deteriorated since the start of the pandemic. Over a third stated that their physical health had also declined. Issues identified as having a negative impact on doctors included increased workload, redeployment, loss of autonomy, personal issues affecting family members, anxiety around recovery plans, inadequate access to changing and storage facilities and to rest areas that allow for social distancing. Doctors appreciated access to ‘calm rooms’ that were made available for staff, access to clinical psychology support, free drinks and free car parking on site.Conclusion The emerging themes are suggestive of increased burnout risk among doctors during the COVID-19 pandemic and encompass factors well beyond shortage of PPE. Small organisational initiatives and the implementation of changes suggested by survey respondents can have a positive impact on doctors’ well-being.
Work plays a central role in health. A conceptual model can help frame research priorities and questions to explore determinants of workers’ safety, health, and wellbeing. A previous conceptual model focused on the workplace setting to emphasize the role of conditions of work in shaping workers’ safety, health and wellbeing. These conditions of work include physical, organizational, and psychosocial factors. This manuscript presents and discusses an updated and expanded conceptual model, placing the workplace and the conditions of work within the broader context of socio-political-economic environments and consequent trends in employment and labor force patterns. Social, political and economic trends, such as growing reliance on technology, climate change, and globalization, have significant implications for workers’ day-to-day experiences. These structural forces in turn shape employment and labor patterns, with implications for the availability and quality of jobs; the nature of relationships between employers and workers; and the benefits and protections available to workers. Understanding these patterns will be critical for anticipating the consequences of future changes in the conditions of work, and ultimately help inform decision-making around policies and practices intended to protect and promote worker safety, health, and wellbeing. This model provides a structure for anticipating research needs in response to the changing nature of work, including the formation of research priorities, the need for expanded research methods and measures, and attention to diverse populations of enterprises and workers. This approach anticipates changes in the way work is structured, managed, and experienced by workers and can effectively inform policies and practices needed to protect and promote worker safety, health and wellbeing.
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has put considerable physical and emotional strain on frontline healthcare workers. Among frontline healthcare workers, physician trainees represent a unique group—functioning simultaneously as both learners and caregivers and experiencing considerable challenges during the pandemic. However, we have a limited understanding regarding the emotional effects and vulnerability experienced by trainees during the pandemic. We investigated the effects of trainee exposure to patients being tested for COVID-19 on their depression, anxiety, stress, burnout and professional fulfillment. All physician trainees at an academic medical center (n = 1375) were invited to participate in an online survey. We compared the measures of depression, anxiety, stress, burnout and professional fulfillment among trainees who were exposed to patients being tested for COVID-19 and those that were not, using univariable and multivariable models. We also evaluated perceived life stressors such as childcare, home schooling, personal finances and work-family balance among both groups. 393 trainees completed the survey (29% response rate). Compared to the non-exposed group, the exposed group had a higher prevalence of stress (29.4% vs. 18.9%), and burnout (46.3% vs. 33.7%). The exposed group also experienced moderate to extremely high perceived stress regarding childcare and had a lower work-family balance. Multivariable models indicated that trainees who were exposed to COVID-19 patients reported significantly higher stress (10.96 [95% CI, 9.65 to 12.46] vs 8.44 [95% CI, 7.3 to 9.76]; P = 0.043) and were more likely to be burned out (1.31 [95% CI, 1.21 to1.41] vs 1.07 [95% CI, 0.96 to 1.19]; P = 0.002]. We also found that female trainees were more likely to be stressed (P = 0.043); while unmarried trainees were more likely to be depressed (P = 0.009), and marginally more likely to have anxiety (P = 0.051). To address these challenges, wellness programs should focus on sustaining current programs, develop new and targeted mental health resources that are widely accessible and devise strategies for creating awareness regarding these resources.
Background
Medical-related professions are at high suicide risk. However, data are contradictory and comparisons were not made between gender, occupation and specialties, epochs of times. Thus, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis on suicide risk among health-care workers.
Method
The PubMed, Cochrane Library, Science Direct and Embase databases were searched without language restriction on April 2019, with the following keywords: suicide* AND (« health care worker* » OR physician* OR nurse*). When possible, we stratified results by gender, countries, time, and specialties. Estimates were pooled using random-effect meta-analysis. Differences by study-level characteristics were estimated using stratified meta-analysis and meta-regression. Suicides, suicidal attempts, and suicidal ideation were retrieved from national or local specific registers or case records. In addition, suicide attempts and suicidal ideation were also retrieved from questionnaires (paper or internet).
Results
The overall SMR for suicide in physicians was 1.44 (95CI 1.16, 1.72) with an important heterogeneity (I² = 93.9%, p<0.001). Female were at higher risk (SMR = 1.9; 95CI 1.49, 2.58; and ES = 0.67; 95CI 0.19, 1.14; p<0.001 compared to male). US physicians were at higher risk (ES = 1.34; 95CI 1.28, 1.55; p <0.001 vs Rest of the world). Suicide decreased over time, especially in Europe (ES = -0.18; 95CI -0.37, -0.01; p = 0.044). Some specialties might be at higher risk such as anesthesiologists, psychiatrists, general practitioners and general surgeons. There were 1.0% (95CI 1.0, 2.0; p<0.001) of suicide attempts and 17% (95CI 12, 21; p<0.001) of suicidal ideation in physicians. Insufficient data precluded meta-analysis on other health-care workers.
Conclusion
Physicians are an at-risk profession of suicide, with women particularly at risk. The rate of suicide in physicians decreased over time, especially in Europe. The high prevalence of physicians who committed suicide attempt as well as those with suicidal ideation should benefits for preventive strategies at the workplace. Finally, the lack of data on other health-care workers suggest to implement studies investigating those occupations.
Background: The objective of this article is to provide an overview of and update on the Office for Total Worker Health® (TWH) program of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (CDC/NIOSH). Methods: This article describes the evolution of the TWH program from 2014 to 2018 and future steps and directions. Results: The TWH framework is defined as policies, programs, and practices that integrate protection from work-related safety and health hazards with promotion of injury and illness prevention efforts to advance worker well-being. Conclusions: The CDC/NIOSH TWH program continues to evolve in order to respond to demands for research, practice, policy, and capacity building information and solutions to the safety, health, and well-being challenges that workers and their employers face.
Aims
The aim of this narrative synthesis was to explore the necessary and sufficient conditions required to define moral distress.
Background
Moral distress is said to occur when one has made a moral judgement but is unable to act upon it. However, problems with this narrow conception have led to multiple redefinitions in the empirical and conceptual literature. As a consequence, much of the research exploring moral distress has lacked conceptual clarity, complicating attempts to study the phenomenon.
Design
Systematic literature review and narrative synthesis (November 2015–March 2016).
Data sources
Ovid MEDLINE® In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations 1946–Present, PsycINFO® 1967–Present, CINAHL® Plus 1937–Present, EMBASE 1974–24 February 2016, British Nursing Index 1994–Present, Social Care Online, Social Policy and Practice Database (1890–Present), ERIC (EBSCO) 1966–Present and Education Abstracts.
Review methods
Literature relating to moral distress was systematically retrieved and subjected to relevance assessment. Narrative synthesis was the overarching framework that guided quality assessment, data analysis and synthesis.
Results
In all, 152 papers underwent initial data extraction and 34 were chosen for inclusion in the narrative synthesis based on both quality and relevance. Analysis revealed different proposed conditions for the occurrence of moral distress: moral judgement, psychological and physical effects, moral dilemmas, moral uncertainty, external and internal constraints and threats to moral integrity.
Conclusion
We suggest the combination of (1) the experience of a moral event, (2) the experience of ‘psychological distress’ and (3) a direct causal relation between (1) and (2) together are necessary and sufficient conditions for moral distress.
Objective:
The purpose of this study was to investigate moral distress (MD) and turnover intent as related to professional quality of life in physicians and nurses at a tertiary care hospital.
Method:
Health care providers from a variety of hospital departments anonymously completed 2 validated questionnaires (Moral Distress Scale-Revised and Professional Quality of Life Scale). Compassion fatigue (as measured by secondary traumatic stress [STS] and burnout [BRN]) and compassion satisfaction are subscales which make up one's professional quality of life. Relationships between these constructs and clinicians' years in health care, critical care patient load, and professional discipline were explored.
Results:
The findings (n = 329) demonstrated significant correlations between STS, BRN, and MD. Scores associated with intentions to leave or stay in a position were indicative of high verses low MD. We report highest scoring situations of MD as well as when physicians and nurses demonstrate to be most at risk for STS, BRN and MD. Both physicians and nurses identified the events contributing to the highest level of MD as being compelled to provide care that seems ineffective and working with a critical care patient load >50%.
Conclusion:
The results from this study of physicians and nurses suggest that the presence of MD significantly impacts turnover intent and professional quality of life. Therefore implementation of emotional wellness activities (e.g., empowerment, opportunity for open dialog regarding ethical dilemmas, policy making involvement) coupled with ongoing monitoring and routine assessment of these maladaptive characteristics is warranted. (PsycINFO Database Record
This Viewpoint provides proposed institutional practices, such as medicolegal collaboration and providing materials and resources, to support obstetrician-gynecologists (OB-GYNs) in abortion-restrictive states.
This study compares the race and ethnicity of reproductive-age females between states that implemented restrictive abortion policies after the Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision and states that did not.
Stresses on healthcare systems and moral distress among clinicians are urgent, intertwined bioethical problems in contemporary healthcare. Yet conceptualizations of moral distress in bioethical inquiry often overlook a range of routine threats to professional integrity in healthcare work. Using examples from our research on frontline physicians working during the COVID-19 pandemic, this article clarifies conceptual distinctions between moral distress, moral injury, and moral stress and illustrates how these concepts operate together in healthcare work. Drawing from the philosophy of healthcare, we explain how moral stress results from the normal operations of overstressed systems; unlike moral distress and moral injury, it may not involve a sense of powerlessness concerning patient care. The analysis of moral stress directs attention beyond the individual, to stress-generating systemic factors. We conclude by reflecting on how and why this conceptual clarity matters for improving clinicians' professional wellbeing, and offer preliminary pathways for intervention.
This study examines an underexplored source of medical uncertainty: the political context of care. Since 2011, Ohio has passed over 16 abortion-restrictive laws. We know little about how this legislation affects reproductive health care outside of abortion clinics. Drawing on focus groups and interviews with genetic counselors and obstetrician-gynecologists, we examine how abortion legislation impacts their work. We find that interpretation and implementation of legislation is not straightforward and varies by institution and region of the state. An ever-changing legislative landscape combined with uneven implementation of restrictions into policy produces uncertainty in reproductive health care. We also found uncertainty about the legal consequences of abortion in restrictive contexts, with obstetrician-gynecologists reporting greater concerns given their proximity to care provision. We argue that uncertainty can result in stricter interpretations of regulations than necessitated by the law, thereby amplifying the impacts of an already restrictive context for abortion care.
Rationale:
Challenges unique to abortion care have negative implications for access to safe abortion and the psychosocial well-being of healthcare providers. A deeper understanding of the experience of providing abortion care can inform responsive interventions toward supporting abortion providers and strengthening health systems.
Objective:
A meta-ethnography was conducted to describe the experiences of providing abortion care and offer broad conceptual implications of abortion providers' experiences on their psychosocial coping and well-being.
Methods:
International grey and published research reported in English between 2000 and 2020 was identified via Web of Science Core Collection, PsycInfo, PubMed, Science Direct and Africa-Wide. Studies conducted in contexts where elective abortion is legally permitted were included. Study samples included nurses, physicians, counsellors, administrative staff and other healthcare providers involved in abortion care. Qualitative studies and qualitative data from mixed designs were included. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool was used for appraisal and data was analysed using a meta-ethnographic approach.
Findings:
The review included 47 articles. Five themes arose from the data including the emotional challenges of providing clinical and psychological care, organisational and structural challenges, experiences characterised by stigma, pro-choice narratives, and coping with challenges. Outcomes ranged from moral and emotional alignment, resistance to abortion stigma, and job satisfaction to moral distress, emotional suppression, internalised stigma, selective participation and discontinuation of abortion care. Outcomes were dependent on the nature of interpersonal relationships, working conditions, the internalization of positive or negative messages about abortion, personal history and individual coping styles.
Conclusions:
Despite facing significant challenges in their work, the presence of positive outcomes among abortion providers and the moderating role of external and individual-level factors on well-being have encouraging implications for supporting psychosocial wellness among abortion providers.
Objective:
In 2015, the Georgia (US) legislature implemented a gestational limit, or "ban" on abortion at or beyond 22 weeks from last menstrual period. In this study, we qualitatively examined abortion provider perspectives of the ban's impact on abortion care access and provision.
Study design:
Between May 2018 and September 2019, we conducted in-depth individual interviews with 20 abortion providers (clinicians, staff, administrators) from four clinics in Georgia. Interviews explored perceptions of and experiences with the ban and its effects on abortion care. Team members coded all transcripts to 100% agreement using an iterative, group consensus process, and conducted thematic analysis using inductive and deductive techniques.
Results:
Participants reported strict adherence to the ban, but also its negative consequences: additional labor plus service-delivery restrictions, legally constructed risks for providers, intrusion into the provider-patient relationship, and impact of limited services felt by patients and thus providers. Participants commonly mentioned disparities in the ban's impact and viewed the ban as disproportionately affecting people of color, those experiencing financial insecurity, and those with underlying medical conditions. Nonetheless, participants described clear, unrelenting commitment to providing quality patient-centered care, and dedication to and satisfaction in their work.
Conclusions:
Georgia's ban operates as legislative interference, adversely affecting provision of quality, patient-centered abortion care, despite providers' resilience and commitment. These experiences in Georgia have timely and clear implications for the entire country following the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, thus reducing care access and increasing negative health and social consequences and inequities for patients and communities on a national scale.
Implications statement:
Our findings from Georgia (US) indicate an urgent need for coordinated efforts to challenge the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision and for proactive policies that protect access to later abortion care. Research that identifies strategies for supporting providers and patients faced with continuing restrictive legal environments is warranted.
Objective:
To describe experiences with abortion counseling and access in patients with lethal or life-limiting fetal diagnoses in Texas after enactment of Senate Bill 8 (SB8).
Methods:
In this qualitative study, we interviewed patients who obtained abortions after enactment of SB8, using semi-structured interviews to explore how restrictions affected abortion care. Two researchers coded all transcripts using an inductive technique and analyzed themes in an iterative approach.
Results:
We interviewed 16 participants who reported gestational durations from 13 to 29 weeks at the time of abortion. Participants described loss of the therapeutic patient-physician relationship and feelings of isolation while pursuing abortion due to the limitations imposed by SB8. For example, participants felt there was a physician "gag rule" regarding abortion ("the unspoken word of termination"), resulting in the need to find information about pregnancy options outside of the medical community and further highlighting the privilege of financial resources necessary to obtain an abortion on their own. Participants also expressed fears regarding confidentiality with their support systems and clinicians ("I would joke around and say, well don't sue me, but halfway mean it") and personal safety when self-referring for abortion ("…am I making the right choice on where I need to go? Is it safe?").
Conclusion:
Abortion restrictions and bans such as SB8 erode the patient-physician relationship, evoking fear and safety concerns during a vulnerable time for those undergoing abortion for lethal or life-limiting fetal diagnoses. They force patients to shoulder the significant burden of understanding pregnancy options and navigating the process of abortion alone, which is likely to have greater effects on those with fewer resources.
This Viewpoint discusses how states’ restrictions on abortion will affect medical students’ training in providing reproductive health care and also create moral distress by being forced to provide care that may harm patients.
The upcoming U.S. Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization has the potential to eliminate or severely restrict access to legal abortion care in the United States. We address the impact that the decision could have on abortion access and its consequences beyond abortion care. We posit that an abortion ban would, in effect, mean that anyone who becomes pregnant, including those who continue a pregnancy and give birth to healthy newborns and those with pregnancy complications or adverse pregnancy outcomes will become newly vulnerable to legal surveillance, civil detentions, forced interventions, and criminal prosecution. The harms imposed by banning or severely restricting abortion access will disproportionately affect persons of color and perpetuate structural racism. We caution that focusing on Roe as a decision that only protects ending a pregnancy ignores the protection that the decision also affords people who want to continue their pregnancies. It overlooks the ways in which overturning Roe will curtail fundamental rights for all those who become pregnant and will undermine their status as full persons meriting Constitutional protections. Such a singular focus inevitably obscures the common ground that people across the ideological spectrum might inhabit to ensure the safety, health, humanity, and rights of all people who experience pregnancy.
Background:
Moral distress is a state in which a clinician cannot act in accordance with their ethical beliefs because of external constraints. Physician trainees, who work within rigid hierarchies and who lack clinical experience, are particularly vulnerable to moral distress. We examined the dynamics of physician trainee moral distress in end-of-life care by comparing experiences in two different national cultures and healthcare systems.
Objective:
We investigated cultural factors in the US and the UK that may produce moral distress within their respective healthcare systems, as well as how these factors shape experiences of moral distress among physician trainees.
Design:
Semi-structured in-depth qualitative interviews about experiences of end-of-life care and moral distress.
Participants:
Sixteen internal medicine residents in the US and fourteen junior doctors in the UK.
Approach:
The work was analyzed using thematic analysis.
Key results:
Some drivers of moral distress were similar among US and UK trainees, including delivery of potentially inappropriate treatments, a poorly defined care trajectory, and involvement of multiple teams creating different care expectations. For UK trainees, healthcare team hierarchy was common, whereas for US trainees, pressure from families, a lack of guidelines for withholding inappropriate treatments, and distress around physically harming patients were frequently cited. US trainees described how patient autonomy and a fear of lawsuits contributed to moral distress, whereas UK trainees described how societal expectations around resource allocation mitigated it.
Conclusion:
This research highlights how the differing experiences of moral distress among US and UK physician trainees are influenced by their countries' healthcare cultures. This research illustrates how experiences of moral distress reflect the broader culture in which it occurs and suggests how trainees may be particularly vulnerable to it. Clinicians and healthcare leaders in both countries can learn from each other about policies and practices that might decrease the moral distress trainees experience.
Objective:
To evaluate the prevalence and features of policies regulating abortion in U.S. teaching hospitals.
Methods:
In this mixed-methods study, we conducted a national survey of obstetrics and gynecology teaching hospitals (2015-2016) and qualitative interviews (2014 and 2017) with directors at obstetrics and gynecology residency programs. We asked participants about hospital regulations on abortion and their perceptions of the nature and enforcement of these policies. Interview analysis was conducted with a grounded theoretical approach and informed development of the survey. The prevalence of policies was described using survey data; differences in policy structures by region were analyzed using a series of logistic regression models.
Results:
Directors from 169 of 231 eligible training programs responded to the survey (73%). Institutional policies limited abortion beyond state law in 57% of teaching hospitals, most commonly in the Midwest and South (odds ratio [OR] 4.3, P<.01 for Midwest; OR 4.0, P=.001 for South vs Northeast). Policies varied in form (written and unwritten) and restricted abortion based on the indication for the procedure and gestational age. Nonmedically indicated, or "elective" procedures were more commonly restricted (48% of sites reporting any policy and 25% prohibiting these abortions altogether) than medically indicated ones (28% of sites reporting any policy.) Policies were created by those with institutional power, including hospital leadership and obstetrics and gynecology department chairs, and were perceived to be motivated by personal beliefs and a desire to avoid controversy. Rules were commonly enforced by medical specialists, hospital ethics committees, and department chairs. Qualitative data highlighted the convoluted nuances of these policies, which often put clinicians at odds with their professional mandates.
Discussion:
Reportedly driven by broader institutional interests, obstetrics and gynecology teaching hospital policies often restricted abortion beyond state law to the detriment of abortion access and training opportunities. Vague or unwritten abortion policies, although difficult to navigate, gave health care providers some agency and flexibility over their practices.
Twenty years ago, the Institute of Medicine (now the National Academy of Medicine) published 2 important reports¹,2 in response to a crisis in patient safety that led to significant reform and improvements in quality and patient safety. It is time for another major system improvement in response to the crisis of clinician burnout. Numerous changes with health information technologies, accountability frameworks, and payment models have substantially affected the patient-clinician relationship and the work demands placed on health care professionals. Physicians, nurses, and other clinicians are experiencing mounting system pressures that contribute to occupational stress, including burnout, which has been defined as emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and a low sense of personal accomplishment from work.³ Students and trainees also experience pressures and similar degrees of occupational stress.
Elevated rates of burnout and post-traumatic stress have been found in staff working in critical care settings, but the aspect of moral distress has been harder to quantify until a recent revision of a scale previously designed for nurses, was adapted for use with a range of health professionals, including physicians. In this cross-sectional survey, n = 171 nurses and physicians working in intensive care in the United Kingdom completed the Moral Distress Scale-Revised in relation to their experiences at work. Mean (SD) Moral Distress Scale-Revised score was 70.2 (39.6). Significant associations were found with female gender (female 74.1 (40.2) vs. male 55.5 (33.8), p = 0.010); depression (r = 0.165, p = 0.035) and with intention to leave job (considering leaving 85.5 (42.4) vs. not considering leaving 67.2 (38.6), p = 0.040). These results highlight the importance of considering the moral impact of work-related issues when addressing staff wellbeing in critical care settings.
There is increasing recognition of the value added by integrating traditionally separate efforts to protect and promote worker safety and health. This paper presents an innovative conceptual model to guide research on determinants of worker safety and health and to inform the design, implementation and evaluation of integrated approaches to promoting and protecting worker health. This model is rooted in multiple theories and the premise that the conditions of work are important determinants of individual safety and health outcomes and behaviors, and outcomes important to enterprises such as absence and turnover. Integrated policies, programs and practices simultaneously address multiple conditions of work, including the physical work environment and the organization of work (e.g., psychosocial factors, job tasks and demands). Findings from two recent studies conducted in Boston and Minnesota (2009–2015) illustrate the application of this model to guide social epidemiological research. This paper focuses particular attention on the relationships of the conditions of work to worker health-related behaviors, musculoskeletal symptoms, and occupational injury; and to the design of integrated interventions in response to specific settings and conditions of work of small and medium size manufacturing businesses, based on a systematic assessment of priorities, needs, and resources within an organization. This model provides an organizing framework for both research and practice by specifying the causal pathways through which work may influence health outcomes, and for designing and testing interventions to improve worker safety and health that are meaningful for workers and employers, and responsive to that setting's conditions of work.
The general view of descriptive research as a lower level form of inquiry has influenced some researchers conducting qualitative research to claim methods they are really not using and not to claim the method they are using: namely, qualitative description. Qualitative descriptive studies have as their goal a comprehensive summary of events in the everyday terms of those events. Researchers conducting qualitative descriptive studies stay close to their data and to the surface of words and events. Qualitative descriptive designs typically are an eclectic but reasonable combination of sampling, and data collection, analysis, and re-presentation techniques. Qualitative descriptive study is the method of choice when straight descriptions of phenomena are desired.
Importance
Physicians in training are at high risk for depression. However, the estimated prevalence of this disorder varies substantially between studies.Objective
To provide a summary estimate of depression or depressive symptom prevalence among resident physicians.Data Sources and Study Selection
Systematic search of EMBASE, ERIC, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO for studies with information on the prevalence of depression or depressive symptoms among resident physicians published between January 1963 and September 2015. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they were published in the peer-reviewed literature and used a validated method to assess for depression or depressive symptoms.Data Extraction and Synthesis
Information on study characteristics and depression or depressive symptom prevalence was extracted independently by 2 trained investigators. Estimates were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. Differences by study-level characteristics were estimated using meta-regression.Main Outcomes and Measures
Point or period prevalence of depression or depressive symptoms as assessed by structured interview or validated questionnaire.Results
Data were extracted from 31 cross-sectional studies (9447 individuals) and 23 longitudinal studies (8113 individuals). Three studies used clinical interviews and 51 used self-report instruments. The overall pooled prevalence of depression or depressive symptoms was 28.8% (4969/17 560 individuals, 95% CI, 25.3%-32.5%), with high between-study heterogeneity (Q = 1247, τ2 = 0.39, I2 = 95.8%, P < .001). Prevalence estimates ranged from 20.9% for the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire with a cutoff of 10 or more (741/3577 individuals, 95% CI, 17.5%-24.7%, Q = 14.4, τ2 = 0.04, I2 = 79.2%) to 43.2% for the 2-item PRIME-MD (1349/2891 individuals, 95% CI, 37.6%-49.0%, Q = 45.6, τ2 = 0.09, I2 = 84.6%). There was an increased prevalence with increasing calendar year (slope = 0.5% increase per year, adjusted for assessment modality; 95% CI, 0.03%-0.9%, P = .04). In a secondary analysis of 7 longitudinal studies, the median absolute increase in depressive symptoms with the onset of residency training was 15.8% (range, 0.3%-26.3%; relative risk, 4.5). No statistically significant differences were observed between cross-sectional vs longitudinal studies, studies of only interns vs only upper-level residents, or studies of nonsurgical vs both nonsurgical and surgical residents.Conclusions and Relevance
In this systematic review, the summary estimate of the prevalence of depression or depressive symptoms among resident physicians was 28.8%, ranging from 20.9% to 43.2% depending on the instrument used, and increased with calendar year. Further research is needed to identify effective strategies for preventing and treating depression among physicians in training.