Burnout, Compassion Fatigue, Coping, Stress (Psychology)
Conditions
Brief summary
Compassion Fatigue can be conceptualized as consisting of two components (Gentry, 2015): (1) burnout, and (2) secondary traumatic stress (STS), also referred to as vicarious trauma. The study includes a quantitative assessment through the administration of the Professional Quality of Life Scale (Professional Quality of Life: Compassion Satisfaction and Fatigue, Version 5; Stamm, 2009) at two time points, baseline (T0) and follow-up (T1), to measure levels of Compassion Fatigue among healthcare professionals working within the Emergency Department, specifically in the Emergency Room and General Intensive Care Unit. In the interval between the two quantitative assessments, following T0 and preceding T1, a Participatory Action Research (PAR) approach will be conducted. The study will also explore potential protective and risk factors related to Compassion Fatigue specific to the Emergency Room and General Intensive Care Unit settings. The Participatory Action Research will be carried out using focus group methodology. The primary objective of the study is to assess Compassion Fatigue (Larsen & Stamm, 2008) among healthcare professionals working in the Emergency Department, specifically in the Emergency Room and General Intensive Care Unit of the Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo in Pavia, before (T0) and after (T1) the implementation of the Participatory Action Research conducted through focus groups. The second assessment (T1) will be carried out 18 months after the baseline assessment (T0)
Interventions
The focus groups were organized into five modules: (1) compassion fatigue, burnout, and secondary traumatic stress; (2) coping strategies (problem-focused and emotion-focused coping); (3) work motivation and work-related stress; (4) work-life balance; and (5) advice and work organization
Sponsors
Study design
Eligibility
Inclusion criteria
* Minimum age of 18 years at the time of questionnaire completion; * Employment in the Emergency Room or General Intensive Care Unit of the Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo as a physician, nurse, or healthcare assistant at the time of questionnaire completion; * Provision of written informed consent.
Exclusion criteria
* Individuals who, although employed at the Policlinico San Matteo at the time of questionnaire completion, do not work as physicians, nurses, or healthcare assistants or do not reside in Italy at the time of questionnaire completion; * Individuals who, although employed at the Policlinico San Matteo at the time of questionnaire completion and working as physicians, nurses, or healthcare assistants, are not assigned to one of the departments involved in the study (Emergency Room or General Intensive Care Unit).
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| The primary endpoint will be the change in the Professional Quality of Life: Compassion Satisfaction and Fatigue, Version 5 (Stamm, 2009) score measured before (T0) and after (T1) the focus group sessions. | from enrollment to the end of treatment at 18 months | The primary objective will be measured using the following psychological instrument: the Professional Quality of Life: Compassion Satisfaction and Fatigue, Version 5 (ProQOL; Stamm, 2009), a self-report questionnaire consisting of 20 items designed to assess Compassion Fatigue in caregiving activities. The primary endpoint will be the difference between the Professional Quality of Life scores measured at the 18-month follow-up (T1) after the Participatory Action Research (focus groups) and the baseline assessment (T0), both overall and stratified by clinical department. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Change in score on the professional burnout subscale | from the enrollment to the end of treatment at 18 months | The Student's t-test (or its non-parametric equivalent, the Wilcoxon signed-rank test) will be used for paired data to compare the score on the professional burnout scale recorded at T1 with that recorded at T0. The analyses will be repeated for each UOC. |
| Change in the Secondary Traumatic Stress sub scale score | from the enrollment to the end of treatment at 18 months | Change in the Secondary Traumatic Stress sub scale score: The higher the score, the higher the level of secondary traumatization. |
| Association between participants' characteristics and level of participation with changes in scale scores | From the enrollment to the end of treatment at 18 months | Association between participants' characteristics and level of participation with changes in scale scores |
Countries
Italy