We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
The effectiveness of interventions to improve resilience among health professionals: A systematic review.
Nurse Education Today 2018 December
OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of resilience interventions in improving resilience outcome among health professionals.
BACKGROUND: The nature of health professionals' work is physically and emotionally demanding, with trauma a common consequence with the act of providing health care.
DESIGN: A systematic review.
DATA SOURCE: A comprehensive search of the literature was conducted in February 2018 using PubMed, PsychInfo, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CIHAHL) and Scopus.
REVIEW METHODS: Methodological quality was assessed and a standardized data coding form was used to extract data.
RESULTS: Of the 33 included studies, 15 were single-arm pre-post-design, 10 were RCTs, five used a non-randomized controlled design, and three were qualitative. Eleven studies (out of 16) showed a significant improvement in resilience scores while five (out of eight) studies reported a significant difference in resilience scores between treatment and control groups.
CONCLUSION: Findings suggest that resilience training may be of benefit to health professionals. However, not all interventions enhanced resilience with training volume being more effective. Not all studies reporting resilience used standard resilience instruments. The results of the current review may inform resilience programs as well as future interventional studies on resilience building.
BACKGROUND: The nature of health professionals' work is physically and emotionally demanding, with trauma a common consequence with the act of providing health care.
DESIGN: A systematic review.
DATA SOURCE: A comprehensive search of the literature was conducted in February 2018 using PubMed, PsychInfo, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CIHAHL) and Scopus.
REVIEW METHODS: Methodological quality was assessed and a standardized data coding form was used to extract data.
RESULTS: Of the 33 included studies, 15 were single-arm pre-post-design, 10 were RCTs, five used a non-randomized controlled design, and three were qualitative. Eleven studies (out of 16) showed a significant improvement in resilience scores while five (out of eight) studies reported a significant difference in resilience scores between treatment and control groups.
CONCLUSION: Findings suggest that resilience training may be of benefit to health professionals. However, not all interventions enhanced resilience with training volume being more effective. Not all studies reporting resilience used standard resilience instruments. The results of the current review may inform resilience programs as well as future interventional studies on resilience building.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app