Conectar
To undertake further psychometric testing of the Multimorbidity Treatment Burden Questionnaire (MTBQ) and examine whether reversing the scale reduced floor effects.
Survey.
UK primary care.
Adults (≥18 years) with three or more long-term conditions randomly selected from four general practices and invited by post.
Baseline survey: sociodemographics, MTBQ (original or version with scale reversed), Treatment Burden Questionnaire (TBQ), four questions (from QQ-10) on ease of completing the questionnaires. Follow-up survey (1–4 weeks after baseline): MTBQ, TBQ and QQ-10. Anonymous data collected from electronic GP records: consultations (preceding 12 months) and long-term conditions. The proportion of missing data and distribution of responses were examined for the original and reversed versions of the MTBQ and the TBQ. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Spearman’s rank correlation (Rs) assessed test–retest reliability and construct validity, respectively. Ease of completing the MTBQ and TBQ was compared. Interpretability was assessed by grouping global MTBQ scores into 0 and tertiles (>0).
244 adults completed the baseline survey (consent rate 31%, mean age 70 years) and 225 completed the follow-up survey. Reversing the scale did not reduce floor effects or data skewness. The global MTBQ scores had good test–retest reliability (ICC for agreement at baseline and follow-up 0.765, 95% CI 0.702 to 0.816). Global MTBQ score was correlated with global TBQ score (Rs 0.77, ps 0.17, p=0.010), and number of different general practitioners consulted (Rs 0.23, ps –0.063, p=0.330). Most participants agreed that both the MTBQ and TBQ were easy to complete and included aspects they were concerned about.
This study demonstrates test–retest reliability and ease of completion of the MTBQ and builds on a previous study demonstrating good content validity, construct validity and internal consistency reliability of the questionnaire.
To understand the experience of critical care nurses during the COVID-19 pandemic, through the application of the Job-Demand-Resource model of occupational stress.
Qualitative interview study.
Twenty-eight critical care nurses (CCN) working in ICU in the UK NHS during the COVID-19 pandemic took part in semi-structured interviews between May 2021 and May 2022. Interviews were guided by the constructs of the Job-Demand Resource model. Data were analysed using framework analysis.
The most difficult job demands were the pace and amount, complexity, physical and emotional effort of their work. Prolonged high demands led to CCN experiencing emotional and physical exhaustion, burnout, post-traumatic stress symptoms and impaired sleep. Support from colleagues and supervisors was a core job resource. Sustained demands and impaired physical and psychological well-being had negative organizational consequences with CCN expressing increased intention to leave their role.
The combination of high demands and reduced resources had negative impacts on the psychological well-being of nurses which is translating into increased consideration of leaving their profession.
The full impacts of the pandemic on the mental health of CCN are unlikely to resolve without appropriate interventions.
Managers of healthcare systems should use these findings to inform: (i) the structure and organization of critical care workplaces so that they support staff to be well, and (ii) supportive interventions for staff who are carrying significant psychological distress as a result of working during and after the pandemic. These changes are required to improve staff recruitment and retention.
We used the COREQ guidelines for reporting qualitative studies.
Six CCN provided input to survey content and interview schedule. Two authors and members of the study team (T.S. and S.C.) worked in critical care during the pandemic.
FreshRSS 