The kindness COVID-19 toolkit: a mixed-methods evaluation of a programme designed by doctors in training for doctors in training
Objectives The impact of a coronavirus disease (COVID-19)-specific professional development programme on the well-being of obstetrics and gynaecology (O&G) doctors in training (DiT) working during the pandemic.Design A mixed-method evaluation of a single group pre–post test design study.Sett...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2022-11-01
|
| Series: | BMJ Open |
| Online Access: | https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/12/11/e060575.full |
| _version_ | 1811316753324572672 |
|---|---|
| author | Ryan J Hodges Rebecca McDonald Daniel L Rolnik Madeleine C Ward Karen Crinall William Crinall James Aridas Cheryl Leung Danielle Quittner |
| author_facet | Ryan J Hodges Rebecca McDonald Daniel L Rolnik Madeleine C Ward Karen Crinall William Crinall James Aridas Cheryl Leung Danielle Quittner |
| author_sort | Ryan J Hodges |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Objectives The impact of a coronavirus disease (COVID-19)-specific professional development programme on the well-being of obstetrics and gynaecology (O&G) doctors in training (DiT) working during the pandemic.Design A mixed-method evaluation of a single group pre–post test design study.Setting Melbourne, Australia between September 2020 and April 2021.Participants 55 O&G DiT working across four healthcare sites of a major tertiary hospital in Victoria, Australia, were included in the programme.Interventions The delivery of a codesigned peer-to-peer programme, which identified and addressed the well-being goals of O&G DiT. Seven interactive workshops were run alongside the implementation of a number of participant-led wellness initiatives.Main outcome measures Repeated-measures analysis of WHO Well-being Index (WHO-5) and Copenhagen Burnout Innovatory (CBI) scores across three time points during the programme. Multilevel generalised linear mixed-effects models with random intercept were fit to the data, both in the entire population (intention-to-treat) and restricted to those who attended the workshop (‘per-protocol’ analysis). Participatory experiences and programme learning were captured using the Most Significant Change (MSC) technique, which included inductive thematic analysis.Results We demonstrated an overall 31.9% improvement in well-being scores (p=0.006). The MSC evaluation captured a shift in workplace culture as a result of the programme, with improvement across the domains of connection, caring, communication, confidence and cooperation.Conclusions We have successfully used a mixed-method approach to contextualise a productive programme to improve the well-being of COVID-19 front-line healthcare workers. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-13T11:55:02Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-56ba85811607471f9b38fde91adb7b53 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2044-6055 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-13T11:55:02Z |
| publishDate | 2022-11-01 |
| publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
| record_format | Article |
| series | BMJ Open |
| spelling | doaj.art-56ba85811607471f9b38fde91adb7b532022-12-22T02:47:57ZengBMJ Publishing GroupBMJ Open2044-60552022-11-01121110.1136/bmjopen-2021-060575The kindness COVID-19 toolkit: a mixed-methods evaluation of a programme designed by doctors in training for doctors in trainingRyan J Hodges0Rebecca McDonald1Daniel L Rolnik2Madeleine C Ward3Karen Crinall4William Crinall5James Aridas6Cheryl Leung7Danielle Quittner8Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, AustraliaAddictions Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King`s College London, London, UKDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, AustraliaObstetrics and Gynaecology, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, AustraliaCrinall Consulting, Melbourne, Victoria, AustraliaCrinall Consulting, Melbourne, Victoria, AustraliaWomen’s & Newborn, Monash Health, Clayton, Victoria, AustraliaWomen’s & Newborn, Monash Health, Clayton, Victoria, AustraliaWomen’s & Newborn, Monash Health, Clayton, Victoria, AustraliaObjectives The impact of a coronavirus disease (COVID-19)-specific professional development programme on the well-being of obstetrics and gynaecology (O&G) doctors in training (DiT) working during the pandemic.Design A mixed-method evaluation of a single group pre–post test design study.Setting Melbourne, Australia between September 2020 and April 2021.Participants 55 O&G DiT working across four healthcare sites of a major tertiary hospital in Victoria, Australia, were included in the programme.Interventions The delivery of a codesigned peer-to-peer programme, which identified and addressed the well-being goals of O&G DiT. Seven interactive workshops were run alongside the implementation of a number of participant-led wellness initiatives.Main outcome measures Repeated-measures analysis of WHO Well-being Index (WHO-5) and Copenhagen Burnout Innovatory (CBI) scores across three time points during the programme. Multilevel generalised linear mixed-effects models with random intercept were fit to the data, both in the entire population (intention-to-treat) and restricted to those who attended the workshop (‘per-protocol’ analysis). Participatory experiences and programme learning were captured using the Most Significant Change (MSC) technique, which included inductive thematic analysis.Results We demonstrated an overall 31.9% improvement in well-being scores (p=0.006). The MSC evaluation captured a shift in workplace culture as a result of the programme, with improvement across the domains of connection, caring, communication, confidence and cooperation.Conclusions We have successfully used a mixed-method approach to contextualise a productive programme to improve the well-being of COVID-19 front-line healthcare workers.https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/12/11/e060575.full |
| spellingShingle | Ryan J Hodges Rebecca McDonald Daniel L Rolnik Madeleine C Ward Karen Crinall William Crinall James Aridas Cheryl Leung Danielle Quittner The kindness COVID-19 toolkit: a mixed-methods evaluation of a programme designed by doctors in training for doctors in training BMJ Open |
| title | The kindness COVID-19 toolkit: a mixed-methods evaluation of a programme designed by doctors in training for doctors in training |
| title_full | The kindness COVID-19 toolkit: a mixed-methods evaluation of a programme designed by doctors in training for doctors in training |
| title_fullStr | The kindness COVID-19 toolkit: a mixed-methods evaluation of a programme designed by doctors in training for doctors in training |
| title_full_unstemmed | The kindness COVID-19 toolkit: a mixed-methods evaluation of a programme designed by doctors in training for doctors in training |
| title_short | The kindness COVID-19 toolkit: a mixed-methods evaluation of a programme designed by doctors in training for doctors in training |
| title_sort | kindness covid 19 toolkit a mixed methods evaluation of a programme designed by doctors in training for doctors in training |
| url | https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/12/11/e060575.full |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT ryanjhodges thekindnesscovid19toolkitamixedmethodsevaluationofaprogrammedesignedbydoctorsintrainingfordoctorsintraining AT rebeccamcdonald thekindnesscovid19toolkitamixedmethodsevaluationofaprogrammedesignedbydoctorsintrainingfordoctorsintraining AT daniellrolnik thekindnesscovid19toolkitamixedmethodsevaluationofaprogrammedesignedbydoctorsintrainingfordoctorsintraining AT madeleinecward thekindnesscovid19toolkitamixedmethodsevaluationofaprogrammedesignedbydoctorsintrainingfordoctorsintraining AT karencrinall thekindnesscovid19toolkitamixedmethodsevaluationofaprogrammedesignedbydoctorsintrainingfordoctorsintraining AT williamcrinall thekindnesscovid19toolkitamixedmethodsevaluationofaprogrammedesignedbydoctorsintrainingfordoctorsintraining AT jamesaridas thekindnesscovid19toolkitamixedmethodsevaluationofaprogrammedesignedbydoctorsintrainingfordoctorsintraining AT cherylleung thekindnesscovid19toolkitamixedmethodsevaluationofaprogrammedesignedbydoctorsintrainingfordoctorsintraining AT daniellequittner thekindnesscovid19toolkitamixedmethodsevaluationofaprogrammedesignedbydoctorsintrainingfordoctorsintraining AT ryanjhodges kindnesscovid19toolkitamixedmethodsevaluationofaprogrammedesignedbydoctorsintrainingfordoctorsintraining AT rebeccamcdonald kindnesscovid19toolkitamixedmethodsevaluationofaprogrammedesignedbydoctorsintrainingfordoctorsintraining AT daniellrolnik kindnesscovid19toolkitamixedmethodsevaluationofaprogrammedesignedbydoctorsintrainingfordoctorsintraining AT madeleinecward kindnesscovid19toolkitamixedmethodsevaluationofaprogrammedesignedbydoctorsintrainingfordoctorsintraining AT karencrinall kindnesscovid19toolkitamixedmethodsevaluationofaprogrammedesignedbydoctorsintrainingfordoctorsintraining AT williamcrinall kindnesscovid19toolkitamixedmethodsevaluationofaprogrammedesignedbydoctorsintrainingfordoctorsintraining AT jamesaridas kindnesscovid19toolkitamixedmethodsevaluationofaprogrammedesignedbydoctorsintrainingfordoctorsintraining AT cherylleung kindnesscovid19toolkitamixedmethodsevaluationofaprogrammedesignedbydoctorsintrainingfordoctorsintraining AT daniellequittner kindnesscovid19toolkitamixedmethodsevaluationofaprogrammedesignedbydoctorsintrainingfordoctorsintraining |