Improving the wellbeing of staff who work in palliative care settings: A systematic review of psychosocial interventions
Open accessAbstract
Background: Staff in palliative care settings perform emotionally demanding roles which may lead to psychological distress including stress and burnout. Therefore, interventions have been designed to address these occupational risks. Aim: To investigate quantitative studies exploring the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions that attempt to improve psychological wellbeing of palliative care staff. Design: A systematic review was conducted according to methodological guidance from UK Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Data sources: A search strategy was developed based on the initial scans of palliative care studies. Potentially eligible research articles were identified by searching the following databases: CINAHL, MEDLINE (Ovid), PsycINFO and Web of Science. Two reviewers independently screened studies against pre-set eligibility criteria. To assess quality, both researchers separately assessed the remaining studies using the Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies. Results: A total of 1786 potentially eligible articles were identified – nine remained following screening and quality assessment. Study types included two randomised controlled trials, two non-randomised controlled trial designs, four one-group pre–post evaluations and one process evaluation. Studies took place in the United States and Canada (5), Europe (3) and Hong Kong (1). Interventions comprised a mixture of relaxation, education, support and cognitive training and targeted stress, fatigue, burnout, depression and satisfaction. The randomised controlled trial evaluations did not improve psychological wellbeing of palliative care staff. Only two of the quasi-experimental studies appeared to show improved staff wellbeing although these studies were methodologically weak. Conclusion: There is an urgent need to address the lack of intervention development work and high-quality research in this area.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Evidence for the effectiveness of any particular intervention to improve palliative care staff wellbeing was inconclusive.
“Evidence for the effectiveness of any particular intervention was inconclusive”
From Feasibility of RESTORE: An online Acceptance and Commitment Therapy intervention to improve palliative care staff wellbeing. (2023) · cites this paper as [18]
A systematic review prior to the COVID pandemic identified nine intervention studies to improve palliative care staff wellbeing.
“A systematic review prior to the COVID pandemic identified nine intervention studies to improve palliative care staff wellbeing including music therapy, a stress reduction programme, art therapy, a sleep intervention and a psycho-existential intervention. 18”
From Feasibility of RESTORE: An online Acceptance and Commitment Therapy intervention to improve palliative care staff wellbeing. (2023) · cites this paper as [18]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 53 · Cited by 66
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- Maslach C, Schaufeli WB and Leiter MP. Job burnout. Annual review of psychology 2001; 52: 397-422.
- Lissandre S, Abbey-Huguenin H, Bonnin-Scanon S, et al. Facteurs associe´s au burnout chez les soignants en oncohe´matologie. Oncologie 2008; 10: 116-124.
- Pereira SM, Fonseca AM and Carvalho AS. Burnout in palliative care: literature review. Nursing Ethics 2011; 18: 317-26.
- Carter P, Dyer K and Mikan S. Behavioral sleep intervention for hospice nurses: A pilot study. In Oncology Nursing Forum 2007; 34:190-191.
- Cote T. Evaluating the grief experience in hospice clinicians. Journal of Palliative Medicine 2008; 11: 342-382.
- Authors
- Hill, R. C., Dempster, M., Donnelly, M., & McCorry, N. K.
- Affiliations
- Queen's University Belfast (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Hill, Rebecca C
- Venue
- Palliative Medicine
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2016-07-10
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 825-833
- ISSN
- 0269-2163 (ISSN-L)
- 1477-030X
- OpenAlex
- W2328045619
- Cited by
- 66
- References
- 53
- Citations by year
- 2025: 6 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 2
- FWCI
- 1.08
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- pure.qub.ac.uk
- Locations
- Palliative Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Research Portal (Queen's University Belfast) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- Medical Research Council (MR/K023241/1)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative and Oncologic Care
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
- Keywords
- palliative care staff, employee well-being, psychosocial interventions, burnout, occupational stress, psychological distress, relaxation intervention, employee training, cognitive training, depression, job satisfaction, fatigue
- MeSH terms
- Burnout, Professional, Canada, Depression, Europe, Health Personnel, Humans, Palliative Care, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review