The impact and experience of debriefing for clinical staff following traumatic events in clinical settings: A systematic review.

Health care professionals are more frequently exposed to potentially traumatic events than individuals in other professions. Repeated trauma exposure can significantly impact both physical and mental health. In clinical settings, the term "debriefing" refers to a group meeting during which clinical events and decision-making are reviewed and discussed to improve clinical practice. The present review investigated the use of debriefing for clinical staff in clinical settings following exposure to direct and vicarious trauma. We examined whether the use of posttrauma debriefing impacts symptoms of distress and explored how clinical staff experience debriefing; we also investigated the factors that influence this experience. A systematic search of five electronic databases was conducted between August 31 and September 2, 2019. Included articles (N = 13) described the use of debriefing in clinical settings with clinical staff following a traumatic event. We assessed methodological quality and performed a narrative synthesis. Four studies found some evidence of the benefits of debriefing for reducing psychological sequelae to traumatic events. Seven studies commented on factors that clinical staff perceived to be important for the debriefing to feel helpful, including the being given the opportunity for reflection, gaining a shared experience, and having the right peer facilitator. Some evidence suggests that debriefing with staff working in clinical settings can reduce posttraumatic distress symptoms, and subjective evidence suggests that clinical staff members perceive debriefing to be useful. Due to the limited literature, no firm conclusions could be drawn, and further methodologically sound research is required.

Parental and staff experiences of restricted parental presence on a Neonatal Intensive Care Unit during COVID-19.

AIM: The COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on parental presence in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) during the first wave. The NICU team at the Rosie Hospital, Cambridge, endeavoured to explore the impact on parent and staff experiences of supporting parents throughout the period when visiting was restricted, between 13th August and 11th September 2020. METHODS: Bespoke surveys were designed following the first lockdown to gather information on the impact on staff and parents. The questions were developed in the context of initial observations and conversations with staff and parents. RESULTS: The findings of this study have illustrated the extent of the restrictions on parental wellbeing and mood, with the restrictions having had an adverse effect on these. In addition, the findings illustrate the adverse effect that the parents reported due to the restricted presence in terms of their babies' wellbeing, parent-infant bonding, partners' wellbeing, parental confidence, the ability to breastfeed confidently and parents' access to the medical teams. CONCLUSION: The findings of this study have a number of clinical implications for parents and staff. Namely, the data supported the decision not to close NICU again during the second and third waves.

Factors associated with secondary traumatic stress and burnout in neonatal care staff: A cross-sectional survey study.

INTRODUCTION: High rates of secondary traumatic stress and burnout have been found across nursing populations. However, few studies have focused on neonatal staff. OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this article are to explore the prevalence and severity of secondary traumatic stress (STS) and burnout in neonatal staff, and identify risk factors and protective factors for STS and burnout within this population with the aim of informing future staff support. METHODS: A quantitative, cross-sectional study using a survey design was conducted; 246 neonatal staff reported measures of STS, burnout, self-compassion and satisfaction with ward climate. RESULTS: Neonatal staff reported high rates of moderate-severe STS and burnout. STS and burnout were negatively associated with self-compassion and satisfaction with ward climate, suggesting them to be protective factors against STS and burnout. STS was found to be a risk factor for burnout and vice versa. CONCLUSION: Interventions that increase understanding of STS and burnout, nurture self-compassion, provide support and enhance stress management could help mitigate the impact of STS and burnout amongst neonatal staff.

The Psychosocial Patient-Reported Outcomes of End of Pathway Cleft Surgery: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To identify and review the literature on the psychosocial patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of surgery at the end of the cleft treatment pathway. DESIGN: A systematic literature search was performed using electronic databases (Medline, PubMed, EMBASE, PsycInfo, Web of Science, and Science Direct) from database inception to September 2017, to identify studies measuring and reporting the psychosocial PROs of end of pathway cleft surgery. RESULTS: Of 263 identified papers, 22 studies were eligible for inclusion. Apart from one randomized controlled study, studies were largely observational and adopted a cross-sectional or retrospective design. The majority (n = 16) were small-scale studies. The methodological quality was variable in terms of what, how, and when psychosocial outcomes were measured and reported. None of the studies utilized a psychosocial PRO measure validated in the cleft population, and few studies measured outcomes prospectively. A high proportion of studies utilized bespoke measures of patient satisfaction. Taken together, findings from the included studies are tentative but seem to suggest patients derive some benefit from undergoing end of pathway cleft surgery, in terms of increased satisfaction, quality of life, social interactions, and decreased appearance-related distress. CONCLUSIONS: Due to methodological challenges and the heterogeneity of what, how, and when outcomes are measured and currently reported, it is difficult to determine the psychosocial PROs of end of pathway cleft surgeries. Consequently, this review advocates the conduct of well-designed, longitudinal studies using cleft-sensitive tool/s to capture the psychosocial PROs of end of pathway cleft surgery at various time points.

Development and preliminary testing of the Brief Developmental Assessment: an early recognition tool for children with heart disease.

Introduction Neurodevelopmental abnormalities are common in children with CHD and are the highest-priority concerns for parents and professionals following cardiac surgery in childhood. There is no additional routine monitoring of development for children with CHD in the United Kingdom; hence, neurodevelopmental concerns may be detected late, precluding early referral and intervention. METHODS: An early recognition tool - the "Brief Developmental Assessment" - was developed using quality improvement methodology involving several iterations and rounds of pilot testing. Our requirements were for a tool covering important developmental domains and practicable for use within inpatient and outpatient settings by paediatric cardiac health professionals who are non-developmental specialists, without specialised equipment and which involved direct observation, as well as parental report. RESULTS: Items were included in the tool based on existing developmental measures, covering the domains of gross and fine motor skills, daily living skills, communication, socialisation, and general understanding. Items were developed for five age bands - 0-16 weeks, 17-34 weeks, 35-60 weeks, 15 months-2.9 years, and 3-4.9 years - and the final versions included a traffic light scoring system for identifying children with possible delay in any or all domains. Preliminary testing indicated excellent inter-rater reliability, an ability to detect children with a diagnosis known to be associated with developmental delay, and largely acceptable internal reliability. CONCLUSION: We report the evolution and preliminary testing of an early recognition tool for assessing the development of children with heart disease; this was encouraging and sufficiently good to support further validation in a larger study.

Psychosocial adjustment and quality of life in children undergoing screening in a specialist paediatric hypertrophic cardiomyopathy clinic.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the psychological well-being and quality of life in children with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and the potential psychosocial impact of screening. METHODS: A total of 152 children (aged 3-18 years) attending a specialist paediatric hypertrophic cardiomyopathy clinic, and their parents completed the Generic Core Scales and Cardiac Module of the Paediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL) questionnaire as well as the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire; 21 patients (14%) had hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (group A); 23 children (15%) harboured hypertrophic cardiomyopathy-causing sarcomeric mutations with normal echocardiograms (group G); and 108 children (71%) had a family history of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy with normal investigations and attended for clinical cardiological screening (group S). RESULTS: In group A, mean PedsQLTM total scores reported by children and parents were lower than those reported by unaffected children (p<0.001). There was no significant difference between unaffected and gene-positive patients. Mean Cardiac module PedsQLTM total scores by children and parents were lower in children with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy compared with unaffected patients [mean child-reported total score 86.4 in group S versus 72.3 in group A (p<0.001) and 80.2 in group G (p=0.25); mean parent-reported total score 91.6 in group S versus 71.4 in group A (p<0.001) and 87 in group G (p=0.4)]. There was no significant difference between group S and group G on any of the scales, or between the three groups of patients in the mean Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire scores. CONCLUSIONS: Children with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy have a significantly reduced quality of life. Importantly, Quality-of-Life scores among unaffected children attending for screening were not different compared with scores from a normative UK population.