Prevalence, Predictors, and Experience of Moral Suffering in Nursing and Care Home Staff during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Mixed-Methods Systematic Review.

(1) Background: Nursing and care home staff experienced high death rates of older residents and increased occupational and psychosocial pressures during the COVID-19 pandemic. The literature has previously found this group to be at risk of developing mental health conditions, moral injury (MI), and moral distress (MD). The latter two terms refer to the perceived ethical wrongdoing which contravenes an individual's moral beliefs and elicits adverse emotional responses. (2) Method: A systematic review was conducted to explore the prevalence, predictors, and psychological experience of MI and MD in the aforementioned population during the COVID-19 pandemic. The databases CINAHL, APA PsychINFO, APA PsychArticles, Web of Science, Medline, and Scopus were systematically searched for original research studies of all designs, published in English, with no geographical restrictions, and dating from when COVID-19 was declared a public health emergency on the 30 January 2020 to the 3 January 2022. Out of 531 studies screened for eligibility, 8 studies were selected for review. A thematic analysis was undertaken to examine the major underpinning themes. (3) Results: MI, MD, and related constructs (notably secondary traumatic stress) were evidenced to be present in staff, although most studies did not explore the prevalence or predictors. The elicited major themes were resource deficits, role challenges, communication and leadership, and emotional and psychosocial consequences. (4) Conclusions: Our findings suggest that moral injury and moral distress were likely to be present prior to COVID-19 but have been exacerbated by the pandemic. Whilst studies were generally of high quality, the dearth of quantitative studies assessing prevalence and predictors suggests a research need, enabling the exploration of causal relationships between variables. However, the implied presence of MI and MD warrants intervention developments and workplace support for nursing and care home staff.

'Weighing up risks': a model of care home staff decision-making about potential resident hospital transfers.

BACKGROUND: care home staff play a crucial role in managing residents' health and responding to deteriorations. When deciding whether to transfer a resident to hospital, a careful consideration of the potential benefits and risks is required. Previous studies have identified factors that influence staff decision-making, yet few have moved beyond description to produce a conceptual model of the decision-making process. OBJECTIVES: to develop a conceptual model to describe care home staff's decision-making when faced with a resident who potentially requires a transfer to the hospital. METHODS: data collection occurred in England between May 2018 and November 2019, consisting of 28 semi-structured interviews with 30 members of care home staff across six care home sites and 113 hours of ethnographic observations, documentary analysis and informal conversations (with staff, residents, visiting families, friends and healthcare professionals) at three of these sites. RESULTS: a conceptual model of care home staff's decision-making is presented. Except in situations that staff perceived to be urgent enough to require an immediate transfer, resident transfers tended to occur following a series of escalations. Care home staff made complex decisions in which they sought to balance a number of potential benefits and risks to: residents; staff (as decision-makers); social relationships; care home organisations and wider health and social care services. CONCLUSIONS: during transfer decisions, care home staff make complex decisions in which they weigh up several forms of risk. The model presented offers a theoretical basis for interventions to support deteriorating care home residents and the staff responsible for their care.

Using advance and emergency care plans during transfer decisions: A grounded theory interview study with care home staff.

BACKGROUND: Advance care planning has been identified as one of few modifiable factors that could reduce hospital transfers from care homes. Several types of documents may be used by patients and clinicians to record these plans. However, little is known about how plans are perceived and used by care home staff at the time of deterioration. AIM: To describe care home staff experiences and perceptions of using written plans during in-the-moment decision-making about potential resident hospital transfers. DESIGN: Qualitative semi-structured interviews analysed using the Straussian approach to grounded theory. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Thirty staff across six care homes (with and without nursing) in the East and West Midlands of England. RESULTS: Staff preferred (in principle) to keep deteriorating residents in the care home but feared that doing so could lead to negative repercussions for them as individuals, especially when there was perceived discordance with family carers' wishes. They felt that clinicians should be responsible for these plans but were happy to take a supporting role. At the time of deterioration, written plans legitimised the decision to care for the resident within the home; however, staff were wary of interpreting broad statements and wanted plans to be detailed, specific, unambiguous, technically 'correct', understood by families and regularly updated. CONCLUSIONS: Written plans provide reassurance for care home staff, reducing concerns about personal and professional risk. However, care home staff have limited discretion to interpret plans and transfers may occur if plans are not specific enough for care home staff to use confidently.