Problem Statement
As the problem statement of the current research and literature review, one should name the worsening of the situation regarding nurses’ and other healthcare providers’ mental health. It is caused by various factors, including increased workload due to issues such as the COVID-19 pandemic or natural disasters (Finstad et al., 2021). These adverse effects have various outcomes, such as burnout at work, depression, lack of time for personal life, and more (Yu et al., 2019).
It is worth noting that the symptoms mentioned above have a significantly adverse impact on the entire healthcare system (Brooks et al., 2020). Notably, depression and burnout cause the worsening of health services provided to patients (Heath et al., 2020). Therefore, not only do the nurses have mental problems, but the patients experience a decrease in healthcare and are at risk (BNurs et al., 2020). Consequently, this problem should be researched thoroughly to improve the well-being of healthcare providers and provide them with more relaxing opportunities (d’Ettorre et al., 2021). Many methods should be considered, including various coping methods to eliminate depression and other mental disorders.
Research Question
What coping mechanisms can nurses use to limit the consequences of facing traumatic experiences at work? The format PICO was used to structure the question and guide the search. Population – nurses. Phenomenon of Interest – coping mechanisms. Context – traumatic experience at work.
Search Strategy
The Google Scholar, EBSCO, MDPI Open Access Journals, and BMJ Journals electronic databases were used to conduct systematic literature searches. These databases were chosen as they allow one to apply specific settings, such as relevance of the sources and their type of view. They also contain a qualitative description of sources, including all necessary information, which is essential for understanding the importance of the source for the current study.
The following key search terms were selected and combined using Boolean operators: nurses, medical facilities, stress, depression, COVID-19, pandemic, coping strategies, stress-resilience, post-traumatic stress, disasters, medical equipment, and psychologists. The delimiters, such as commas, slashes, and quotation marks, were consistent across each database, allowing users to search for vital resources comfortably and quickly. Secondary and gray sources of literature were excluded from this review.
The search strategy, including the databases, key search terms, and the number of articles found using this method, is shown in Table 1. The search was conducted in August 2023 and was limited to articles published between 2018 and 2023.
The following inclusion criteria were applied during article selection:
Study Designs and Aim/s
Although both qualitative and quantitative methods are essential for the current study, primary attention was given to studies using quantitative methods during the search for sources.
Intervention and Outcome
Studies aimed to research and prevent traumatic experiences among nurses during work. Particularly, the research focused on the coping mechanisms and other techniques related to dealing with depression and mental illnesses of healthcare providers. Studies have explored various strategies, including coping methods, to mitigate the adverse effects on healthcare workers resulting from disasters and pandemics.
Participants and setting
Studies included real nurses with different working experiences. Studies included healthcare workers who participated in the treatment of patients during the COVID-19 pandemic
Publication Type and Language
- Studies that were undertaken internationally and in the United States of America.
- Studies published in English.
- Studies that contain relevant, unfiltered, and qualitative evidence.
- Studies that were published in peer-reviewed journals or with full access.
Database Search Template
This literature search method yielded 43 articles. Once duplicates (n=15 articles) were removed, the abstract of 28 articles was screened for inclusion in this review. The majority of the rejected articles (n = 15) were not related to the study’s current specifications. In addition, some of them contained insufficient evidence, which was not suitable to prove the quality of the conducted study. These articles were excluded.
The remaining 28 full-text articles were screened for inclusion in this review. A further 22 articles were excluded for the following reasons:
- The articles did not have nurses as the primary object of the study. In other words, the primary focus of this paper’s research was not in correlation with the aim of the current study.
- The names of the articles showed that the studied population was not following the purposes of the current study.
- The described research was conducted only with a qualitative study, and, therefore, the discussions and conclusions were based on this type of study.
- The described research was too short and did not contain specific evidence, discussions, and descriptions of how the research was conducted. It allows one to state that the lack of information undermines the quality of the study.
- Only the abstract of the paper was written in English. All other parts were in other languages, and they had limited access to them.
- The study was not focused on finding specific methods for dealing with stress and mental disorders of healthcare providers. Still, it just evaluated the main principles and issues of the COVID-19 pandemic and its influence on healthcare.
- The study did not have any information related to coping mechanisms and, therefore, is not suitable as the practical point for this research. The study has a limited scope of research participants, which is not enough to provide qualitative evidence of the relevance and fairness of the conclusions.
- The presented information in numbers and facts was not qualitatively synchronized. It was not presented in graphs or tables, which made it extremely difficult to understand the step-by-step process of the research and highlight vital facts for the current study.
- The paper did not have a sufficient number of citations and references, which was the reason for doubt concerning its relevance and scientific reliability. Additionally, existing citations were not correctly formatted, and it was impossible to use links to access the articles online.
References
BNurs, A. L., Brown, J. A., Rees, C. S., Leslie, G. D., Dip, P. G. (2020). Nurse resilience: A concept analysis. International Journal of Mental Health Nursing Volume 29, Issue 4 p. 553-575.
Brooks, S., Amlot, R., Rubin, G., & Greenberg, N. (2020). Psychological resilience and post-traumatic growth in disaster-exposed organizations: Overview of the literature. BMJ Mil Health, 166, 52-56.
d’Ettorre, G., Ceccarelli, G., Santinelli, L., Vassalini, P., Innocenti, G. P., Alessandri, F., Koukopoulos, A. E., Russo, A., d’Ettorre, G., & Tarsitani, L. (2021). Post-traumatic stress symptoms in healthcare workers dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(2), 601.
Finstad, G. L., Giorgi, G., Lulli, L. G., Pandolfi, C., Foti, G., León-Perez, J. M., Cantero-Sánchez, F. J., & Mucci, N. (2021). Resilience, coping strategies and posttraumatic growth in the workplace following COVID-19: A narrative review on the positive aspects of trauma. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(18).
Heath, C., Sommerfield, A., & Ungern-Sternberg, B. S. (2020). Resilience strategies tomanage psychological distress among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: a narrative review. Anaesthesia, 75(10), 1364-1371.
Yu, F., Raphael, D., Mackay, L., Smith, M., & King, A. (2019). Personal and work-related factors associated with nurse resilience: A systematic review. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 93, 129-140.