ObjectivesTo collate and synthesise available literature on burnout and compassion fatigue (CF) among organ and tissue donation coordinators (OTDCs) and to respond to the research question: what is known about burnout and CF among OTDCs worldwide?DesignScoping review using Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews.Data sourcesMedline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LILACS, PTSpubs and grey literature (ResearchGate, OpenGrey, Organ Donation Organization (ODO) websites, open access theses and dissertations) up to April 2020.Study selectionStudies reporting aspects of burnout and CF among OTDCs, including risk and protective factors.Data extractionTwo reviewers independently screened the studies for eligibility and extracted data from chosen sources using a data extraction tool developed for this study; NVIVO was used to perform a qualitative directed content analysis.ResultsThe searches yielded 741 potentially relevant records, of which 29 met the inclusion criteria. The majority of articles were from the USA (n=7, 24%), Canada (n=6, 21%) and Brazil (n=6, 21%), published between 2013 and 2020 (n=13, 45%) in transplant journals (n=11, 38%) and used a qualitative design approach (n=12, 41%). In the thematic analysis, we classified the articles into five categories: (1) burnout characteristics, (2) CF characteristics, (3) coping strategies, (4) protective factors and (5) ambivalence.ConclusionWe identified aspects of burnout and CF among OTDCs, including defining characteristics, demographic predispositions, protective factors, coping strategies, precursors, consequences and personal ambivalences. Researchers described burnout and CF characteristics but did not use consistent terms when referring to CF and burnout, which may have hindered the identification of all relevant sources. This gap should be addressed by the application of consistent terminology, systematic approaches and appropriate research methods that combine quantitative and qualitative investigation to examine the underlying reasons for the development of burnout and CF among OTDCs.
Objective: To analyze the historical events of the nursing profession presented by the Brazilian print media and that were configured as important in the (re/des) construction of the professional identity, from 1980 to 1986. Method: Qualitative research with a documental historical nature guided by historical investigation process, using 80 articles published in newspapers of great national circulation. Results: They portrayed the nursing struggles and representative entities to improve working conditions, the highlights for intercurrences in the nursing area, as well as the media portrayal of the stereotype of nursing at the time. Conclusion: The stereotypes traced by print media result in a double impact on nursing and its professional identity. On the one hand, it adds visibility to the struggles and gains of the category, and on the other, it generates devaluation by portraits of intercurrences in the exercise of the profession without pertinent contextualization and explanation of the facts that approached and resulted in such an event.
Despite the availability of guidelines about the different types of review literature, the identification of the best approach is not always clear for nursing researchers. Therefore, in this article, we provide a comprehensive guide to be used by health care and nursing scholars while choosing among 4 popular types of reviews (narrative, integrative, scoping, and systematic review), including a descriptive discussion, critical analysis, and decision map tree. Although some review methodologies are more rigorous, it would be inaccurate to say that one is preferable over the others. Instead, each methodology is adequate for a certain type of investigation, nursing methodology research, and research paradigm.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.