Aim The long-term stress, anxiety and job burnout experienced by healthcare workers (HCWs) are important to consider as the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic stresses healthcare systems globally. The primary objective was to examine the changes in the proportion of HCWs reporting stress, anxiety, and job burnout over six months during the peak of the pandemic in Singapore. The secondary objective was to examine the extent that objective job characteristics, HCW-perceived job factors, and HCW personal resources were associated with stress, anxiety, and job burnout. Method A sample of HCWs (doctors, nurses, allied health professionals, administrative and operations staff; N = 2744) was recruited via invitation to participate in an online survey from four tertiary hospitals. Data were gathered between March-August 2020, which included a 2-month lockdown period. HCWs completed monthly web-based self-reported assessments of stress (Perceived Stress Scale-4), anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7), and job burnout (Physician Work Life Scale). Results The majority of the sample consisted of female HCWs (81%) and nurses (60%). Using random-intercept logistic regression models, elevated perceived stress, anxiety and job burnout were reported by 33%, 13%, and 24% of the overall sample at baseline respectively. The proportion of HCWs reporting stress and job burnout increased by approximately 1·0% and 1·2% respectively per month. Anxiety did not significantly increase. Working long hours was associated with higher odds, while teamwork and feeling appreciated at work were associated with lower odds, of stress, anxiety, and job burnout. Conclusions Perceived stress and job burnout showed a mild increase over six months, even after exiting the lockdown. Teamwork and feeling appreciated at work were protective and are targets for developing organizational interventions to mitigate expected poor outcomes among frontline HCWs.

The EORTC Quality of Life Group has just completed the final phase (field-testing and validation) of an international project to develop a stand-alone measure of spiritual well-being (SWB) for palliative cancer patients. Participants (n = 451)-from 14 countries on four continents; 54% female; 188 Christian; 50 Muslim; 156 with no religion-completed a provisional 36-item measure of SWB plus the EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL (PAL), then took part in a structured debriefing interview. All items showed good score distribution across response categories. We assessed scale structure using principal component analysis and Rasch analysis, and explored construct validity, and convergent/divergent validity with the PAL. Twenty-two items in four scoring scales (Relationship with Self, Relationships with Others, Relationship with Someone or Something Greater, and Existential) explained 53% of the variance. The measure also includes a global SWB item and nine other items. Scores on the PAL global quality-of-life item and Emotional Functioning scale weakly-moderately correlated with scores on the global SWB item and two of the four SWB scales. This new validated 32-item SWB measure addresses a distinct aspect of quality-of-life, and is now available for use in research and clinical practice, with a role as both a measurement and an intervention tool.

Background ENABLE (Educate, Nurture, Advise, Before Life Ends) is a nurse coach-led, early palliative care model for patients with advanced cancer and their family caregivers. Content covered includes problem-solving, advance care planning, symptom management and self-care. The aim was to evaluate the cultural acceptability of ENABLE among patients with advanced cancer and their caregivers in Singapore and identify modifications for an adapted ENABLE-SG model. Methods Qualitative formative evaluation with a thematic analysis approach in two hospitals in Singapore, involving patients (n = 10), family caregivers (n = 11) and healthcare professionals (n = 10) who care for patients with advanced cancer. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to explore (i) the main needs and challenges facing individuals with advanced cancer and their family caregivers; (ii) patient involvement in healthcare decision making; and (iii) content and delivery of ENABLE. Results While physical needs were largely well met, participants expressed that psychosocial care was delivered too late in the illness trajectory. Healthcare decision making approaches varied from a patient-centred shared decision-making model to a family-centred model where patients may not know their cancer diagnosis and prognosis. The content was considered to be relevant, comprehensive and practical; financial assistance, adjustment to body image, and evaluation of complementary therapy were also recommended. Face-to-face rather than telephone sessions were preferred to facilitate rapport building. Conclusions ENABLE was broadly acceptable with some modifications, including adjusting the content to ensure it can be delivered even if the patient is not fully aware of cancer diagnosis and delivering the first session face-to-face with flexibility for subsequent sessions.

No abstract