We should move away from a focus on individual resilience towards building resilient systems

Johal, Harleen Kaur; Prout, Rachel; Birchley, Giles; Huxtable, Richard

doi:10.1136/bmj.n2737

Cited by 6 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thirdly, during a pandemic, organizations should develop the individual resilience of primary healthcare professionals at the organizational level by monitoring their health status, providing technical guidance, offering targeted support programs and creating an optimal working environment. Additionally, in the early stages of a pandemic, organizations need to redeploy staffing structures, form a flexible shift schedule, optimize the workflow, and guarantee adequate rest time for primary healthcare professionals ( Johal et al, 2021 ), with a view to improving individual adaptation to the stressful environment, attending to their the mental state and enhancing resilience. What’s more, it is recommended that health authorities and society provide instrumental and emotional support for healthcare professionals during the pandemic to enhance resilience in terms of sharing information, stocking, providing adequate emergency supplies, and offering medical support and emotional value when necessary.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Association of individual resilience with organizational resilience, perceived social support, and job performance among healthcare professionals in township health centers of China during the COVID-19 pandemic

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundPrimary healthcare professionals were overworked and psychologically overwhelmed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Resilience is an important shield for individuals to cope with psychological stress and improve performance in crises. This study aims to explore the association of individual resilience with organizational resilience, perceived social support and job performance among healthcare professionals in township health centers of China during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsData from 1,266 questionnaires were collected through a cross-sectional survey conducted in December 2021 in Shandong Province, China. Descriptive analysis of individual resilience, organizational resilience, perceived social support, and job performance was conducted. Pearson correlation analysis was used to examine the correlations among these variables, and structural equation modeling was performed to verify the relationships between these variables.ResultsThe score of individual resilience was 101.67 ± 14.29, ranging from 24 to 120. Organizational resilience (β = 0.409, p < 0.01) and perceived social support (β = 0.410, p < 0.01) had significant direct effects on individual resilience. Individual resilience (β = 0.709, p < 0.01) had a significant direct effect on job performance. Organizational resilience (β = 0.290, p < 0.01) and perceived social support (β = 0.291, p < 0.01) had significant indirect effects on job performance.ConclusionDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, the individual resilience of healthcare professionals in township health centers was at a moderate level. Organizational resilience and perceived social support positively affected individual resilience, and individual resilience positively affected job performance. Furthermore, individual resilience mediated the effect of organizational resilience and perceived social support on job performance. It is recommended that multiple stakeholders work together to improve the individual resilience of primary healthcare professionals.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Association of individual resilience with organizational resilience, perceived social support, and job performance among healthcare professionals in township health centers of China during the COVID-19 pandemic

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…26 Resilience is generally considered a ‘toxic term’ in medical culture. 66 67 However, it was included for completeness as it features so heavily in policy and research literature on doctor well-being.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Which outcomes should be included in a core outcome set for capturing and measuring doctor well-being? A Delphi study

Simons,

Klepacz,

Baldwin

2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: To develop a core outcome set (COS) to capture and measure the well-being of doctors working in the NHS. Design: An online Delphi study. Setting: United Kingdom National Health Service. Participants: Participants from four stakeholder groups: i) those who might use the COS in research, ii) organisations that measure/capture NHS staff wellbeing, iii) professionals with experience managing NHS staff wellbeing, and iv) NHS doctors, were identified through authorship of relevant publications, attendee lists of doctor well-being conferences and meetings, professional bodies, participation in a previous study and recommendations from others. They were recruited via email. Method: A two-stage process: 1) creating a list of 43 wellbeing outcomes informed by a systematic review of wellbeing measurement instruments, a survey of UK doctors and 2 doctor engagement workshops, and 2) an online modified Delphi study (with two rounds) to reach consensus. Outcomes were rated on a 9-point Likert scale; consensus was reached when ≤75% agreed that an outcome was critical for inclusion in the COS. Results: Fifty-two participants completed both Delphi rounds. Seven wellbeing outcomes met the threshold for inclusion in the COS: General wellbeing, Health, Personal safety, Job satisfaction, Morale, Life work balance, and Good clinical practice. Conclusion: Use of the COS has the potential to reduce heterogeneity and standardise the capture and measurement of doctor well-being and ensure outcomes important to all stakeholders are reported. Trial registration: This study was prospectively registered with the COMET initiative www.comet-initiative.org (Registration: 1577)

show abstract

“…However, these recommendations are not yet standard practice, and at the time of writing the workforce remains dependent on informal peer support. While formal support programmes may be beneficial for participants, care must be taken not to focus on the implied resilience of individuals but rather to improve the mechanisms of organizations to support those individuals [45].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influencing factors in surgical decision‐making: a qualitative analysis of colorectal surgeons' experiences of postoperative complications

Bisset,

Moug,

Oliphant

et al. 2024

Colorectal Disease

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AimWhen making anastomotic decisions in rectal cancer surgery, surgeons must consider the risk of anastomotic leakage, which bears implications for the patient's quality of life, cancer recurrence and, potentially, death. The aim of this study was to investigate the views of colorectal surgeons on how their individual attributes (e.g. experience, personality traits) may influence their decision‐making and experience of complications.MethodThis qualitative study used individual interviews for data collection. Purposive sampling was used to invite certified UK‐based colorectal surgeons to participate. Participants were recruited until ongoing data review indicated no new codes were generated, suggesting data sufficiency. Data were analysed thematically following Braun and Clarke's six‐step framework.ResultsSeventeen colorectal surgeons (eight female, nine male) participated. Two key themes with relevant subthemes were identified: (1) personal attributes influencing variation in decision‐making (e.g. demographics, personality) and (2) the influence of complications on decision‐making. Surgeons described variation in the management of complications based upon their personal attributes, which included factors such as gender, experience and subspeciality interests. Surgeons described the detrimental impact of anastomotic leakage on their mental and physical health. Experience of anastomotic leakage influences future decision‐making and is associated with changes in practice even when a technical error is not identified.ConclusionColorectal surgeons consider anastomotic leaks to be personal ‘failures’, which has a negative impact on surgeon welfare. Better understanding of how surgeons make difficult decisions, and how surgeons respond to and learn from complications, is necessary to identify ‘personalized’ methods of supporting surgeons at all career stages, which may improve patient outcomes.

show abstract

We should move away from a focus on individual resilience towards building resilient systems

Cited by 6 publications

References 13 publications

Association of individual resilience with organizational resilience, perceived social support, and job performance among healthcare professionals in township health centers of China during the COVID-19 pandemic

Association of individual resilience with organizational resilience, perceived social support, and job performance among healthcare professionals in township health centers of China during the COVID-19 pandemic

Which outcomes should be included in a core outcome set for capturing and measuring doctor well-being? A Delphi study

Influencing factors in surgical decision‐making: a qualitative analysis of colorectal surgeons' experiences of postoperative complications

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About