Reflective practice to reduce moral injury in healthcare workers.

IF 1.7
S Tazrin, T Niyarepola, S A M Stevelink, R Bhundia, D Lamb, N Greenberg, B Croak
{"title":"Reflective practice to reduce moral injury in healthcare workers.","authors":"S Tazrin, T Niyarepola, S A M Stevelink, R Bhundia, D Lamb, N Greenberg, B Croak","doi":"10.1093/occmed/kqag060","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Moral injury (MI) can arise when individuals experience events that violate their moral beliefs. During the COVID-19 pandemic, MI gained attention among healthcare workers (HCWs). Reflective practice (RP) may help prevent or mitigate MI but remains underexplored. This narrative review examines existing literature on RP interventions addressing MI in HCWs.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>To synthesize existing literature on RP interventions to prevent or mitigate MI in HCWs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A semi-structured literature search was conducted in July 2024 and updated in August 2025 across four databases. Twelve studies evaluating RP interventions, including three studies identifying barriers to RP, were included. Across the 12 studies, the sample size was n = 793, involving nurses and other HCWs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most studies implemented structured workshops combining RP with psychoeducation and group discussion. Of the studies, 11 studies lacked control groups, three used pre-/post-test designs, while others relied on self-reported helpfulness. These studies provided preliminary evidence for the feasibility and perceived value of RP in addressing MI. The only study with a control group was limited by a small sample size, and the results were non-significant. Reported barriers to implementing RP included individual-level factors (e.g. lack of experience) and institutional obstacles (e.g. limited managerial support).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Findings suggest RP holds promise as an intervention for MI in HCWs. However, the evidence base is limited by small samples and weak study designs. Further research using robust methodologies, including randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and longitudinal studies, is needed to evaluate RP across diverse HCW roles, including administrative staff.</p>","PeriodicalId":520727,"journal":{"name":"Occupational medicine (Oxford, England)","volume":" ","pages":"435-441"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13673504/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Occupational medicine (Oxford, England)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/occmed/kqag060","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Moral injury (MI) can arise when individuals experience events that violate their moral beliefs. During the COVID-19 pandemic, MI gained attention among healthcare workers (HCWs). Reflective practice (RP) may help prevent or mitigate MI but remains underexplored. This narrative review examines existing literature on RP interventions addressing MI in HCWs.

Aims: To synthesize existing literature on RP interventions to prevent or mitigate MI in HCWs.

Methods: A semi-structured literature search was conducted in July 2024 and updated in August 2025 across four databases. Twelve studies evaluating RP interventions, including three studies identifying barriers to RP, were included. Across the 12 studies, the sample size was n = 793, involving nurses and other HCWs.

Results: Most studies implemented structured workshops combining RP with psychoeducation and group discussion. Of the studies, 11 studies lacked control groups, three used pre-/post-test designs, while others relied on self-reported helpfulness. These studies provided preliminary evidence for the feasibility and perceived value of RP in addressing MI. The only study with a control group was limited by a small sample size, and the results were non-significant. Reported barriers to implementing RP included individual-level factors (e.g. lack of experience) and institutional obstacles (e.g. limited managerial support).

Conclusions: Findings suggest RP holds promise as an intervention for MI in HCWs. However, the evidence base is limited by small samples and weak study designs. Further research using robust methodologies, including randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and longitudinal studies, is needed to evaluate RP across diverse HCW roles, including administrative staff.

减少医护人员道德伤害的反思性实践。
背景:当个体经历违背其道德信仰的事件时,就会产生道德伤害(MI)。在2019冠状病毒病大流行期间,心肌梗死引起了医护人员的关注。反思性实践(RP)可能有助于预防或减轻心肌梗死,但仍未得到充分探索。本文回顾了现有的关于RP干预治疗HCWs心肌梗死的文献。目的:综合现有关于RP干预预防或减轻HCWs心肌梗死的文献。方法:于2024年7月对4个数据库进行半结构化文献检索,并于2025年8月更新。纳入了12项评估RP干预措施的研究,包括3项确定RP障碍的研究。在这12项研究中,样本量为n = 793,涉及护士和其他卫生保健工作者。结果:大多数研究采用结构化工作坊,将RP与心理教育和小组讨论相结合。在这些研究中,11项研究缺乏对照组,3项研究采用了前/后测试设计,而其他研究则依赖于自我报告的帮助。这些研究为RP治疗心肌梗死的可行性和感知价值提供了初步证据。唯一一项有对照组的研究受到样本量小的限制,结果不显著。报告的实施RP的障碍包括个人层面的因素(如缺乏经验)和体制障碍(如有限的管理支持)。结论:研究结果表明,RP有望作为HCWs患者心肌梗死的干预措施。然而,证据基础受限于小样本和薄弱的研究设计。需要使用包括随机对照试验(rct)和纵向研究在内的可靠方法进行进一步研究,以评估不同HCW角色(包括行政人员)的RP。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书