{"title":"Supplemental Material for Prevalence of Burnout Among Health Care Workers During Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Pandemic: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis","authors":"","doi":"10.1037/pro0000483.supp","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/pro0000483.supp","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48217,"journal":{"name":"Professional Psychology-Research and Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2022-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41677337","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
L. Lind, Rachel N. Ward, Savannah G. Rose, L. Brown
Public Significance Statement The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the provision of mental health services in long-term care (LTC) settings, resulting in negative impacts not only for LTC residents who had previously been receiving mental health services but also the clinicians providing the services. This study examines the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health providers' ability to provide mental health services in LTC settings, patient functioning, and providers' personal well-being and professional functioning. The authors hope that information within this article will assist in elucidating critical insights that can serve as a guide for policymakers, administrators, employers, and mental health clinicians regarding the provision of mental health services to residents in LTC settings during future pandemics. Due to the rapid spread of COVID-19 in long-term care (LTC) settings and the subsequent mandatory visitor restrictions that were put in place, the provision of behavioral health services in LTC settings was impacted. To examine the pandemic's effect on the provision of psychological services in this setting and its impact on clinicians and their patients, we surveyed 126 licensed mental health clinicians working in LTC settings during the pandemic. The sample consisted of psychologists, social workers, and psychiatry mid-level practitioners from 31 states who had provided mental health care services in LTC settings during the initial 7 months after the COVID-19 pandemic was declared a national emergency. This exploratory study revealed that the pandemic significantly impacted the availability and use of mental health services in LTC settings. Although there was a reported increase in the use of telehealth services compared to prepandemic frequency, it was noted that LTC residents went long periods of time without access to mental health services. Government-imposed visitor restrictions and pandemic-related restrictions were perceived as negatively impacting the emotional well-being, loneliness, and quality of life of LTC residents. Perceived factors contributing to the financial and emotional impact of COVID-19 on clinicians were explored, and it was noted that more than half of the sample reported experiencing burnout and nearly one third of surveyed clinicians believed they had experienced trauma by providing mental health services in LTC settings during the COVID-19 pandemic. Understanding this impact has implications for providing mental health services during the current and future pandemics.
{"title":"The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on psychological service provision, mental health practitioners, and patients in long-term care settings: Results from a rapid response survey.","authors":"L. Lind, Rachel N. Ward, Savannah G. Rose, L. Brown","doi":"10.1037/pro0000486","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/pro0000486","url":null,"abstract":"Public Significance Statement The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the provision of mental health services in long-term care (LTC) settings, resulting in negative impacts not only for LTC residents who had previously been receiving mental health services but also the clinicians providing the services. This study examines the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health providers' ability to provide mental health services in LTC settings, patient functioning, and providers' personal well-being and professional functioning. The authors hope that information within this article will assist in elucidating critical insights that can serve as a guide for policymakers, administrators, employers, and mental health clinicians regarding the provision of mental health services to residents in LTC settings during future pandemics. Due to the rapid spread of COVID-19 in long-term care (LTC) settings and the subsequent mandatory visitor restrictions that were put in place, the provision of behavioral health services in LTC settings was impacted. To examine the pandemic's effect on the provision of psychological services in this setting and its impact on clinicians and their patients, we surveyed 126 licensed mental health clinicians working in LTC settings during the pandemic. The sample consisted of psychologists, social workers, and psychiatry mid-level practitioners from 31 states who had provided mental health care services in LTC settings during the initial 7 months after the COVID-19 pandemic was declared a national emergency. This exploratory study revealed that the pandemic significantly impacted the availability and use of mental health services in LTC settings. Although there was a reported increase in the use of telehealth services compared to prepandemic frequency, it was noted that LTC residents went long periods of time without access to mental health services. Government-imposed visitor restrictions and pandemic-related restrictions were perceived as negatively impacting the emotional well-being, loneliness, and quality of life of LTC residents. Perceived factors contributing to the financial and emotional impact of COVID-19 on clinicians were explored, and it was noted that more than half of the sample reported experiencing burnout and nearly one third of surveyed clinicians believed they had experienced trauma by providing mental health services in LTC settings during the COVID-19 pandemic. Understanding this impact has implications for providing mental health services during the current and future pandemics.","PeriodicalId":48217,"journal":{"name":"Professional Psychology-Research and Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48494540","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Karin Dangermond, R. Weewer, J. Duyndam, A. Machielse
{"title":"“The profession is just different”: Why noncareer and career firefighters have different experiences with critical incidents, and the role of informal peer support in processing them.","authors":"Karin Dangermond, R. Weewer, J. Duyndam, A. Machielse","doi":"10.1037/pro0000484","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/pro0000484","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48217,"journal":{"name":"Professional Psychology-Research and Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47976890","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Melanie M. Wilcox, Stephanie Winkeljohn Black, Joanna M Drinane, Ingrid Morales-Ramirez, Zainab Akef, Karen W Tao, C. DeBlaere, J. Hook, Don E. Davis, C. Watkins, Jesse Owen
{"title":"Supplemental Material for A Brief Qualitative Examination of Multicultural Orientation in Clinical Supervision","authors":"Melanie M. Wilcox, Stephanie Winkeljohn Black, Joanna M Drinane, Ingrid Morales-Ramirez, Zainab Akef, Karen W Tao, C. DeBlaere, J. Hook, Don E. Davis, C. Watkins, Jesse Owen","doi":"10.1037/pro0000477.supp","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/pro0000477.supp","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48217,"journal":{"name":"Professional Psychology-Research and Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2022-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43208501","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Supplemental Material for Psychological Assessment Reports for Linguistically Minoritized Clients: Considerations for Ethical and Professional Practice","authors":"","doi":"10.1037/pro0000462.supp","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/pro0000462.supp","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48217,"journal":{"name":"Professional Psychology-Research and Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2022-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47049646","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
interventions to utilization of social cognitive perspectives in promoting biodiversity conservation. Abstract A survey of psychologist s’ attitudes toward the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) and its alternatives was conducted. Almost 90% of psychologists reported regularly consulting DSM-5, despite dissatisfaction with it. However, opinions varied by theoretical orientation. Cognitive-behavioral psychologists held positive attitudes about DSM, whereas psychodynamic and humanistic/constructivist/systems psychologists were negatively inclined toward it. Integrative/eclectic psychologists were in between. Diagnostic codes and identifying pathology were seen as DSM-5 ’s biggest advantages, and the medicalization of psychosocial problems and obscuring individual differences as its biggest disadvantages. Psychologists supported developing alternatives to DSM-5, but when asked about six alternatives — International Classification of Diseases (ICD), Research Domain Criteria (RDoC), Psychodynamic Diagnostic Manual 2 (PDM), Operationalized Psychodynamic Diagnosis (OPD), Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP), and Power Threat Meaning Framework (PTMF) — they were generally unfamiliar with them except for ICD. Although not wishing to abandon the medical model, psychologists (except for cognitive-behaviorists) said DSM-5 relies too much on medical semantics and questioned whether mental disorders should be considered a subset of medical disorders. Overall, psychologists use DSM for practical reasons (diagnostic categories and codes) more than scientific ones (validity and reliability). This finding affirms something remarkable: Despite ongoing attention to revising and improving DSM over the past four decades, psychologists remain lukewarm toward it and strongly interested in alternatives. However, until alternatives are better known and provide the necessary practical advantages, psychologists will likely continue to use DSM despite their mixed feelings about it.
{"title":"Psychologist attitudes toward DSM-5 and its alternatives.","authors":"J. Raskin, D. Maynard, Michael C. Gayle","doi":"10.1037/pro0000480","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/pro0000480","url":null,"abstract":"interventions to utilization of social cognitive perspectives in promoting biodiversity conservation. Abstract A survey of psychologist s’ attitudes toward the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) and its alternatives was conducted. Almost 90% of psychologists reported regularly consulting DSM-5, despite dissatisfaction with it. However, opinions varied by theoretical orientation. Cognitive-behavioral psychologists held positive attitudes about DSM, whereas psychodynamic and humanistic/constructivist/systems psychologists were negatively inclined toward it. Integrative/eclectic psychologists were in between. Diagnostic codes and identifying pathology were seen as DSM-5 ’s biggest advantages, and the medicalization of psychosocial problems and obscuring individual differences as its biggest disadvantages. Psychologists supported developing alternatives to DSM-5, but when asked about six alternatives — International Classification of Diseases (ICD), Research Domain Criteria (RDoC), Psychodynamic Diagnostic Manual 2 (PDM), Operationalized Psychodynamic Diagnosis (OPD), Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP), and Power Threat Meaning Framework (PTMF) — they were generally unfamiliar with them except for ICD. Although not wishing to abandon the medical model, psychologists (except for cognitive-behaviorists) said DSM-5 relies too much on medical semantics and questioned whether mental disorders should be considered a subset of medical disorders. Overall, psychologists use DSM for practical reasons (diagnostic categories and codes) more than scientific ones (validity and reliability). This finding affirms something remarkable: Despite ongoing attention to revising and improving DSM over the past four decades, psychologists remain lukewarm toward it and strongly interested in alternatives. However, until alternatives are better known and provide the necessary practical advantages, psychologists will likely continue to use DSM despite their mixed feelings about it.","PeriodicalId":48217,"journal":{"name":"Professional Psychology-Research and Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2022-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43596369","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Luona Lin, K. Stamm, Krag S Ferenz, C. V. Wright, Sophie Bethune, Jessica Conroy
Public Significance Statement This study is among the first in examining the relationship between challenges with the use of telehealth and psychologists' response during the coronavirus pandemic, highlighting the need to address both provider and patient barriers to telehealth that influence provider well-being. Allowing flexibility in policies, regulations, and format of service delivery and making telehealth training opportunities and resources available are key to ensure a healthy behavioral workforce and the continued delivery of health care services. The coronavirus pandemic drastically altered the landscape of mental health care delivery as psychologists pivoted to telehealth and grappled with increasing population mental health care needs. Despite the rapid shift to telehealth, many challenges on both the provider and patient sides remain. The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between challenges with the use of telehealth and psychologists' response during the pandemic. The study used survey data from 1,679 doctoral-level licensed psychologists who provided services via telehealth during September-October 2020. Results from ordered logistic and ordinary least squares regressions suggest that the degree of telehealth challenge psychologists experienced was not statistically associated with workload, patient load, or ability to meet patient demand during the pandemic. However, the degree of telehealth challenge patients experienced was significantly associated with these outcomes. The fewer patients who experienced telehealth challenges, the more psychologists were able to maintain or increase their workload and patient load and meet patient demand. Telehealth challenges experienced by both psychologists and their patients were associated with psychologists' mental health. Psychologists experiencing fewer telehealth challenges, and having fewer patients experiencing telehealth challenges, were more likely to report lower stress levels, be able to practice self-care and maintain positive work-life balance, and less likely to experience burnout. Findings of this study have clear policy implications to encourage continued telehealth after the public health emergency ends and address barriers to effectively utilize telehealth. These measures are critical to supporting the health service psychologist workforce and maintaining the continuity of mental health care.
{"title":"Relationship between challenges with the use of telehealth and psychologists’ response during the coronavirus pandemic.","authors":"Luona Lin, K. Stamm, Krag S Ferenz, C. V. Wright, Sophie Bethune, Jessica Conroy","doi":"10.1037/pro0000481","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/pro0000481","url":null,"abstract":"Public Significance Statement This study is among the first in examining the relationship between challenges with the use of telehealth and psychologists' response during the coronavirus pandemic, highlighting the need to address both provider and patient barriers to telehealth that influence provider well-being. Allowing flexibility in policies, regulations, and format of service delivery and making telehealth training opportunities and resources available are key to ensure a healthy behavioral workforce and the continued delivery of health care services. The coronavirus pandemic drastically altered the landscape of mental health care delivery as psychologists pivoted to telehealth and grappled with increasing population mental health care needs. Despite the rapid shift to telehealth, many challenges on both the provider and patient sides remain. The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between challenges with the use of telehealth and psychologists' response during the pandemic. The study used survey data from 1,679 doctoral-level licensed psychologists who provided services via telehealth during September-October 2020. Results from ordered logistic and ordinary least squares regressions suggest that the degree of telehealth challenge psychologists experienced was not statistically associated with workload, patient load, or ability to meet patient demand during the pandemic. However, the degree of telehealth challenge patients experienced was significantly associated with these outcomes. The fewer patients who experienced telehealth challenges, the more psychologists were able to maintain or increase their workload and patient load and meet patient demand. Telehealth challenges experienced by both psychologists and their patients were associated with psychologists' mental health. Psychologists experiencing fewer telehealth challenges, and having fewer patients experiencing telehealth challenges, were more likely to report lower stress levels, be able to practice self-care and maintain positive work-life balance, and less likely to experience burnout. Findings of this study have clear policy implications to encourage continued telehealth after the public health emergency ends and address barriers to effectively utilize telehealth. These measures are critical to supporting the health service psychologist workforce and maintaining the continuity of mental health care.","PeriodicalId":48217,"journal":{"name":"Professional Psychology-Research and Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2022-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41886420","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Supplemental Material for Relationship Between Challenges With the Use of Telehealth and Psychologists’ Response During the Coronavirus Pandemic","authors":"","doi":"10.1037/pro0000481.supp","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/pro0000481.supp","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48217,"journal":{"name":"Professional Psychology-Research and Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2022-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44247400","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Supplemental Material for Psychologist Attitudes Toward DSM-5 and Its Alternatives","authors":"","doi":"10.1037/pro0000480.supp","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/pro0000480.supp","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48217,"journal":{"name":"Professional Psychology-Research and Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2022-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47150804","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
It is estimated that the VA will have rendered decisions on roughly 1.4 million disability claims in 2021. A substantial percentage of these are for mental health conditions, specifically posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, almost all Compensation and Pension (C&P) examinations for PTSD were completed in-person;since March 2020, most have been conducted using telehealth. However, the content and quality of such exams, relative to those conducted in-person, have not been studied. The present study compared Initial PTSD examinations by telehealth to those completed in-person. Overall, 105 reports (51 in-person and 54 telehealth) were randomly selected from all Initial PTSD C&P exams completed within VA Connecticut between 2019 and 2020 (1 year preceding the pandemic and the first year of the pandemic). Raters were masked to all information indicating examiner, mode, and date of exam. Exam content was recorded, and exam quality was rated using three metrics that demonstrated adequate reliability and sensitivity in a prior study. There were no statistically significant differences between in-person and tele-exams on any relevant report content variables, report quality metrics, or VA disability rating outcomes. Results support the validity of the use of telehealth for conducting psychological exams for PTSD disability claims within the VA. Implications for the use of telehealth technology in improving operational breadth and reducing barriers to examination and care, both in the VA and beyond, are discussed.
{"title":"PTSD disability examinations in the Department of Veterans Affairs:\u0000 A comparison of telehealth and in-person exams.","authors":"M. Gianoli, A. W. Meisler","doi":"10.1037/pro0000479","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/pro0000479","url":null,"abstract":"It is estimated that the VA will have rendered decisions on roughly 1.4 million disability claims in 2021. A substantial percentage of these are for mental health conditions, specifically posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, almost all Compensation and Pension (C&P) examinations for PTSD were completed in-person;since March 2020, most have been conducted using telehealth. However, the content and quality of such exams, relative to those conducted in-person, have not been studied. The present study compared Initial PTSD examinations by telehealth to those completed in-person. Overall, 105 reports (51 in-person and 54 telehealth) were randomly selected from all Initial PTSD C&P exams completed within VA Connecticut between 2019 and 2020 (1 year preceding the pandemic and the first year of the pandemic). Raters were masked to all information indicating examiner, mode, and date of exam. Exam content was recorded, and exam quality was rated using three metrics that demonstrated adequate reliability and sensitivity in a prior study. There were no statistically significant differences between in-person and tele-exams on any relevant report content variables, report quality metrics, or VA disability rating outcomes. Results support the validity of the use of telehealth for conducting psychological exams for PTSD disability claims within the VA. Implications for the use of telehealth technology in improving operational breadth and reducing barriers to examination and care, both in the VA and beyond, are discussed.","PeriodicalId":48217,"journal":{"name":"Professional Psychology-Research and Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2022-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44919260","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：