TY - JOUR
T1 - Complementary and integrative medicine intervention in front-line COVID-19 clinicians
AU - Ben-Arye, Eran
AU - Gressel, Orit
AU - Samuels, Noah
AU - Stein, Nili
AU - Eden, Arieh
AU - Vagedes, Jan
AU - Kassem, Sameer
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024.
PY - 2024/5/1
Y1 - 2024/5/1
N2 - Objective To assess the impact of a multidisciplinary complementary and integrative medicine (CIM) intervention on physical and emotional concerns among front-line COVID-19 healthcare providers (HCPs). Methods A multimodality CIM treatment intervention was provided by integrative practitioners to HCPs in three isolated COVID-19 departments. HCPs' two main concerns were scored (from 0 to 6) before and following the CIM intervention using the Measure Yourself Concerns and Wellbeing questionnaire. Postintervention narratives identified reflective narratives specifying emotional and/or spiritual keywords. Results Of 181 HCPs undergoing at least one CIM treatment, 119 (65.7%) completed post-treatment questionnaires. While HCPs listing baseline emotional-related concerns benefited from the CIM intervention, those who did not express emotional or spiritual concerns improved even more significantly following the first session, for both leading concerns (p=0.038) and emotional-related concerns (p=0.023). Nevertheless, it was shown that following subsequent treatments HCPs who expressed emotional and spiritual concerns improved more significantly than those who did not for emotional-related concerns (p=0.017). Conclusions A CIM intervention for front-line HCPs working in isolated COVID-19 departments can significantly impact emotional-related concerns, more so after the first treatment and among HCPs not using emotional-spiritual keywords in post-treatment narratives. Referral of HCPs to CIM programmes for improved wellbeing should avoid referral bias to those not expressing emotional/spiritual concerns.
AB - Objective To assess the impact of a multidisciplinary complementary and integrative medicine (CIM) intervention on physical and emotional concerns among front-line COVID-19 healthcare providers (HCPs). Methods A multimodality CIM treatment intervention was provided by integrative practitioners to HCPs in three isolated COVID-19 departments. HCPs' two main concerns were scored (from 0 to 6) before and following the CIM intervention using the Measure Yourself Concerns and Wellbeing questionnaire. Postintervention narratives identified reflective narratives specifying emotional and/or spiritual keywords. Results Of 181 HCPs undergoing at least one CIM treatment, 119 (65.7%) completed post-treatment questionnaires. While HCPs listing baseline emotional-related concerns benefited from the CIM intervention, those who did not express emotional or spiritual concerns improved even more significantly following the first session, for both leading concerns (p=0.038) and emotional-related concerns (p=0.023). Nevertheless, it was shown that following subsequent treatments HCPs who expressed emotional and spiritual concerns improved more significantly than those who did not for emotional-related concerns (p=0.017). Conclusions A CIM intervention for front-line HCPs working in isolated COVID-19 departments can significantly impact emotional-related concerns, more so after the first treatment and among HCPs not using emotional-spiritual keywords in post-treatment narratives. Referral of HCPs to CIM programmes for improved wellbeing should avoid referral bias to those not expressing emotional/spiritual concerns.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85144423206&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1136/bmjspcare-2021-003333
DO - 10.1136/bmjspcare-2021-003333
M3 - ???researchoutput.researchoutputtypes.contributiontojournal.article???
C2 - 35383045
AN - SCOPUS:85144423206
SN - 2045-435X
VL - 14
SP - E1192-E1200
JO - BMJ Supportive and Palliative Care
JF - BMJ Supportive and Palliative Care
IS - e1
ER -