| Title |
Insights into general practitioners’ self-care across 38 countries during the pandemic: a cross-sectional study / |
| Authors |
Keenan, Ivana ; Van Poel, Esther ; Clays, Els ; Willems, Sara ; Milićević, Milena Šantrić ; Tripković, Katica ; Murauskienė, Liubovė ; Hoffmann, Kathryn ; Assenova, Radost ; Busneag, Carmen ; Bojaj, Gazmend ; Collins, Claire |
| DOI |
10.1186/s40359-024-02066-0 |
| Full Text |
|
| Is Part of |
BMC psychology.. London : BioMed Central Ltd. 2024, vol. 12, iss. 1, art. no. 767, p. [1-12].. eISSN 2050-7283 |
| Keywords [eng] |
COVID-19 ; general practitioners ; self-care ; wellbeing |
| Abstract [eng] |
Background: The adoption of healthy self-care practices has proven necessary for professional life, as they often serve as a shield against stressors in the workplace. The COVID-19 pandemic created a high strain on general practitioners (GPs), contributing to increased workload, burnout, and anxiety. The present study aimed to identify self-care practices adopted by GPs amid the COVID-19 pandemic; and to explore the relationships between self-care practices and risk of distress. Methods: The current study utilized an online questionnaire arriving from the PRICOV-19 study, which was distributed among GP practices across 38 countries. The main focus was on the open-text responses where participants disclosed self-care practices employed to maintain mental health during COVID-19. The Six Domains of Self-Care theoretical framework was applied to investigate GP self-care practices across 6 domains including Physical, Professional, Relational, Emotional, Psychological, and Spiritual. The Mayo Clinic Well-Being Index (eWBI) was applied to assess mental well-being and risk of distress among GPs. The analysis was carried out using SPSS Statistics software. Results: In total, 2,949 GPs provided open-text responses on maintaining their mental health. 65.5% of GPs had an eWBI score of ≥ 2 and were considered at risk of distress. The majority of the participants prioritised physical (61.7%), followed by relational (38.0%) and psychological (34.6%) self-care practices to maintain their mental health during the pandemic. GPs who applied relational, physical, and professional self-care were significantly less likely to experience depression, stress, and emotional exhaustion, in comparison with the ones who did not apply these practices. GPs who practiced professional self-care practices had the lowest distress risk (eWBI = 1.99). Overall, 5% of GPs disclosed not applying any practices to maintain their mental health during the pandemic and were the most prone to mental health distress. Conclusions: GPs have navigated the pandemic uniquely, and despite applying self-care practices they faced some level of impact, hence self-care interventions for healthcare professionals should be regarded as essential rather than optional. A long-term investment in strategies focused on improving GPs’ self-care is necessary to increase resilience among GPs and ensure their optimal well-being levels are achieved. |
| Published |
London : BioMed Central Ltd |
| Type |
Journal article |
| Language |
English |
| Publication date |
2024 |
| CC license |
|
