No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

COVID‐19 spread rapidly causing widescale loss of life and economic devastation. Efforts to contain it have resulted in measures such as closing of borders and restrictions around travel, social activities and attending places of worship. We conducted this rapid review to systematically examine, synthesize, and critically appraise the available evidence on the relationship between pandemic‐related behaviours and psychological outcomes. The methods were compliant with the PRISMA guidelines. The review was preregistered with PROSPERO (Registration #: CRD42020181576). A literature search was conducted from January 2010 to April 2020 using ProQuest, Web of Science, PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, Scopus, SAGE Journals, and CINAHL. Of 3844 articles identified, we included 11 quantitative articles in the final synthesis, representing data from 32, 049 individual respondents from eight countries. We identified three pandemics (COVID‐19, MERS‐CoV, Influenza A(H1N1) pdm09) as well as several psychological outcomes including anxiety, mental distress, post‐traumatic stress disorder, and anger. We also identified several behaviours during pandemics and categorized them into protective, preparedness, and perverse behaviours. The review showed that even though there is limited evidence regarding pandemic‐related behaviours and psychological outcomes, the current findings showed that the psychological outcomes significantly impacted on the adoption of the pandemic‐related behaviours. Given the negative effects of psychological outcomes on behaviours, we recommend that mental health professionals should promote mental health support to people exhibiting psychological distress resulting from similar events in the future. Also, we recommend that future research should test the hypothesized effects of pandemics and psychological outcomes on behaviour change.

No abstract

Aims and objectives To provide a review of empirical research investigating how compassion is expressed by nurses and received by patients in hospital settings. Background Compassion is viewed as an important and fundamental part of a health professional practice. Universally, reports from both media and government agencies have addressed perceived deficits of compassion in healthcare with nurses accused of a lack of compassion. Research into compassion to date has largely focused on the problematic nature of compassion such as burnout, fatigue and other negative personal and work‐related outcomes. Design A systematic literature review of empirical research guided by a meta‐ethnographic approach supported the systematic comparison and translation of the included studies. Six online databases were searched from January 2006–December 2016. Methods This review was carried out according to the PRISMA‐P reporting guidelines. How compassion in healthcare was defined was extracted alongside findings on how compassion was expressed by nurses and received by patients. Synthesis of the research was completed resulting in new interpretations. Results Eleven papers met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. Multiple differing definitions of compassion in healthcare were applied. Nurses embody and enact compassion through behaviours such as spending time with patients and communicating effectively with patients. Patients experience compassion through a sense of togetherness with nurses. Conclusion Existing research demonstrated dissonance between the expression of compassion by nurses and how compassion is experienced by patients. The themes identified in this review should be considered by health professionals providing patient care. Relevance to clinical practice Health providers should acknowledge and account for the time that nurses need with patients to demonstrate compassion in practice. Nursing education relating to the expression of compassion should articulate both the subjectivity and ambiguity of the term and examine the relationship between compassion and suffering.

Disasters including public health crises like the COVID‐19 pandemic are known to increase instances of family violence against women, children, and other diverse populations. This paper discusses and provides evidence of disaster‐related vulnerability of and violence towards specific groups of people. We argue that the COVID‐19 pandemic presents the ‘perfect storm’ for family violence, where a set of rare circumstances combine, resulting in a significant aggravation of the resulting event. Given the mental health implications of family violence, mental health professionals need to be aware of this issue during the pandemic and ready to assist with the development of strategies to overcome the situation where possible. To provide protection and prevent violence, there is a need to include at‐risk groups in disaster response and community planning. Such a plan could involve gender and disaster working groups at the local community, state, and national levels.

No abstract