Effects of psychological intervention on empathy fatigue in nurses: A meta-analysis

Xiaojuan Chen; Mingdi Chen; Huang Zheng; Chaoyu Wang; Huimin Chen; Qinglan Wu; Huizhao Liao; Jinru Zhu; Junyan Lin; Xudong Ou; Zhihong Zou; Zhiwei Wang; Zhenzhen Zheng; Xianrui Zhuang; Riken Chen

doi:10.3389/fpubh.2022.952932

Effects of psychological intervention on empathy fatigue in nurses: A meta-analysis

Front Public Health. 2022 Oct 14:10:952932. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.952932. eCollection 2022.

Authors

Xiaojuan Chen^{1

2}, Mingdi Chen¹, Huang Zheng¹, Chaoyu Wang³, Huimin Chen¹, Qinglan Wu⁴, Huizhao Liao⁵, Jinru Zhu¹, Junyan Lin⁵, Xudong Ou⁵, Zhihong Zou⁵, Zhiwei Wang⁵, Zhenzhen Zheng¹, Xianrui Zhuang¹, Riken Chen⁵

Affiliations

¹ The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangdong Medical University, Zhanjiang, China.
² Medical College of Jiaying University, Meizhou, China.
³ Taishan Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Jiangmen, China.
⁴ Central People's Hospital of Zhanjiang, Zhanjiang, China.
⁵ State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease, Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, China.

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this meta-analysis is to systematically assess the effects of psychological intervention on empathy fatigue among nursing staff.

Method: Five electronic databases are searched separately from their establishment to April 8th, 2022. The research team independently performs paper selection, quality assessment, data extraction and analysis for all included studies. PRISMA guidelines are used to report this meta-analysis.

Results: A total of seven randomized controlled trials (RCTs) covering 513 nursing staff are included. The meta-analysis results show that the empathy fatigue score (SMD = -0.22, 95% CI: -0.42~-0.02, P = 0.03) and burnout (SMD = -0.37, 95% CI: -0.56~-0.19, P < 0.001) are lower than the control group. The empathy satisfaction score of the psychological intervention group is higher than that of the control group (SMD = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.27-0.63, P < 0.001). The differences are statistically significant (P < 0.05). Subgroup analysis finds significant heterogeneity in the impact of different departments on psychological intervention at ≥6 weeks (I ² = 71%, P = 0.01) and <6 weeks (I ² = 0%, P = 0.75) (P = 0.05). Different departments also show significant heterogeneity in the effects of psychological intervention: ICU (I ² = 73%, P = 0.02), pediatric (I ² = 53%, P = 0.14) and other departments (I ² = 0%, P = 0.63). The differences are statistically significant (P = 0.0007). Besides, the results show that both mindfulness intervention (SMD = 0.50, 95% CI: 0.24-0.77, P = 0.0002) and other interventions (SMD = 0.41, 95% CI: 0.16-0.65, P = 0.001) are statistically significant difference in the level of empathy satisfaction between the psychological intervention group and the control group.

Conclusion: Psychological intervention has a coordinated improvement effect on empathy fatigue, empathy satisfaction and burnout, and can also improve the quality of life of nursing staff.

Keywords: burnout; empathy fatigue; empathy satisfaction; meta-analysis; nursing staff; psychological intervention; randomized controlled trial.

Publication types

Meta-Analysis
Systematic Review
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

Child
Empathy*
Fatigue
Humans
Psychosocial Intervention*
Quality of Life