Effective Intervention to Reduce Psychological Stress in Human Service Professionals: A Critical Appraisal

This essay critically compares, analyses and assesses effective intervention to reduce psychological stress in human service professionals. The study design, methodology and results are evaluated to establish the validity of the research. The effectiveness of resilience and mindfulness interventions is assessed through a cross-sectional correlational design. The study concludes that cultivating resilience and mindfulness can reduce psychological distress among human service professionals.

Evidence Based Nursing Research
1

Introduction:
Human service professionals work for wellbeing of the vulnerable, distressed, and
disadvantaged people. This type of work is associated with both physical and psychological
stress. Hence, these human service professionals are more prone to burnout and psychological
distress. Intervention need to be provided for such professionals in the form of resilience and
mindfulness to reduce this psychological distress. Effectiveness of the intervention in the
form of resilience and mindfulness can be assessed by conducting research. Validity of the
research can be established by critically appraising the research article. This essay will
critically compare, analyse and assess effective intervention to reduce psychological stress in
human service professionals. In this essay, quality of the research paper will critically
examine the authors, purpose of the study, study design, study methodology and results.
Discussion:
Authors participated for conducting this research study were with relevant expertise and
experience for this study. These authors were associated with organisation where all the
facilities were available for carrying out this study. Every author contributed significantly in
this research study; however, they were not having any conflict of interest.
In this research article, efforts were being made to answer the question set during clinical
scenario. Question set during clinical scenario was in alignment with the aim of the study.
Clinical question and aim of the study mentioned about relationship between the resilience,
mindfulness, psychological distress, burnout, and secondary traumatic stress among human
service professionals. There is direct relationship between the high level of burnout and
secondary traumatic stress with psychological distress with high magnitude. Resilience and
mindfulness can effectively reduce secondary traumatic stress and psychological distress.
However, little attention was given to establish relationship between psychological
interventions like resilience and mindfulness and burnout and secondary traumatic stress.
Establishing this relationship can be helpful in reducing turnover, absenteeism and
unproductive work (Liamputtong, 2016).
In this study, cross-sectional correlational design was being implemented. This study design
was appropriate for finding relationship between the mindfulness and resilience with the
burnout and psychological distress. Moreover, these variables need to be correlated to the
participant specific variables like age, gender, education and employment. In cross-sectional
correlational design data at the single point of time should be collected and in correlational
2

study correlation among different variables need to be established. This study design can be
helpful in establishing association among different variables; however, it cannot establish
temporal relationship. Cross sectional study comprises of observational study in which data
need to be collected from the specific population. In this research, study was carried out on
specific population like healthcare workers. Correlation can be helpful in assessing whether
increase or decrease in one or more variable can be helpful in increasing or decreasing
another variable. In this study, improvement in the mindfulness and resilience was evaluated
for decreasing burnout and psychological distress in the healthcare professionals
(Richardson-Tench, Taylor, Kermode et al., 2015).
Random sampling was being used in this study; however, it was not clearly mentioned. In
random sampling, every participant has opportunity to get participated in the study.
Participants recruited in this study were based on the predefined criteria; hence it can also be
called as purposive sampling. Recruited participants meet the aim of the study because these
participants were recruited from human related services (Melnyk and Fineout-Overholt,
2015).
In this research, quantitative research method was implemented. It was evident from carrying
out survey through questionnaires. Survey research is usually carried out to collect
information related to population of interest. In this research study, information about the
population of interest which is human service related professionals need to be collected.
Surveys can be either questionnaires or sampling. Participation could have been made
mandatory for the participants; hence, it could have met the exact criteria of random sampling
and helped in reducing biasness. These participants were allowed for self-reporting. This self-
reporting also leads to biasness (Hoffmann, Bennett, and Del Mar, 2017; Schneider,
Whitehead, LoBiondo-Wood et al., 2016). In this research study, questionnaires were more
appropriate because in this study predefined set of questions were used for collecting
information from the participants. These predefined set of questionnaires include General
Well-Being Schedule (GWBS), Quality of Life Scale – Version 5 (ProQOL-5), The
Resilience Factor Inventory (RFI) and The Frieburg Mindfulness Inventory (FMI). Hence,
implemented research methodology was appropriate for meeting aim of the research study.
These questionnaires were also again associated with subscales; hence, detailed information
was gathered through these questionnaires. In these surveys, closed ended questions were
used. These types of questions were more useful in such type of studies because variability
among different responders can be reduced (Punch, 2013).
3

In this study, correlation analysis and hierarchical analysis were used. Correlational analysis
can be used for the statistical evaluation of the strength of relationship between or among
different variables and to establish possible relationship among different variables. Hence,
correlational analysis was suitable method of analysis for meeting aim of the study. There can
be both positive and negative correlation. In this analysis, there was existence of negative
correlation because with improvement in the mindfulness and resilience; there could be
reduction in the burnout and distress (Punch, 2013). Hierarchical analysis can be helpful in
analysing difference between different clusters. In this method, bottom up approach was
used. Analysis and interpretation of the results from the study were mentioned in the detailed
manner in this study (Greenhalgh, Wherton, Papoutsi et al., 2017).
From the obtained results, it was evident that results were well aligned with the aim of the
study. Outcome of this study can be effectively used as evidence because this study was
conducted by researchers with appropriate experience in the relevant field after doing proper
background research. However, outcome of this study could not be generalised to other
clinical settings and healthcare centres because participants recruited in this study were from
the same healthcare organisation. Results were presented in both numerical and statistical
format. Results were mentioned with proper subheadings. Separate headings were used for
different variables mentioned in the aim of the study. It indicated obtained results were in
accordance with the aim of the study. Moreover, results were demonstrated in terms of
correlation among different variables and hierarchical analysis for each of the variables was
mentioned. Presented results were in accordance with the aim of the study and were in
alignment with the study design. It indicates transparency in this study. It indicates, analysis
and interpretation of results were mentioned in clear and concise manner (Creswell, 2013).
However, in this study efforts made to improve rigour and validity of the research, were not
mentioned. Rigour and validity of the research are important parameters to improve evidence
and acceptability of the research. Conclusion of the study was mentioned in concise manner.
Conclusion of this research study, supported implementation of the programmes for
cultivating resilience and mindfulness among human service professionals. Conclusion of the
research study was aligned with the scenario and clinical question raised from the scenario
(Polit and Beck, 2017).
Conclusion:
4

This study could not be considered as complete evidence because these results can not be
generalised to all the healthcare centres. Participant recruitment in this study was associated
with drawbacks; hence, there was biasness in the participant recruitment. It might lead to
biasness in the outcome of the study. Outcome of this study was determined through self-
reporting. It might also lead to social desirability bias and demand characteristics. Inferences
made in this study were based on the outcome of this study only. Validity of this study could
have been improved by comparing results of this study with the other similar types of studies.
5

References:
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Sage publications.
Greenhalgh, T., Wherton, J., Papoutsi, C., et al. (2017). Beyond Adoption: A New
Framework for Theorizing and Evaluating Nonadoption, Abandonment, and
Challenges to the Scale-Up, Spread, and Sustainability of Health and Care
Technologies. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 19(11), e367. doi:
10.2196/jmir.8775.
Hoffmann, T., Bennett, S., and Del Mar, C. (2017). Evidence-Based Practice Across the
Health Professions. Elsevier Health Sciences.
Liamputtong, P. (2016). Research Methods in Health: Foundations for Evidence-Based.
Oxford University Press.
Melnyk, B. M., and Fineout-Overholt, E. (2015). Evidence-based Practice in Nursing &
Healthcare: A Guide to Best Practice. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Punch, K. F. (2013). Introduction to social research: Quantitative and qualitative
approaches. Sage.
Polit, D. F., and Beck, C. T. (2017). Nursing Research: Generating and Assessing Evidence
for Nursing Practice. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Richardson-Tench, M., Taylor, B. J., Kermode, S., and Roberts, K. L. (2015). Inquiry in
Health Care. Cengage Learning.
Schneider, Z., Whitehead, D., LoBiondo-Wood, G., et al. (2016). Nursing and Midwifery
Research: Methods and Critical Appraisal for Evidence Based Practice. Elsevier
Health Sciences.
6