Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the impact of Schwartz Center
Rounds, a multi-disciplinary forum to reflect on the emotional
consequences of working in healthcare, on the staff
of a large acute general hospital over a three-year period.
Design: Evaluation data following each Round were collected
routinely from all staff attending over this period
and analysed quantitatively and qualitatively.
Setting: An integrated university teaching trust with both
acute hospital and community services in the North East of
England.
Participants: Over the three-year period of the study, 795
participant evaluation forms were returned by staff attending
the Rounds.
Main outcome measures: A standard evaluation form completed
at the end of each Round by those present, including
ratings on a five-point scale against each of eight statements
and an opportunity to offer additional free text comments.
Results: The findings show a very positive response to all
aspects of the Rounds by staff who attended. The most
highly rated statement was: ‘I have gained insight into
how others think/feel in caring for patients’. This was reinforced
by the qualitative analysis in which the primary
theme was found to be Insight. There were no significant
differences between disciplines/staff groups, indicating that
all staff whether clinical or non-clinical responded to the
Rounds equally positively.
Conclusions: Schwartz Rounds are highly valued by staff
from all disciplines, and by managers and other nonclinicians
as well as clinicians. They appear to have the
potential to increase understanding between different
staff, and so to reduce isolation and provide support.
Rounds, a multi-disciplinary forum to reflect on the emotional
consequences of working in healthcare, on the staff
of a large acute general hospital over a three-year period.
Design: Evaluation data following each Round were collected
routinely from all staff attending over this period
and analysed quantitatively and qualitatively.
Setting: An integrated university teaching trust with both
acute hospital and community services in the North East of
England.
Participants: Over the three-year period of the study, 795
participant evaluation forms were returned by staff attending
the Rounds.
Main outcome measures: A standard evaluation form completed
at the end of each Round by those present, including
ratings on a five-point scale against each of eight statements
and an opportunity to offer additional free text comments.
Results: The findings show a very positive response to all
aspects of the Rounds by staff who attended. The most
highly rated statement was: ‘I have gained insight into
how others think/feel in caring for patients’. This was reinforced
by the qualitative analysis in which the primary
theme was found to be Insight. There were no significant
differences between disciplines/staff groups, indicating that
all staff whether clinical or non-clinical responded to the
Rounds equally positively.
Conclusions: Schwartz Rounds are highly valued by staff
from all disciplines, and by managers and other nonclinicians
as well as clinicians. They appear to have the
potential to increase understanding between different
staff, and so to reduce isolation and provide support.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | - |
| Journal | Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine Open |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 1 Jul 2016 |