Aims & Objectives: This study aims to investigate the experiences of nurses redeployed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Background: The COVID-19 pandemic prompted the redeployment of healthcare staff to address surging cases and staff shortages. Design: Cross-sectional, mixed methods study. Methods: Data was collected via survey and semi-structured interviews. Validated tools were incorporated into the survey, to measure symptoms of anxiety (Generalised Anxiety Disorder-7), depression (Patient health questionnaire-9) and burnout (Copenhagen burnout inventory-19). Quantitative data from the surveys were analysed descriptively using SPSS software. Qualitative data was analysed using a thematic analysis approach. Results: Thirty-one nurses responded to the online survey. Around 24% of the participants reported experiencing moderate to severe symptoms of depression, 10% anxiety and 29.4% burnout during redeployment. The prevalence of work-related burnout was 53.25%, followed by personal (49.4%) and client-related burnout (32%). Data obtained from the open-ended survey questions reflect similar themes as semi-structured interviews. Participants reported a mix of positive and negative redeployment experience. Following themes emerged from their response: Initial feelings and thoughts of redeployment, positive experience, negative experience, impact on mental health and wellbeing, changes since the first redeployment and suggestions for improvement to future placements. Conclusion: The study outcome provides insight into the nurses’ redeployment experience during pandemic and highlights the areas for improvement when preparing for future global and/or local disasters and enhance the overall experience of redeployment. Relevance to clinical practice: This study offers a baseline understanding of nurses' redeployment experiences during the pandemic, informing policymakers and healthcare sectors to enhance redeployment strategies for future crises. Reporting method: This study used the Mixed Methods Article Reporting Standards (MMARS).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Josephine Chow (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: