341.5: The Experiences of Organ and Tissue Donation Coordinators Participating in a Team Cohesion and Communication Workshop: An Exploratory Descriptive Qualitative Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Organ and Tissue Donation Coordinators (OTDCs) work in a highly specific and complex environment that can lead to challenging work-related issues. To address these issues, organ donation organizations need to take preventive measures to improve OTDCs work-related wellbeing. Therefore, this study aimed to (1) investigate OTDC perceptions about compassion fatigue, burnout, and resilience, as it relates to their daily work, and (2) explore the experience of OTDCs following participation in an experiential-based relationship-centered care workshop. Methods: An exploratory qualitative descriptive study was undertaken using semi-structured interviews conducted with a convenience sample of OTDCs in a Canadian organ donation organization. Results: Seven OTDCs participated in this study following their participation in a relationship-centered care workshop. The relationship-centered care approach promotes team cohesion, support, and collegiality, as well as the personhood of patients, families, and staff. The work done with OTDCs focused primarily on strengthening communication and approaches with donor families and optimizing team cohesion. There was consensus among OTDCs that they work in a high-pressure and demanding environment and that the constant exposure to work-related stress and grief resulted in most of them experiencing signs and symptoms of burnout and compassion fatigue throughout their career. Participants stated that the emotional toll of work-related stressors and difficult cases led to the use of a variety of coping strategies to protect and support their well-being. Regarding the workshop, most participants reported improvements in the sense of inclusiveness and cohesiveness among their team after the intervention. The expertise and experience of the facilitators, role playing, group interaction, and feedback were all perceived as valuable components of the intervention. OTDCs also mentioned that future interventions should have additional focus on the donation work and how to become a better communicator. Lastly, participants recognized that more strategies to help mitigate work-related stressors and to prevent burnout and compassion fatigue are needed, and that management and institutions should lead the development of such interventions. Conclusion: Our results described how the mental health and work-related wellbeing of OTDCs are affected daily by their stressful and emotionally challenging role. The workshop and its components were perceived as being valuable and OTDCs reported positive impacts on team cohesiveness and communication skills following the intervention. This work highlights the need for future studies focused on developing effective interventions to mitigate work-related issues among OTDCs.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,014 | 0,017 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,013 | 0,008 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,007 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,005 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».