Exploring the Interprofessional Contributions of Spiritual Health Practitioners to Prevent Compassion Fatigue in Nurses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Few studies in academic literature involve the application of a spiritual health intervention for the purpose of mitigating compassion fatigue in nurses. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this qualitative study was to explore the perspectives of Canadian spiritual health practitioners (SHPs) in their support for nurses to prevent compassion fatigue. METHOD: Interpretive description was utilized for this research study. Sixty-minute interviews with 7 individual SHPs were conducted. Data were analyzed with NVivo 12 software (QSR International, Burlington, Massachusetts). Thematic analysis identified common themes that allowed data from interviews, a pilot project on psychological debriefing, and a literature search to be compared, contrasted, and compiled. RESULTS: The 3 main themes were found. The first theme highlighted the underlying issue of how spirituality is ranked or viewed within health care and the impact of leadership integrating spirituality in their practice. The second theme related to SHPs' perception of nurses' compassion fatigue and lack of connection to spirituality. The final theme explored the nature of SHP support to mitigate compassion fatigue before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. DISCUSSION: Spiritual health practitioners are positioned in a unique role to be facilitators of connectedness. They are professionally trained to provide a type of in situ nurturing for patients and health care staff through spiritual assessments, pastoral counseling, and psychotherapy. The COVID-19 pandemic has revealed an underlying desire for in situ nurturing and connectedness in nurses due to an increase in existential questioning, unusual patient circumstances, and social isolation leading to disconnectedness. Organizational spiritual values are recommended to be exemplified by those in leadership to create holistic, sustainable work environments.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".