ArticleBMC nursing2025
A multi methods study to explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the psychological well-being of cancer nurses across Cheshire and Mersey.
Article in BMC nursing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCancer nurse well-being is crucial for the delivery of high-quality patient care. During the COVID-19 pandemic, fear and anxiety negatively impacted nurse well-being. Understanding the factors contributing to well-being amongst cancer nurses is a priority, as chronic stress can negatively influence job satisfaction and standards of care.
methodsA multi methods approach comprising a repeated measures survey (n = 69), semi-structured interviews (n = 29) and two focus groups was used. This enabled in-depth exploration of nurses' experiences over time. Following ethical approval, nurses from different cancer settings were recruited from NW England. The survey measured anxiety, depression, self-efficacy, resilience and well-being at three time-points [baseline; 3 months and 6 months]. Data was collected Feb-Oct 2022. Participants were also invited to participate in an interview and focus group. This data was subject to Thematic Analysis. Data sources were triangulated to substantiate findings. Ethical approval was obtained and participants provided informed consent.
resultsSurvey data revealed anxiety, well-being, self-efficacy and resilience were broadly consistent over time. The only significant difference was depression, where mean scores at times 2 and 3 were significantly lower than time 1. While most participants reported mild to moderate anxiety and depression throughout the study, at time 3 a significant minority (32%, 9/28) reported severe depression. Four themes arose from interviews: (i) the principles and practice of nursing, (ii) the impact of COVID-19 on nurses' identity, (iii) self-management strategies, (iv) organisational responses. Focus group data emphasised the need for improved communication concerning well-being services.
conclusionsNurses used coping strategies throughout the pandemic and beyond, drawing on professional and personal experiences and adapting to clinical service changes. Well-being was sustained through peer and patient interactions, and work routines. Workplace cultures supporting and normalising nurses' well-being should be encouraged and co-creation of interventions to build resilience and improve communication. Importantly interventions should be evaluated for their effectiveness and barriers to accessing support removed. Our findings build on theory addressing workplace culture, high stress environments and individuals' self-awareness of well-being needs. Research is needed to understand the well-being needs of cancer nurses according to banding, work setting, and pre-existing psychological morbidity. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.