Peer consultation groups: A model for promoting professional resilience, connectedness and skill building in CF care

ABSTRACT

Background: Mental health (MH) providers have become more integrated into CF teams over the past several years, in large part due to the 2015 guidelines for mental health care. (Quittner, et al. 2016). Distance between CF care centers often presents as a barrier to collaboration and consultation among MH providers. We sought to better understand MH providers' experience of their work and to continue peer consultation groups as a way of promoting resilience, connectedness, and skill building among MH providers (Morse, 2012;Beidas, 2013). Methods: MH providers were invited via several professional listservs to participate in 6 monthly, one-hour consultation groups via a video conferencing. Providers (N=93) were assigned to 12 groups (65 clinical social workers, 20 psychologists, 13 other), with an average of 9 per group. Providers were from both adult and pediatric clinics across the US, with at least 85 different institutions represented. Facilitators were encouraged to guide a supportive and case-based peer discussion. Although not required, several groups began meeting more frequently shortly after COVID-19 was declared a pandemic. Results: Providers (N=50) completed a survey prior to beginning group meetings and identified three main goals 1) skill building (60%), 2) support (58%), and 3) sense of community (32%). About half reported feeling connected (“somewhat” or “very”) to the larger CF community (56%), while almost everyone reported feeling connected to providers within their own CF center (98%). The majority indicated feeling that the work they do within CF is somewhat or very emotionally difficult (70%), and many (30%) indicated feeling overwhelmed/burned out at times by their work in CF. Notably, all endorsed greatly enjoying their work in CF. Attrition has been minimal (N=13) and primarily due to scheduling issues. Several groups started meeting twice/month, both to discuss patient needs and work/life balance related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Analysis of postgroup feedback is ongoing with plans to survey after conclusion of six sessions. Conclusions: Peer consultation groups have been very well received by CF MH providers as indicated by low attrition rates and positive feedback. Although MH providers indicated greatly enjoying their work in CF, more than half feel the work is emotionally difficult and for many the work has resulted in feeling overwhelmed/burned out. This format may serve as a model for burnout prevention for MH providers, as well as other allied health providers in CF care with the same barriers to discipline-specific support and consultation.