ABSTRACT
Effective mental health and stress resilience (MHSR) training is essential in military populations given their exposure to operational stressors. The scarcity of empirical evidence supporting the benefits of these programs emphasizes the need for research dedicated to program optimization. This paper aims to identify the relative importance of MHSR training attributes preferred by military members. Conjoint analysis (CA), an experimental method used to prioritize end-user preferences for product feature development, was conducted using an online survey with 567 Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) personnel. Participants made a series of choices between hypothetical MHSR training options that were systematically varied across seven training attributes. Each training attribute consisted of 3-4 variations in the nature of the attribute or its intensity. Participants also completed questions on health beliefs, mental health and previous MHSR training experiences, and demographics, to assess whether preferences varied by individual characteristics. CA demonstrated that instructor type, leadership buy-in, degree of skills practice, and content relevance/applicability were attributes of highest and relatively equal importance. This was followed by degree of accessible supplemental content. Lowest importance was placed on degree of behavioral nudging and demographic similarity between the trainee and trainer. Sociodemographic factors were not associated with MHSR training preferences. Programs that incorporate expert-led instruction, demonstrate leadership buy-in, embed practical applications within simulated stress environments, and provide a digitally-accessible platform to augment training may be well-received among military members. Understanding and accommodating personal preferences when designing MHSR training programs may increase relevance, foster acceptance and trust, and support sustained engagement.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: Healthcare workers (HCWs) often experience morally challenging situations in their workplaces that may contribute to job turnover and compromised well-being. This study aimed to characterize the nature and frequency of moral stressors experienced by HCWs during the COVID-19 pandemic, examine their influence on psychosocial-spiritual factors, and capture the impact of such factors and related moral stressors on HCWs' self-reported job attrition intentions.Methods: A sample of 1204 Canadian HCWs were included in the analysis through a web-based survey platform whereby work-related factors (e.g. years spent working as HCW, providing care to COVID-19 patients), moral distress (captured by MMD-HP), moral injury (captured by MIOS), mental health symptomatology, and job turnover due to moral distress were assessed.Results: Moral stressors with the highest reported frequency and distress ratings included patient care requirements that exceeded the capacity HCWs felt safe/comfortable managing, reported lack of resource availability, and belief that administration was not addressing issues that compromised patient care. Participants who considered leaving their jobs (44%; N = 517) demonstrated greater moral distress and injury scores. Logistic regression highlighted burnout (AOR = 1.59; p < .001), moral distress (AOR = 1.83; p < .001), and moral injury due to trust violation (AOR = 1.30; p = .022) as significant predictors of the intention to leave one's job.Conclusion: While it is impossible to fully eliminate moral stressors from healthcare, especially during exceptional and critical scenarios like a global pandemic, it is crucial to recognize the detrimental impacts on HCWs. This underscores the urgent need for additional research to identify protective factors that can mitigate the impact of these stressors.
This study explored the nature of moral stressors encountered by health care workers, along with impacts on moral injury and intentions to leave their jobs.Morally distressing encounters were common, with the most prevalent and distressing experiences being organizational or team-based in nature.Findings revealed that severity of moral injury, particularly related to trust violation or betrayal, was a key factor influencing healthcare workers' intentions to leave their jobs.
