IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/clnure/v26y2017i2p205-223.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessments of Stress of Conscience, Perceptions of Conscience, Burnout, and Social Support Before and After Implementation of a Participatory Action-Research-Based Intervention

Author

Listed:
  • Eva Ericson-Lidman
  • Johan Ã…hlin

Abstract

Interventions aiming to constructively address stress of conscience are rare. The aim of the study was to compare assessments of stress of conscience, perceptions of conscience, burnout, and social support among health care personnel (HCP) working in municipal residential care of older adults, before and after participation in a participatory action research (PAR) intervention aiming to learn to constructively deal with troubled conscience. Questionnaire data were collected at baseline and at follow-up (1-year interval; n = 29). Descriptive statistics and nonparametric statistical tests were used to make comparisons between baseline and follow-up. HCP gave significantly higher scores to the question, “Are your work achievements appreciated by your immediate superior?†at follow-up compared with baseline. No significant differences in levels of stress of conscience and burnout at follow-up were found. The results suggested that a PAR intervention aiming to learn HCP to deal with their troubled conscience in difficult situations could be partially successful.

Suggested Citation

  • Eva Ericson-Lidman & Johan Ã…hlin, 2017. "Assessments of Stress of Conscience, Perceptions of Conscience, Burnout, and Social Support Before and After Implementation of a Participatory Action-Research-Based Intervention," Clinical Nursing Research, , vol. 26(2), pages 205-223, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:clnure:v:26:y:2017:i:2:p:205-223
    DOI: 10.1177/1054773815618607
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1054773815618607
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1054773815618607?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:clnure:v:26:y:2017:i:2:p:205-223. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.