Premium
How effective and acceptable is W eb 2.0 B alint group participation for general practitioners and general practitioner registrars in regional A ustralia? A pilot study
Author(s) -
Koppe Hilton,
Mortel Thea F.,
Ahern Christine M.
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
australian journal of rural health
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.48
H-Index - 49
eISSN - 1440-1584
pISSN - 1038-5282
DOI - 10.1111/ajr.12212
Subject(s) - affect (linguistics) , attendance , medicine , scale (ratio) , family medicine , coping (psychology) , nursing , psychology , clinical psychology , physics , communication , quantum mechanics , economics , economic growth
Abstract Objective General practitioners ( GP s) and general practice registrars report work‐related stress. B alint groups may improve coping mechanisms. However, attendance at a face‐to‐face B alint group is difficult for rural doctors due to distance constraints. The study aim was to evaluate online B alint groups for rural doctors and determine effect size for a full‐scale trial. Design A mixed‐methods approach, including a pre–post controlled trial and thematic analysis of qualitative data. Setting Rural primary care. Participants Thirteen GP s and 8 general practice registrars completed the study. Interventions B alint groups were delivered over 8–9 fortnightly online sessions. GPs and GP registrars participated in separate groups. Data were collected on work‐related affect, psychological medicine skills and professional isolation using the W arr's W ork‐ R elated A ffect S cale, the P sychological M edicine I nventory, and a professional isolation scale. Main outcome measures Change scores on W arr's W ork‐ R elated A ffect S cale, the P sychological M edicine I nventory, and a professional isolation scale. Results B alint participants' scores were significantly higher post‐intervention on the P sychological M edicine I nventory (mean 6.49 (±0.20) versus 5.43 (±0.26); P < 0.01) and W arr's W ork‐ R elated A ffect (mean 4.09 (±0.09) versus 3.60 (±0.12); P < 0.01) scales than control group scores. Effect size on these scales ranged from 0.46 to 0.50. The greatest challenge was technical problems related to insufficient broadband speed. Conclusions Online B alint groups appear to improve rural doctors' psychological medicine skills and work‐related affect. New data on effect size will inform a full‐scale trial. Improved national broadband infrastructure may enhance online support opportunities for rural doctors.