Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Health Services Research 1/2021

Open Access 01-12-2021 | Care | Research article

Realist evaluation of Schwartz rounds® for enhancing the delivery of compassionate healthcare: understanding how they work, for whom, and in what contexts

Authors: J. Maben, C. Taylor, E. Reynolds, I. McCarthy, M. Leamy

Published in: BMC Health Services Research | Issue 1/2021

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Healthcare work is known to be stressful and challenging, and there are recognised links between the psychological health of staff and high-quality patient care. Schwartz Center Rounds® (Rounds) were developed to support healthcare staff to re-connect with their values through peer reflection, and to promote more compassionate patient care. Research to date has focussed on self-report surveys that measure satisfaction with Rounds but provide little analysis of how Rounds ‘work’ to produce their reported outcomes, how differing contexts may impact on this, nor make explicit the underlying theories in the conceptualisation and implementation of Rounds.

Methods

Realist evaluation methods aimed to identify how Rounds work, for whom and in what contexts to deliver outcomes. We interviewed 97 key informants: mentors, facilitators, panellists and steering group members, using framework analysis to organise and analyse our data using realist logic. We identified mechanisms by which Rounds lead to outcomes, and contextual factors that impacted on this relationship, using formal theory to explain these findings.

Results

Four stages of Rounds were identified. We describe how, why and for whom Schwartz Rounds work through the relationships between nine partial programme theories. These include: trust safety and containment; group interaction; counter-cultural/3rd space for staff; self-disclosure; story-telling; role modelling vulnerability; contextualising patients and staff; shining a spotlight on hidden stories and roles; and reflection and resonance. There was variability in the way Rounds were run across organisations. Attendance for some staff was difficult. Rounds is likely to be a ‘slow intervention’ the impact of which develops over time. We identified the conditions needed for Rounds to work optimally. These contextual factors influence the intensity and therefore degree to which the key ingredients of Rounds (mechanisms) are activated along a continuum, to produce outcomes. Outcomes included: greater tolerance, empathy and compassion for self and others; increased honesty, openness, and resilience; improved teamwork and organisational change.

Conclusions

Where optimally implemented, Rounds provide staff with a safe, reflective and confidential space to talk and support one another, the consequences of which include increased empathy and compassion for colleagues and patients, and positive changes to practice.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Health Education England. Health Education England - NHS Staff and Learners’ Mental Wellbeing Commission. Birmingham: Health Education England; 2019. Health Education England. Health Education England - NHS Staff and Learners’ Mental Wellbeing Commission. Birmingham: Health Education England; 2019.
2.
go back to reference Ham C. UK government's autumn statement: no relief for NHS and social care in England. Bmj. 2016;355:i6382.CrossRef Ham C. UK government's autumn statement: no relief for NHS and social care in England. Bmj. 2016;355:i6382.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Harvey SB, Laird B, Henderson M, Hotopf M. The Mental Health of Health Care Professionals: A review for the Department of Health; 2009. Harvey SB, Laird B, Henderson M, Hotopf M. The Mental Health of Health Care Professionals: A review for the Department of Health; 2009.
8.
go back to reference Maben J, Peccei R, Adams M, Robert G, Richardson A, Murrells T, et al. Exploring the relationship between patients' experiences of care and the influence of staff motivation, affect and wellbeing, Final report.: NIHR Service Delivery and Organisation programme.; 2012. Maben J, Peccei R, Adams M, Robert G, Richardson A, Murrells T, et al. Exploring the relationship between patients' experiences of care and the influence of staff motivation, affect and wellbeing, Final report.: NIHR Service Delivery and Organisation programme.; 2012.
12.
go back to reference Maben J, Taylor C, Dawson J, Leamy M, McCarthy I, Reynolds E, et al. A Realist informed mixed methods evaluation of Schwartz Center Rounds in England. In: Final NIHR HS&DR Report.: Ntaional Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research Programme; 2018. Maben J, Taylor C, Dawson J, Leamy M, McCarthy I, Reynolds E, et al. A Realist informed mixed methods evaluation of Schwartz Center Rounds in England. In: Final NIHR HS&DR Report.: Ntaional Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research Programme; 2018.
15.
go back to reference Manning CF, Acker M, Houseman L, Pressman E, Goodman IF. Schwartz center rounds: evaluation report (executive summary). Boston: Goodman Research Group Inc; 2008. Manning CF, Acker M, Houseman L, Pressman E, Goodman IF. Schwartz center rounds: evaluation report (executive summary). Boston: Goodman Research Group Inc; 2008.
16.
go back to reference George M. Stress in NHS staff triggers defensive inward-focussing and an associated loss of connection with colleagues: this is reversed by Schwartz Rounds. J Compassionate Health Care. 2016;3(9). George M. Stress in NHS staff triggers defensive inward-focussing and an associated loss of connection with colleagues: this is reversed by Schwartz Rounds. J Compassionate Health Care. 2016;3(9).
21.
go back to reference Pawson R, Tilley N. Realistic evaluation. London: Sage; 1997. Pawson R, Tilley N. Realistic evaluation. London: Sage; 1997.
22.
go back to reference Pawson R, Tilley N. Realist evaluation. London: Cabinet Office; 2004. Pawson R, Tilley N. Realist evaluation. London: Cabinet Office; 2004.
26.
go back to reference Westhorp G, Prins E, Kusters C, Hultink M, Guijt I, Brouwers J. Realist evaluation: an overview report from an expert seminar with Dr Gill Westhorp. Wageningen UR Centre for Development Innovation, Netherlands; 2011. p. 22. Westhorp G, Prins E, Kusters C, Hultink M, Guijt I, Brouwers J. Realist evaluation: an overview report from an expert seminar with Dr Gill Westhorp. Wageningen UR Centre for Development Innovation, Netherlands; 2011. p. 22.
30.
go back to reference Manzano A. The craft of interviewing in realist evaluation. Eval Program Planning. 2016;22(3):342-60. Manzano A. The craft of interviewing in realist evaluation. Eval Program Planning. 2016;22(3):342-60.
32.
go back to reference Lewis-Beck MS, Bryman A, Futing Liao T. The SAGE Encyclopedia of Social Science Research Methods; 2004.CrossRef Lewis-Beck MS, Bryman A, Futing Liao T. The SAGE Encyclopedia of Social Science Research Methods; 2004.CrossRef
36.
go back to reference Merton RK. On sociological theories of the middle-range. In: Merton RK, editor. On Theoretical Sociology: Five essays old and new New York Free Press; 1967. Merton RK. On sociological theories of the middle-range. In: Merton RK, editor. On Theoretical Sociology: Five essays old and new New York Free Press; 1967.
38.
go back to reference Finlay L. Relational Integrative Psychotherapy: Processes and Theory in Practice. Chichester, E.Sussex: Wiley; 2016. Finlay L. Relational Integrative Psychotherapy: Processes and Theory in Practice. Chichester, E.Sussex: Wiley; 2016.
40.
go back to reference Casement P. On learning from the patient Routledge: Routledge; 1985. Casement P. On learning from the patient Routledge: Routledge; 1985.
42.
go back to reference Yalom ID, Leszcz M. The theory and practice of group psychotherapy. New York: Basic Books; 2005. Yalom ID, Leszcz M. The theory and practice of group psychotherapy. New York: Basic Books; 2005.
43.
go back to reference Bhabha HK. The location of culture. Abingdon: Routledge; 2004. Bhabha HK. The location of culture. Abingdon: Routledge; 2004.
44.
go back to reference Soja WT. Third space: journeys to Los Angeles and other real-and-imagined places. Oxford: Blackwell; 1996. Soja WT. Third space: journeys to Los Angeles and other real-and-imagined places. Oxford: Blackwell; 1996.
45.
go back to reference Oldenburg R. The great good place: cafes, coffee shops, bookstores, bars, hair salons, and other hangouts at the heart of a community. New York: Marlowe & Company; 1999. Oldenburg R. The great good place: cafes, coffee shops, bookstores, bars, hair salons, and other hangouts at the heart of a community. New York: Marlowe & Company; 1999.
46.
go back to reference Hulme R, Cracknell D, Owens A. Learning in third spaces: developing trans-professional understanding through practitioner enquiry. Educational Action Res. 2009;17(4):537–50.CrossRef Hulme R, Cracknell D, Owens A. Learning in third spaces: developing trans-professional understanding through practitioner enquiry. Educational Action Res. 2009;17(4):537–50.CrossRef
47.
go back to reference Britzman D. Practice makes practice: a critical study of learning to teach. New York: State University of New York Press; 2003. Britzman D. Practice makes practice: a critical study of learning to teach. New York: State University of New York Press; 2003.
52.
go back to reference Savin-Baden M. Learning spaces : creating opportunities for knowledge creation in academic life. Buckingham: McGraw-Hill Education; 2008. Savin-Baden M. Learning spaces : creating opportunities for knowledge creation in academic life. Buckingham: McGraw-Hill Education; 2008.
53.
go back to reference Ross L. The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings: distortions in the attribution process. Adv Exp Soc Psychol. 1977;10:173–220.CrossRef Ross L. The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings: distortions in the attribution process. Adv Exp Soc Psychol. 1977;10:173–220.CrossRef
55.
go back to reference Berry Z, Frederickson J. Explanations and implications of the fundamental Atrribution error: a review and proposal. J Integrated Soc Sci. 2015;5(1):44–57. Berry Z, Frederickson J. Explanations and implications of the fundamental Atrribution error: a review and proposal. J Integrated Soc Sci. 2015;5(1):44–57.
56.
go back to reference Gibson S. Schwartz center rounds: focusing on the patient-caregiver relationship. This national model offers emotional support to doctors and other medical professionals. Health Prog. 2008;89(6):40–3.PubMed Gibson S. Schwartz center rounds: focusing on the patient-caregiver relationship. This national model offers emotional support to doctors and other medical professionals. Health Prog. 2008;89(6):40–3.PubMed
57.
go back to reference Raphael-Grimm T. Fostering compassionate patient care as an integrated, multidisciplinary outcome: lessons learned from facilitating Schwartz rounds. Int J Human Caring. 2008;12(3):97.CrossRef Raphael-Grimm T. Fostering compassionate patient care as an integrated, multidisciplinary outcome: lessons learned from facilitating Schwartz rounds. Int J Human Caring. 2008;12(3):97.CrossRef
58.
go back to reference Cornwell J, Goodrich J. Supporting staff to deliver compassionate care using Schwartz center rounds--a UK pilot. Nurs Times. 2010;106(5):10–2.PubMed Cornwell J, Goodrich J. Supporting staff to deliver compassionate care using Schwartz center rounds--a UK pilot. Nurs Times. 2010;106(5):10–2.PubMed
59.
go back to reference Mullick A, Wright A, Watmore-Eve J, Flatley M. Supporting hospice staff: the introduction of Schwartz center rounds to a UK hospice setting. Eur J Palliat Care. 2013;20(2):62–5. Mullick A, Wright A, Watmore-Eve J, Flatley M. Supporting hospice staff: the introduction of Schwartz center rounds to a UK hospice setting. Eur J Palliat Care. 2013;20(2):62–5.
62.
go back to reference Gishen F, Wood M. Using Schwartz Center Rounds to change hospice culture: does it work? BMJ Support & Palliative Care. 2015;5(1):108. Gishen F, Wood M. Using Schwartz Center Rounds to change hospice culture: does it work? BMJ Support & Palliative Care. 2015;5(1):108.
64.
go back to reference Robert G, Philippou J, Leamy M, Reynolds E, Ross S, Bennett L, et al. Supporting the wellbeing of healthcare staff and improving compassionate care: exploring the adoption of Schwartz center rounds as an organisational innovation in England, 2009-2015. BMJ Open. 2017;7(1):1–10.CrossRef Robert G, Philippou J, Leamy M, Reynolds E, Ross S, Bennett L, et al. Supporting the wellbeing of healthcare staff and improving compassionate care: exploring the adoption of Schwartz center rounds as an organisational innovation in England, 2009-2015. BMJ Open. 2017;7(1):1–10.CrossRef
69.
go back to reference Boorman S. Health and well-being. Final Report; 2009. Boorman S. Health and well-being. Final Report; 2009.
72.
go back to reference Maben J, Leamy M, Taylor C, Reynolds E, Shuldham C, Dawson J, et al. Understanding, Implementing and Sustaining Schwartz Rounds: An Organisational Guide to Implementation. London: King’s College; 2018. Maben J, Leamy M, Taylor C, Reynolds E, Shuldham C, Dawson J, et al. Understanding, Implementing and Sustaining Schwartz Rounds: An Organisational Guide to Implementation. London: King’s College; 2018.
Metadata
Title
Realist evaluation of Schwartz rounds® for enhancing the delivery of compassionate healthcare: understanding how they work, for whom, and in what contexts
Authors
J. Maben
C. Taylor
E. Reynolds
I. McCarthy
M. Leamy
Publication date
01-12-2021
Publisher
BioMed Central
Keyword
Care
Published in
BMC Health Services Research / Issue 1/2021
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6963
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-06483-4

Other articles of this Issue 1/2021

BMC Health Services Research 1/2021 Go to the issue