Improving psychological well‐being among healthcare workers during the COVID‐19 pandemic with an online mindfulness intervention: A randomised waitlist‐controlled trial
Anuradha Baminiwatta, Roshan Fernando, Indrajith Solangaarachchi, Thilini Abayabandara‐Herath, Ananda R. Wickremasinghe, Aruni Hapangama
International Journal of Psychology February 14, 2024 DOI: 10.1002/ijop.13118 (opens in new tab) via OpenAlex
Summary
AI-generated from the abstractA six-week online mindfulness-based intervention significantly improved well-being among healthcare workers in Sri Lanka during the COVID-19 pandemic, but did not significantly reduce their stress. Eighty healthcare workers were randomly assigned to either the intervention or a waitlist-control group. The intervention consisted of weekly one-hour online sessions plus daily home practice. Well-being, measured by the WHO-5 Well-being Index, improved more in the intervention group than in the control group, with medium-to-large effect sizes. However, stress, measured by the Perceived Stress Scale, did not differ significantly between groups. Low adherence, with a median of only three sessions attended, may explain the lack of effect on stress.
Study at a glance
| Characteristics | Randomized controlled trial Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Sample size | 80 |
| Population | Healthcare workers in Sri Lanka |
| Duration | 6-week intervention |
| Topics | Meditation |
| Keywords | Psychological intervention Intervention counseling Randomized controlled trial Mental health |
| Citations | 9 |
| Key finding | A six-week online mindfulness-based intervention significantly improved well-being but did not significantly reduce stress among healthcare workers. |
Abstract
The high prevalence of psychological problems observed among healthcare workers (HCWs) during the COVID‐19 pandemic called for interventions to safeguard their mental health. We assessed the effectiveness of a 6‐week online mindfulness‐based intervention in improving well‐being and reducing stress among HCWs in Sri Lanka. Eighty HCWs were recruited and randomised into two groups: waitlist‐control (WLC) and intervention groups. In the intervention, 1‐hour online sessions were conducted at weekly intervals and participants were encouraged to do daily home practice. Stress and well‐being were measured pre‐ and post‐intervention using the Perceived Stress Scale and WHO‐5 Well‐being Index, respectively. One‐way analysis of covariance was used to evaluate the effectiveness, in both intention‐to‐treat (ITT) and complete‐case (CC) analyses. A significantly greater improvement in well‐being occurred in the intervention arm compared to WLC on both ITT ( p = .002) and CC analyses ( p < .001), with medium‐to‐large effect sizes (partial η 2 = .117–.278). However, the reduction in stress following the intervention was not significant compared to the WLC group on both ITT ( p = .636) and CC analyses ( p = .262). In the intervention arm, the median number of sessions attended by participants was 3. Low adherence to the intervention may have contributed to the apparent non‐significant effect on stress.