Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Our journals
    • Clinical Medicine
    • Future Healthcare Journal
  • Subject collections
  • About the RCP
  • Contact us

Future Healthcare Journal

  • FHJ Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Archive
  • Author guidance
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit online
  • About FHJ
    • Scope
    • Editorial board
    • Policies
    • Information for reviewers
    • Advertising

User menu

  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
RCP Journals
Home
  • Log in
  • Home
  • Our journals
    • Clinical Medicine
    • Future Healthcare Journal
  • Subject collections
  • About the RCP
  • Contact us
Advanced

Future Healthcare Journal

futurehosp Logo
  • FHJ Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Archive
  • Author guidance
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit online
  • About FHJ
    • Scope
    • Editorial board
    • Policies
    • Information for reviewers
    • Advertising

What is shared in Schwartz Centre Rounds in an acute trust setting?

Chantal Meystre and Dawn Chapin
Download PDF
DOI: https://doi.org/10.7861/fhj.7.1.s99
Future Healthc J February 2020
Chantal Meystre
AUniversity Hospitals Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Dawn Chapin
AUniversity Hospitals Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
Loading

Introduction

Schwartz Centre Rounds (SCR) give staff an opportunity to discuss the experience of delivering care with a focus on the ‘human dimension’ of medicine.1 This facilitated educational format, which originated in the US, helps staff deliver compassionate care, and was introduced to hospices and trusts in the UK in 2009. The uptake of SCR rose after they were mentioned in the 2013 Francis Inquiry.2 Motivation for starting rounds in the UK differs from the US, focusing on staff wellbeing, rather than the promotion of compassionate care,3 although the two are linked.4

Feedback from rounds suggests benefit from attendance5 with increasing efficacy with repeated attendance.4 The suggested benefit is hearing staff disclosures and recognising the locus of dysfunction lies in the organisation, not in the individual. This decreases self-criticism and may maintain engagement.6 Reduced isolation, increased teamwork, communication, empathy, and compassion towards colleagues and patients, have been reported.6 This is important to the current staff and patient wellbeing agenda, with ramifications for recruitment and retention, as well as addressing the stress, burnout and suicide rates of clinicians.

While attendee feedback, focus groups and staff surveys have been investigated, to date there is no report of the content of SCR which is clearly pertinent to the evaluation of their mode of efficacy. We therefore undertook a mixed methods evaluation of the Schwartz rounds within our acute trust. Consent to share content without attribution is taken.

Materials and methods

Quantitative analysis of 20 rounds of feedback was analysed using Chi-squared statistic and interpretative phenomenological analysis of 23 rounds’ facilitator notes. Consent to share the learning but not to attribute the content is taken at every round.

Results and discussion

55% attendees were doctors; 8% nurses; 8% professions allied to medicine; 4% other 25% undeclared. 71% of attendees gave feedback. 70% rated rounds excellent or exceptional, with no difference between doctors and other staff. Staff rated ‘developing insight into how others think and feel in delivering care’, higher than ‘knowledge to deliver patient care’.

The seven superordinate themes were: alone and fearful; chaos and tumult; psychological defences; failure and loss; recognising humanity; responsibility and courage; and encouragement. Thus, SCR content covers the difficulties of working in healthcare, personal psychological coping mechanisms, empathy in recognising patients and families as ‘people like us’, as well as the burden of responsibility and the encouragement between clinicians in recognition of the stories heard from colleagues.

Conclusion

Rounds were highly rated, but nurses rarely attend. Rounds are successfully addressing clinician experience of care, rather than process. The content demonstrated staff sharing trauma, challenge, and coping, telling of courage, advising and encouraging others in teamwork.

This novel report of contemporaneously recorded SCR content gives support to George6 in suggesting attendance helps shift clinicians from a dispositional attribution of work experience with withdrawal and isolation, to a situational attribution of events with the likely outcome of preventing internalisation and burnout and promoting teamwork.

Conflicts of interest

None declared.

  • © Royal College of Physicians 2020. All rights reserved.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Wren B.
    True Tales of Organisational Life. Routledge: New York and Abingdon, 2018.
  2. ↵
    1. Francis R
    . Report of the Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust public inquiry. London: The Stationery Office, 2013. https://navigator.health.org.uk/content/report-mid-staffordshire-nhs-foundation-trust-public-inquiry-francis-report-2013?gclid=EAIaIQobChMImYq0qant3wIVTLXtCh3CFQBFEAAYASAAEgL1hfD_BwE [Accessed 14 January 2019].
  3. ↵
    1. Glenn R
    , Philippou J, Leamy M, et al. Exploring the adoption of Schwartz Center Rounds as an organisational innovation to improve staff well-being in England 2009–2015. BMJ Open 2016;7:e014326.
    OpenUrl
  4. ↵
    1. Maben J
    , Taylor C, Dawson J, et al. A realist informed mixed methods evaluation of Schwartz Center Rounds in England. NIHR first look draft. Health Services and Delivery Research, 2017.
  5. ↵
    1. Chadwick R
    , Muncer SJ, Hannon BC, Goodrich J, Cornwell J. Support for compassionate care: Quantitative and qualitative evaluation of Schwartz Center Rounds in an acute general hospital. JRSM Open 2016;7:2054270416648043.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  6. ↵
    1. George MS
    . Stress in NHS staff triggers defensive inward-focusing and an associated loss of connection with colleagues: This is reversed by Schwartz Rounds. Journal of Compassionate Health Care 2016;3:1–17.
    OpenUrl
Back to top
Previous articleNext article

Article Tools

Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Citation Tools
What is shared in Schwartz Centre Rounds in an acute trust setting?
Chantal Meystre, Dawn Chapin
Future Healthc J Feb 2020, 7 (Suppl 1) s99; DOI: 10.7861/fhj.7.1.s99

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
What is shared in Schwartz Centre Rounds in an acute trust setting?
Chantal Meystre, Dawn Chapin
Future Healthc J Feb 2020, 7 (Suppl 1) s99; DOI: 10.7861/fhj.7.1.s99
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Introduction
    • Materials and methods
    • Results and discussion
    • Conclusion
    • Conflicts of interest
    • References
  • Info & Metrics

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Course 2 – creating a specialty registrars procedure course
  • Women empowering women
  • Procedural skills training for medical registrars – is it needed?
Show more Education, Training and medical professionalism

Similar Articles

FAQs

  • Difficulty logging in.

There is currently no login required to access the journals. Please go to the home page and simply click on the edition that you wish to read. If you are still unable to access the content you require, please let us know through the 'Contact us' page.

  • Can't find the CME questionnaire.

The read-only self-assessment questionnaire (SAQ) can be found after the CME section in each edition of Clinical Medicine. RCP members and fellows (using their login details for the main RCP website) are able to access the full SAQ with answers and are awarded 2 CPD points upon successful (8/10) completion from:  https://cme.rcplondon.ac.uk

Navigate this Journal

  • Journal Home
  • Current Issue
  • Ahead of Print
  • Archive

Related Links

  • ClinMed - Home
  • FHJ - Home

Other Services

  • Advertising
futurehosp Footer Logo
  • Home
  • Journals
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
HighWire Press, Inc.

Follow Us:

  • Follow HighWire Origins on Twitter
  • Visit HighWire Origins on Facebook

Copyright © 2021 by the Royal College of Physicians