Factors of maladaptive coping in emergency healthcare professionals: A systematic review.

Background: Emergency healthcare professionals (EHPs) face significant occupational stressors requiring the skilled use of adaptive coping strategies. Some EHP resort to maladaptive coping (MC) strategies that negatively impact their mental health, yet MC strategies are not clearly defined in the literature. Examining factors that predispose EHP to MC can support interventions to improve coping and well-being.

Objective: This systematic review examined MC among EHP working in pre-hospital and hospital-based settings. The primary aim was to identify factors associated with MC strategies used by EHP.

Methods: Embase, Ovid, CINAHL Plus, PsychInfo, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched for quantitative studies measuring MC use among EHP. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) 2020 checklist was used to guide the review. Studies were included if they: (a) targeted licensed healthcare professionals providing patient care, (b) occurred in emergency department or pre-hospital emergency setting, and (c) examined provider coping. Studies were excluded if they: (a) did not include EHPs, (b) did not differentiate results in mixed samples, (c) did not clearly measure coping strategies, (d) failed to include MC strategies in the results, or (e) were not available in full text. Risk of bias and study quality was appraised using Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Checklist. Bandura's Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) guided the final synthesis, drawing conclusions from the evidence to identify factors associated with MC in EHP.

Results: A total of 14 cross-sectional studies, published between 2003 and 2021, were included in the review. Included studies were conducted in either pre-hospital, hospital, or a combination of both settings. Most studies included mixed samples or emergency physicians. A variety of coping strategies were significantly correlated with poor mental health outcomes including venting, denial, disengagement, self-blame, and substance use. Among personal factors, EHPs who were female, older than 50, living alone, with personal trauma history were significantly more likely to use MC strategies. Additionally, EHP with children, work experience, higher life satisfaction, and resilience were negatively associated with MC. Environmental factors positively associated with MC included work stress, workload, and poor benefits. Trauma exposure had a positive, but non-significant relationship.

Conclusions: Emergency healthcare professionals use a variety of coping strategies, many of which are maladaptive and significantly related to poor mental health outcomes. Several personal and environmental factors contribute to behavior that reflect the use of MC strategies, but findings are sparse. Researchers should consider current limitations and challenges, particularly mental health stigma, when designing future studies.

Clinical Relevance: The evidence in this review suggests that certain factors predispose EHP for use of MC strategies. This review highlights an important research gap necessitating more robust studies to identify MC risk factors among EHP in chronically high-stress environments.