Impact of intrawork rest breaks on doctors' performance and well-being: systematic review
Aimee O'Neill1, David Baldwin1,2, Samuele Cortese1,3,4
1Clinical and Experimental Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Objectives:
To summarise evidence on intrawork breaks and their associated effect on doctors' well-being and/or performance at work.
Design:
Systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 statement guidelines DATA SOURCES: Embase, PubMed, Web of Science (Core Collection) and PsychINFO were systematically searched on 6 June 2021.
Eligibility Criteria:
No restrictions were placed on language, study design or date of publication.
Data Extraction And Analysis:
Methodological quality was appraised using Cochrane's Risk of Bias (ROB-2), Cochrane's Risk of Bias in Non-randomised Studies (ROBINS-I), and the Johanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklists for cross-sectional, cohort and qualitative studies. Quantitative synthesis was not undertaken due to substantial heterogeneity of design and outcomes. Results are presented narratively.
Results:
Database searches returned 10 557 results and searches of other sources returned two additional records. Thirty-two papers were included in the systematic review, comprised of 29 unique studies, participants and topics and 3 follow-up studies. A variety of well-being and performance outcome measures were used. Overall, findings indicate that intrawork breaks improved some measures of well-being and/or work performance. However, methodological quality was judged to be low with a high risk of bias in most included studies.
Discussion:
Using existing evidence, it is not possible to conclude with confidence whether intrawork breaks improve well-being and/or work performance in doctors. There is much inconsistency regarding how breaks are defined, measured and the outcomes used to assess effectiveness. Future research should seek to: (a) define and standardise the measurement of breaks, (b) use valid, reliable outcome measures to evaluate their impact on well-being and performance and (c) minimise the risk of bias in studies where possible.
Prospero Registration Number:
CRD42020156924; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=156924.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Methods of Documentation II: POMR
Chronopharmacokinetics: Circadian Rhythms and Influence on Drug Response
The time of drug administration is an important factor to consider, as it can influence the toxic dose of a drug. For example, a study conducted by Prins et al. in 1997 examined the effects of the timing of...
Obedience
Insufficient Sleep and Sleep Deprivation
Sleep deprivation is a more severe form of sleep loss...
Stress Prevention and Stress Management Techniques IV
The Placebo Effect


