The aim of this review is to systematically review studies on work-related stress that may affect the mental health of veterinarians. Studies have indicated a high prevalence of various risk factors for mental disorders among practicing veterinarians. In addition to a high risk of suicide, there is increasing evidence of burnout and depression. A scoping review was conducted using the PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, PubPsych and PSYNDEX databases. Twenty-one studies (plus seven studies with nonstandardized questionnaires) published between 2000 and 2021 were found that presented data on the effect of workload on the mental wellbeing of veterinarians. All of the included studies indicate a high prevalence of psychological stressors in veterinary practice. The risks of burnout, anxiety and depressive disorders are higher in this occupational group than in the general population and other occupational groups. Subjectively, female veterinarians perceive their psychological workload to be higher than that of their male counterparts. Working hours and ethical dilemmas stand out as major sources of stress. There is a need to improve overall psychological wellbeing of veterinarians. Organizational support services and developing personal strategies for coping with work-related stress can prove helpful.

Purpose Stressors due to the workload in the ambulance service are numerous and can be positively counteracted by work-related behaviors and experiences. We analyzed the subjective perceptions of workload and stress as a function of work-related behavior and experience patterns among emergency service personnel (EMP). Methods A total of 276 EMP (94.6% men) participated (average age: 39.3 ± 8.04 years). Data on the stress situations of ambulance service staff according to the Slesina questionnaire, the Recovery–Stress Questionnaire (EBF), and the Questionnaire for Physical, Psychological and Social Symptoms (KOEPS) were obtained. Participants were classified into four patterns (A, B, G, and S) based on the Work-Related Behavior and Experience Patterns (AVEM) questionnaire. Results Overall, 32% of EMP were classified into AVEM risk patterns A and B. For half of the stress factors examined (23/46), the data were significantly different among the AVEM groups. Individuals with AVEM risk patterns have higher stress and lower recovery scores on the EBF and more physical, psychological, and social-communicative impairments shown using the KOEPS (all variables p < 0.001). Analyses showed moderate correlations among the AVEM dimensions (exceptions included striving for perfection, subjective importance of work, and work-related ambition), and the main scales of the EBF and KOEPS. Conclusion Work-related patterns of behavior and experience are used to determine how stress is handled, and it is possible to distinguish between patterns that promote health and those that hazardous to it. Individuals with AVEM patterns that are a risk to their health experience high stress, low recovery, and increased physical, psychological, and social-communicative impairments. Health-promoting work-related behaviors can be used to counteract stress. Companies developing preventive health promotion measures should focus on individuals with AVEM patterns that are a risk to their health.

Zusammenfassung Hintergrund Die Balance zwischen Belastungsempfinden und Erholung der Einsatzkräfte im Rettungsdienst während des Diensts und in der Freizeit ist ein wesentlicher Indikator für die psychische und physische Gesundheit. Sie gewährleistet Erfolg in der notfallmedizinischen Versorgung und ist gleichzeitig auch ein gesundheitspolitischer, ökonomischer Faktor für jede Organisation. Das Ziel der Studie war es, den Erholungs-Beanspruchungs-Zustand des Rettungsdienstpersonals während der ersten und zweiten Welle der SARS-CoV-2-Pandemie zu analysieren. Material und Methoden Die quantitative Querschnittstudie umfasst 1936 Datensätze von Einsatzkräften (334 Frauen und 1602 Männer, Durchschnittsalter 34,9 ± 10,5 Jahre). Die Onlinebefragung während der SARS-CoV-2-Pandemie erfolgte während der ersten Welle 2020 (t1) und der zweiten Welle 2021 (t2). Es wurde die Kurzform EBF-24/A (Testform S2) des Erholungs-Belastungs-Fragebogens (EBF) nach Kallus angewendet. Ergebnisse Im Verlauf der beiden Erhebungsphasen nahm die Dimension Beanspruchung signifikant zu (t1: 2,52 ± 0,98 und t2: 2,88 ± 1,04 Punkte, p < 0,001) und die Erholung signifikant ab (t1: 2,98 ± 0,90 und t2: 2,64 ± 0,89 Punkte, p < 0,001). Ähnliches bot sich auch für die dazugehörigen Subskalen mit Ausnahme der Subskala „erholsamer Schlaf“ der Dimension Erholung (t1: 2,81 ± 1,36 und t2: 2,72 ± 1,36 Punkte). Schlussfolgerung Die seit Anfang 2020 bestehende SARS-CoV-2-Pandemie verdeutlicht, dass das Belastungserleben von der ersten zur zweiten Welle zugenommen und das Empfinden der Erholung für Einsatzkräfte im Rettungsdienst abgenommen hat. Die Studie bietet eine Einordnung zur gegenwärtigen Situation des Erholungs-Beanspruchungs-Zustands im deutschen Rettungsdienst und erlaubt Prognosen über Leistung und Gesundheit in Pandemiesituationen. Dabei ist davon auszugehen, dass die Verschlechterung des Ist-Zustands nicht einzig nur aus dem Arbeitskontext resultiert, sondern gleichzeitig ein Spiegelbild der Ressourcenausstattung darstellt, die sich aus der Gesamtheit der Einflüsse des Individuums ableitet.

SummaryControl center dispatchers (CCDs) are exposed to high levels of work-related mental stress, which are exacerbated by the current severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic. The aim of this study was to comparatively analyze the recovery and stress state of CCDs during the first and second waves of the SARS-CoV‑2 pandemic. A total of 490 CCDs (n = 440, t1 and n = 50, t2) with a mean age of 42.26 ± 8.79 years participated directly at the end of the first wave from June to August 2020 (t1) and during the second wave between January and February 2021 (t2) of the SARS-CoV‑2 pandemic. The short form (EBF-24/A; test form S2) of the Kallus recovery-stress questionnaire (EBF) was applied. Over the course of the two survey phases, the dimensions strain significantly increased (t1: 2.47 ± 1.08 vs. t2: 3.12 ± 0.93 points, p < 0.001) and recovery significantly decreased (t1: 3.03 ± 0.94 vs. t2: 2.50 ± 0.81 points, p < 0.001). Significant to highly significant differences were present in the EBF dimensions of the two waves in the majority of cases, even when taking the waves into account. For the variable “recovery in the social field”, a medium effect was noticeable in the corrected model (η2 = 0.064). The SARS-CoV‑2 pandemic illustrates that the stress experience increased from the first to the second waves, and the recovery of CCDs decreased. These data provide a directional trend as the pandemic is ongoing, and stress and strain situations in control centers may continue to worsen. Immediate health promotion and prevention measures are essential.