(1) Background: The issue of burnout in healthcare staff is frequently discussed in relation to occupational health. In this paper, we report healthcare staff experiences of stress and burnout. (2) Methods: In total, 72 healthcare staff were interviewed from psychiatry, surgery, and emergency departments at an Australian public health service. The sample included doctors, nurses, allied health professionals, administrators, and front-line managers. Interview transcripts were thematically analyzed, with participant experiences interpreted against descriptors of burnout in Maslach’s Burnout Inventory and the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD-11). (3) Results: Staff experiences closely matched the ICD-11 description of stress associated with working in an uncongenial workplace, with few reported experiences which matched the ICD-11 descriptors of burnout. (4) Conclusion: Uncongenial workplaces in public health services contribute to healthcare staff stress. While previous approaches have focused on biomedical assistance for individuals, our findings suggest that occupational health approaches to addressing health care staff stress need greater focus on the workplace as a social determinant of health. This finding is significant as organizational remedies to uncongenial stress are quite different from remedies to burnout.
Purpose of reviewThe paper aims to provide an overview of the psychological and behavioural impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, with a focus on variations in behavioural response in different geographical areas due to the existence of different social-cultural contexts. Recent findingsWhilst anxiety, depression and economic stressors are common findings worldwide, specific behavioural responses are heavily influenced by government stances, misinformation, conspiratorialism and competing demands of resource scarcity. This has led to very different understandings of the pandemic even in geographically close areas, and more so when comparing disparate regions such as Africa, South America and Europe. The paper also comments on the absence of robust evidence regarding increases of suicidality and violence on a global level, whilst noting evidence certainly exists in specific regions.
PurposeThe authors explored clinical staff perceptions of their interactions with middle management and their experiences of the uncongeniality of their working environment.Design/methodology/approachSemi-structured interviews of clinical staff from an Australian public health service's Emergency, Surgery and Psychiatry departments. Volunteer interview transcripts were inductively coded using a reflexive thematic content analysis.FindingsOf 73 interviews, 66 participants discussed their interactions with management. Most clinicians considered their interactions with middle management to be negative based on a violation of their expectations of support in the workplace. Collectively, these interactions formed the basis of clinical staff perceptions of management's lack of capacity and fit for the needs of staff to perform their roles.Practical implicationsStrategies to improve management's fit with clinicians' needs may be beneficial for reducing uncongenial workplaces for healthcare staff and enhanced patient care.Originality/valueThis article is among the few papers that discuss interactions with management from the perspective of clinical staff in healthcare. How these perspectives inform the perception of workplace uncongeniality for clinicians contributes greater understanding of the factors contributing to adversarial relationships between clinicians and managers.
Australia's response to the coronavirus outbreak has widely been considered to be among the most successful in the world. A bipartisan “national government” akin to that in wartime, a fairly unified COVID response by the federal and all the state governments, international border closures and quarantine, some of the best coronavirus testing in the world, and widespread public acceptance of physical distancing, all contributed to Australia being able to call itself the “lucky country” in its successful navigation of the COVID crisis. The country clearly had a plan for the mental health consequences of COVID. The impacts of lockdown were identified early, and steps taken to mitigate them. There was no spike in tertiary mental health presentations. Telehealth was embraced, support services mobilized, and public awareness of mental health issues made part of the conversation. While anxiety seemed raised nationwide, much of this lays at a subclinical level, manifesting through activities such as increased consumption of alcohol. Management of the burden of increased nationwide anxiety was carried out through online-based nongovernmental organizations, often directly recommended by the government itself.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.