Burnout and its influencing factors between frontline nurses and nurses from other wards during the outbreak of Coronavirus Disease -COVID-19- in Iran

Abstract

Objective. To assess burnout level during an outbreak ofCOVID-19 and to identify influencing factors between frontlinenurses and nurses from other wards.
 Methods. This crosssectional study makes comparison between two groups of nursesincluding frontline (exposure group) and other nurses working inusual wards (non-exposure group) in Torbat Heydariyeh city, Iran.Oldenburg Burnout Inventory (OLBI), Job stress questionnaire(JSQ), and questionnaires of hospital resources, family support,and measuring the fear of COVID-19 were used as researchinstruments.
 Results. The scores of job stress and burnout inthe exposure group with COVID-19 infection were significantlyhigher than in the non-exposure group (p=0.006 and p=0.002,respectively). Although, in univariate linear regression, employmentstatus (p=0.047), experience in taking care of patient confirmed or suspected with COVID-19 infection (p=0.006), hospital resources (p=0.047), and job stress(p<0.001) were considered as significant risk factors for COVID-19-related burnout. In multivariateregression analysis, job stress (p=0.031, β=0.308) was considered as an only factor that hasa significant relationship with COVID-19-related burnout.
 Conclusion. The burnout level infrontline nurses was higher than other nurses, the most important influencing factor was the jobstress. Regarding to negative effects of burnout on both physical and mental health nurses, it issuggested that a strong strategy be considered to reduce nurses’ burnout to be able to controlongoing and future outbreaks successfully.

What We Have Learned from Two Decades of Epidemics and Pandemics: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Psychological Burden of Frontline Healthcare Workers

“…All 79 cross-sectional studies [41, 42, 44-50, 52-54, 56-63, 65-74, 77-122, 124-126] met four or more quality criteria, with 38 studies meeting all eight [41, 44, 48, 50, 54, 57, 59, 60, 63, 65-67, 74, 78-80, 83, 87-89, 91, 93, 96, 99-102, 104, 105, 107-109, 113, 119-121, 124, 126]. Most of the studies clearly defined criteria for inclusion in the sample, described study subjects and setting in detail, measured the exposure in a valid, reliable way, and used objective standard criteria for measurement of condition and appropriate statistical analysis.…”

“…The majority of the studies on COVID-19 were published in China ( n = 32) [67, 73-76, 84-86, 88, 91-93, 95-97, 99, 101, 102, 107, 110, 113, 114, 116-119, 121-126] and Italy ( n = 6) [71, 72, 78, 79, 83, 103]. Other studies were conducted in the United States [68, 89, 106], Iran [100, 105, 112], Turkey [80, 104, 111], Germany [90, 120], Pakistan [66, 87], Poland [115], India [108], Egypt [81], Brazil [77], France [70], Spain [94], Saudi Arabia [98], and Singapore [109]. Two studies recruited participants from different countries [69, 82].…”

“…Most of the 86 studies applying a cross-sectional study design assessed the psychological impact at a single point in time. Namely, 29 studies performed data collection in earlier phases of the outbreak in the respective country [64-66, 77, 79-81, 84-89, 91, 96, 98, 100, 103, 105, 106, 108, 109, 111-115, 120, 126], nine during the outbreak [69, 73, 82, 95, 97, 101, 110, 118, 125], 32 in later phases [41, 42, 44-46, 50, 53, 54, 56, 59-61, 67, 68, 70-72, 74, 78, 83, 90, 92-94, 102, 104, 107, 117, 119, 121, 122, 124], and eight after the end of the outbreak [47-49, 52, 57, 58, 63, 99]. Another seven studies focusing on SARS [43, 51, 55], MERS [64], and COVID-19 [75, 76, 123] also included follow-up data.…”

“…More than two-thirds of the studies ( n = 60) [41-45, 47, 48, 50, 51, 53-55, 57, 59, 60, 62-68, 71, 72, 74, 75, 78-80, 83, 87-93, 99-105, 107-109, 111-117, 119-122, 124, 126] compared psychological and psychosomatic symptoms between frontline staff and other groups of participants (e.g., non-frontline healthcare providers, general public).…”

Factors affecting mental health of health care workers during coronavirus disease outbreaks (SARS, MERS & COVID-19): A rapid systematic review

“…When briefly discussing the risk factors, studies by Cai et al [63] and Wankowicz et al [64] confirmed that the rate of mental health problems is significantly increased in frontline HCWs. Further, there is growing evidence that risk perception and health fear are independent factors for developing mental distress [65,66] while Sarboozi Hoseinabadi et al [67] could not demonstrate a significant association between fear of COVID-19 infection and burnout symptomatology. It was also confirmed that loneliness because of social isolation as well as job stress are associated with increased mental distress or burn-out symptomatology, respectively [66,67].…”