Instruments for assessing health workers’ burnout during the COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review

Phuspa, Sisca Mayang; Alim, Syahirul; Dharmastuti, Anjarie; Saefudin, Muhamad Arif; Lutfiyah, Nur Ulfi; Sutomo, Adi Heru

doi:10.1080/09638237.2022.2118689

Cited by 2 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…MFI is the instrument most widely used in the studies captured in this scoping review. Although the author did not write explicitly the reasons for choosing this instrument, but psychometric properties are generally primary considerations [21]. The MFI has a valid factor structure and psychometric properties.…”

Section: Instumentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Whereas instruments created for the general public are MFI [31], FSS [32], and SF-36 [33]. As a preference, the target population's specificity should also be taken into account because an instrument will produce valid measurements for a specific target group and not valid for other groups [21].…”

Section: Instumentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The first group includes the SOFI, MFI, SF-36 and OFER, a multidimensional instrument with two or more subscales, while the second group includes the FSS and FAS, a unidimensional instrument. Instruments that have more dimensions or subscales show item complexity so they are better able to capture many components of fatigue than unidimensional instruments [21]. Most of the authors have chosen more complex instruments [22-27, 34, 35], whereas only two papers used the simple unidimensional instruments [36][37].…”

Section: Instumentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This disscussion shows an inconsistency in use, even though researchers argue for practicality. Generally, respondents prefer shorter questionnaires because they are more time efficient [21].…”

Section: Instumentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Scoping Review on Measurement Tool for Work Fatigue

Rahmania,

Ma’rifah,

Mayang Phuspaand

et al. 2024

SHS Web Conf.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Measurement tools for assessing work fatigue are very diverse and developed according to research needs. The are several measurements that widely used to address or find out the work fatigue in industries. This research is a scoping review of “Swedish Occupational Fatigue Inventory”, “The Multidimensional Work Fatigue Inventory”, “Fatigue Severity Scale”, “Fatigue Assessment Scale”, “Short Form 36 Vitality Subscale”, and “The Occupational Fatigue Exhaustion Recovery Scale (OFER). This was reported under the guidance of PRISMA extension for Scoping Review (PRISMA-ScR). This study shows an inconsistency in use of measurement tools, even though researchers argue for practicality. The large number of studies on work fatigue allows confusion of researchers to choose a measurement tool for work fatigue that is suitable for the research population. This research helps other to describe various measurement tools of work fatigue that are often used globally. Further research can determine the measurement tool of fatigue according to needs and some considerations of advantages to be more accurate.

show abstract

Section: Instumentmentioning

confidence: 99%