Organization-Level Factors Associated With Burnout

Thompson, Helaina; Askelson, Natoshia M.; Bucklin, Rebecca; Gauthreaux, Nicole; Faber, E. S. L.; Ball, Coltin; Yang, Suejin; Steere, Eliza

doi:10.1097/jom.0000000000002837

Cited by 2 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The Table 1 lists the most common risk factors identified (found in 2 or more studies) across the studies with a comparison by pandemic status and region. Overall, the most common risk factors for burnout identified across all studies were: overwork/overtime,21-25,27,32,35 lack of support,21,27,30,31 and new/changing/unclear responsibilities and roles 21,22,24,27. The most common risk factors analyzed with quantitative statistical significance were: overwork/overtime,25,27,32,35 lack of support,27,30,31 younger age,25,27,32 and permanent/full-time employee status 25,27,32.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Among the records retrieved from PubMed (n = 2330), ClinicalKey (n = 134), PsycINFO (n = 224), SocINDEX (n = 45), and EMBASE (n = 594), before screening 477 records were excluded as duplicates (Figure 1). Ultimately, the review incorporated 15 studies, 4 qualitative, [21][22][23][24] and 11 quantitative studies. [25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35] A supplemental table (see Supplemental Digital Content Table 1, available at http://links.lww.com/ JPHMP/B291) displays the characteristics of the included studies.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Overall, the most common risk factors for burnout identified across all studies were: overwork/overtime, [21][22][23][24][25]27,32,35 lack of support, 21,27,30,31 and new/changing/unclear responsibilities and roles. 21,22,24,27 The most common risk factors analyzed with quantitative statistical significance were: overwork/overtime, 25,27,32,35 lack of support, 27,30,31 younger age, 25,27,32 and permanent/fulltime employee status. 25,27,32 In US studies, the most common risk factors were: overwork/overtime, [21][22][23][24] new/changing/unclear roles and responsibilities, 21,22,24 and staffing shortages.…”

Section: Risk Factors For Burnoutmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…25,32 In studies during the COVID-19 pandemic, the most common risk factors were: overwork/ overtime, [21][22][23][24]27 lack of support, 21,27,30,31 and new/changing/unclear roles and responsibilities. 21,22,24,27 In the Lee et al 27 study, in addition to younger age, female gender, and unmarried status, those who reported poor self-rated health had the greatest burnout scores. In support of the Lee et al 27 study, a study by Kim et al 31 found that those with better perception of their overall health were significantly less likely to experience burnout.…”

Section: Risk Factors For Burnoutmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Prevalence of Burnout Among Public Health Professionals: A Systematic Review

Spencer-Hwang,

Cruz,

Ong

et al. 2024

Journal of Public Health Management &Amp; Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context: Since the initial outbreak of COVID-19, health professionals—both clinical health care, as well as public health concentrations—have faced tremendous pressures. A growing body of literature indicates the pandemic has magnified already prevalent burnout rates among clinical health professionals and to what extent for public health professionals remains to be determined. Objective: This study purpose is to conduct a systematic review of literature examining burnout prevalence among public health professionals before and during the COVID-19 pandemic—nationally and internationally—with identification of potential risk factors. Design: We conducted a literature search in PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, SocINDEX, and ClinicalKey since inception through April 4, 2023. Inclusion criteria included peer-reviewed, original research studies (qualitative or quantitative), in English, assessing prevalence of, or risk factors for, burnout in public health professionals. Two authors independently screened abstracts, titles, full report of studies and abstracted data related to burnout. This review was conducted using Joanna Briggs Institute Systematic Reviews guidelines and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines with narrative synthesis. Protocol for this review registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023424468). Results: Of 3327 health-related articles mentioning burnout, 15 met inclusion criteria (11 quantitative and 4 qualitative) with 10 in international settings and 5 in US majority of quantitative studies were from international settings and only 1 in United States. Seventy-eight percent of studies that included prevalence data, exhibited a burnout prevalence greater than 50% (with a range of 19%-81%). The pandemic likely heightened (13% increase) already elevated burnout prevalence. Major risk factors identified included overwork, lack of support, changing roles, and full-time employment status, though many risk factors had not been studied in the United States. Conclusions: Burnout is prevalent among public health professionals, nationally and internationally, and likely heightened by the COVID-19 pandemic. More research is warranted assessing burnout among differing public health concentrations and interventions developed. Public health is an essential framework for protecting and promoting health nationally and internationally, and we need to ensure and support solidity of that framework.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Risk Factors For Burnoutmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Risk Factors For Burnoutmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Prevalence of Burnout Among Public Health Professionals: A Systematic Review

Spencer-Hwang,

Cruz,

Ong

et al. 2024

Journal of Public Health Management &Amp; Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The Role of Supervisory Support and Self-Efficacy on Work Effectiveness with Work Burnout as a Moderator Variable

Putra,

Darmawan

2024

JSE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aims to investigate the effect of supervisory support and self-efficacy on work effectiveness, with work burnout as a moderating variable. The quantitative method was used using a questionnaire distributed to 100 respondents who worked at a company in Surabaya. The results of data analysis using the multiple regression method reveal that supervisory support has a significant positive impact on work effectiveness, along with self-efficacy which also has a significant positive influence on work effectiveness. Then supervisory support moderates the relationship positively and significantly towards work burnout. Self-efficacy was found to moderate the relationship positively and significantly to job burnout, indicating that the higher the level of self-efficacy, the lower the perceived level of job burnout. Meanwhile, work burnout negatively and significantly moderates the relationship to work effectiveness, indicating that the higher the level of work burnout, the lower the observed work effectiveness.

show abstract

Organization-Level Factors Associated With Burnout

Cited by 2 publications

References 31 publications

Prevalence of Burnout Among Public Health Professionals: A Systematic Review

Prevalence of Burnout Among Public Health Professionals: A Systematic Review

The Role of Supervisory Support and Self-Efficacy on Work Effectiveness with Work Burnout as a Moderator Variable

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About