Prevalence, features and workplace factors associated with burnout among intensivists in Australia and New Zealand

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Shona Mair , Liz Crowe , Mark Nicholls , Siva Senthuran , Kristen Gibbons , Daryl Jones
{"title":"Prevalence, features and workplace factors associated with burnout among intensivists in Australia and New Zealand","authors":"Shona Mair ,&nbsp;Liz Crowe ,&nbsp;Mark Nicholls ,&nbsp;Siva Senthuran ,&nbsp;Kristen Gibbons ,&nbsp;Daryl Jones","doi":"10.51893/2022.3.OA8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><strong>Objectives:</strong> To investigate the prevalence and features of self-reported burnout among intensivists working in Australia and New Zealand, and evaluate potentially modifiable workplace stressors associated with increased risk of self-reported burnout.</p><p><strong>Methods:</strong> We performed an electronic survey among registered intensivists in Australia and New Zealand. Burnout and professional quality of life were measured using the Professional Quality of Life Scale version 5 (ProQOL-5). Socio-organisational factors were defined <em>a priori</em> and assessed using a five-point Likert scale. Thematic analysis was conducted on an open-ended question on workplace stressors.</p><p><strong>Results:</strong> 261 of 921 estimated intensivists responded (response rate, 28.3%). Overall, few participants (0.8%) demonstrated high scores (&gt; 75th centile) for burnout, and 70.9% of participants scored in the average range for burnout. Of note, 98.1% of participants scored in the average to high range for compassion satisfaction. No association was found between sex, age, or years of practice with the level of burnout or compassion satisfaction. Seven themes emerged regarding intensivists' most stressful aspects of work: interpersonal interactions and workplace relationships (25.5%), workload and its impact (24.9%), resources and capacity (22.6%), health systems leadership and bureaucracy (16.1%), end-of-life issues and moral distress (8.4%), clinical management (4.9%), and job security and future uncertainty (1.3%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion:</strong> Fewer Australian and New Zealand intensivists experienced burnout than previously reported. Many self-reported work stressors do not relate to clinical work and are due to interpersonal interactions with other colleges and hospital administrators. Such factors are potentially modifiable and could be the focus of future interventions.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":49215,"journal":{"name":"Critical Care and Resuscitation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1441277223000571/pdfft?md5=958b6f6067cfe235c4067dee5ae60ed5&pid=1-s2.0-S1441277223000571-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Care and Resuscitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1441277223000571","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To investigate the prevalence and features of self-reported burnout among intensivists working in Australia and New Zealand, and evaluate potentially modifiable workplace stressors associated with increased risk of self-reported burnout.

Methods: We performed an electronic survey among registered intensivists in Australia and New Zealand. Burnout and professional quality of life were measured using the Professional Quality of Life Scale version 5 (ProQOL-5). Socio-organisational factors were defined a priori and assessed using a five-point Likert scale. Thematic analysis was conducted on an open-ended question on workplace stressors.

Results: 261 of 921 estimated intensivists responded (response rate, 28.3%). Overall, few participants (0.8%) demonstrated high scores (> 75th centile) for burnout, and 70.9% of participants scored in the average range for burnout. Of note, 98.1% of participants scored in the average to high range for compassion satisfaction. No association was found between sex, age, or years of practice with the level of burnout or compassion satisfaction. Seven themes emerged regarding intensivists' most stressful aspects of work: interpersonal interactions and workplace relationships (25.5%), workload and its impact (24.9%), resources and capacity (22.6%), health systems leadership and bureaucracy (16.1%), end-of-life issues and moral distress (8.4%), clinical management (4.9%), and job security and future uncertainty (1.3%).

Conclusion: Fewer Australian and New Zealand intensivists experienced burnout than previously reported. Many self-reported work stressors do not relate to clinical work and are due to interpersonal interactions with other colleges and hospital administrators. Such factors are potentially modifiable and could be the focus of future interventions.

澳大利亚和新西兰重症监护人员职业倦怠的患病率、特征和工作场所因素
目的:调查在澳大利亚和新西兰工作的重症护理人员自我报告的倦怠的患病率和特征,并评估与自我报告的倦怠风险增加相关的潜在可改变的工作场所压力因素。方法:我们对澳大利亚和新西兰的注册重症医师进行了电子调查。职业倦怠和职业生活质量采用职业生活质量量表第5版(ProQOL-5)进行测量。社会组织因素的定义是先验的,并使用五点李克特量表进行评估。对一个关于工作场所压力源的开放式问题进行了专题分析。结果:921名预估强化医师中有261人有反应(有效率28.3%)。总体而言,少数参与者(0.8%)表现出高分(>75百分位),70.9%的参与者在倦怠的平均范围内得分。值得注意的是,98.1%的参与者在同情满意度方面得分在中高区间。没有发现性别、年龄或从业年限与倦怠程度或同情心满意度之间存在关联。关于重症医生工作中压力最大的方面,出现了七个主题:人际交往和工作场所关系(25.5%)、工作量及其影响(24.9%)、资源和能力(22.6%)、卫生系统领导和官僚作风(16.1%)、临终问题和道德困扰(8.4%)、临床管理(4.9%)、工作保障和未来不确定性(1.3%)。结论:澳大利亚和新西兰的重症监护人员经历过的倦怠比以前报道的要少。许多自我报告的工作压力源与临床工作无关,而是由于与其他学院和医院管理人员的人际交往。这些因素可能是可以改变的,可能是未来干预的重点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Critical Care and Resuscitation
Critical Care and Resuscitation CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE-
CiteScore
7.70
自引率
3.40%
发文量
44
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: ritical Care and Resuscitation (CC&R) is the official scientific journal of the College of Intensive Care Medicine (CICM). The Journal is a quarterly publication (ISSN 1441-2772) with original articles of scientific and clinical interest in the specialities of Critical Care, Intensive Care, Anaesthesia, Emergency Medicine and related disciplines. The Journal is received by all Fellows and trainees, along with an increasing number of subscribers from around the world. The CC&R Journal currently has an impact factor of 3.3, placing it in 8th position in world critical care journals and in first position in the world outside the USA and Europe.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信