Reliability and Validity of the Student Version of the Oldenburg Burnout Inventory in Physical Therapist Students

Allison L. Smith, J. Ellison, J. Bogardus, P. Gleeson
{"title":"Reliability and Validity of the Student Version of the Oldenburg Burnout Inventory in Physical Therapist Students","authors":"Allison L. Smith, J. Ellison, J. Bogardus, P. Gleeson","doi":"10.1097/JTE.0000000000000222","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction. Limited research exists on burnout in physical therapists (PTs) and PT students. The prevalence of PT student burnout is unknown and few outcome measures exist to study burnout in students. The purpose of this study was to assess the test–retest reliability and internal consistency of the Oldenburg Burnout Inventory for Students (OLBI-S) and convergent validity of the OLBI-S with the Maslach Burnout Inventory General Survey for Students (MBI-GSS) in Doctor of Physical Therapy (DPT) students. Review of Literature. Most authors studying burnout have used the MBI, which has been criticized in recent years. The OLBI was developed in response to the criticisms and psychometric limitations of the MBI. The OLBI-S has not yet been validated in PT students. Subjects. Participants included a convenience sample of DPT students attending Texas Woman's University in Houston during the fall semester of 2020. Methods. Students completed the OLBI-S and MBI-GSS and completed the OLBI-S a second time 1 week later. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculated to examine test–retest reliability, Cronbach's α was calculated to assess internal consistency, and convergent validity was assessed by calculating Pearson's correlations comparing corresponding subscales for the OLBI-S and MBI-GSS. Results. Test–retest reliability was excellent for both the OLBI-S exhaustion subscale (ICC = .916, P < .001) and the OLBI-S disengagement subscale (ICC = .955, P < .001). Internal consistency was good for both the exhaustion subscale (Cronbach's α = .833) and the disengagement subscale (Cronbach's α = .784). Convergent validity was found to be good between the OLBI-S and MBI-GSS exhaustion subscales (r = .741, P < .001) as well as the disengagement subscale of the OLBI-S and cynicism subscale of the MBI-GSS (r = .766, P < .001). Discussion and Conclusion. The OLBI-S has excellent reliability, good validity, and is a free alternative outcome measure to the MBI-GSS to measure burnout in DPT students.","PeriodicalId":91351,"journal":{"name":"Journal, physical therapy education","volume":"36 1","pages":"205 - 209"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal, physical therapy education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JTE.0000000000000222","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Introduction. Limited research exists on burnout in physical therapists (PTs) and PT students. The prevalence of PT student burnout is unknown and few outcome measures exist to study burnout in students. The purpose of this study was to assess the test–retest reliability and internal consistency of the Oldenburg Burnout Inventory for Students (OLBI-S) and convergent validity of the OLBI-S with the Maslach Burnout Inventory General Survey for Students (MBI-GSS) in Doctor of Physical Therapy (DPT) students. Review of Literature. Most authors studying burnout have used the MBI, which has been criticized in recent years. The OLBI was developed in response to the criticisms and psychometric limitations of the MBI. The OLBI-S has not yet been validated in PT students. Subjects. Participants included a convenience sample of DPT students attending Texas Woman's University in Houston during the fall semester of 2020. Methods. Students completed the OLBI-S and MBI-GSS and completed the OLBI-S a second time 1 week later. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculated to examine test–retest reliability, Cronbach's α was calculated to assess internal consistency, and convergent validity was assessed by calculating Pearson's correlations comparing corresponding subscales for the OLBI-S and MBI-GSS. Results. Test–retest reliability was excellent for both the OLBI-S exhaustion subscale (ICC = .916, P < .001) and the OLBI-S disengagement subscale (ICC = .955, P < .001). Internal consistency was good for both the exhaustion subscale (Cronbach's α = .833) and the disengagement subscale (Cronbach's α = .784). Convergent validity was found to be good between the OLBI-S and MBI-GSS exhaustion subscales (r = .741, P < .001) as well as the disengagement subscale of the OLBI-S and cynicism subscale of the MBI-GSS (r = .766, P < .001). Discussion and Conclusion. The OLBI-S has excellent reliability, good validity, and is a free alternative outcome measure to the MBI-GSS to measure burnout in DPT students.
奥尔登堡倦怠量表学生版在物理治疗师学生中的信度和有效性
介绍。关于物理治疗师和学生的职业倦怠的研究很少。体育专业学生倦怠的患病率尚不清楚,也很少有研究学生倦怠的结果测量方法。本研究的目的是评估Oldenburg学生倦怠量表(OLBI-S)的重测信度和内部一致性,以及OLBI-S与Maslach学生倦怠量表综合调查(MBI-GSS)在物理治疗博士(DPT)学生中的收敛效度。文献回顾。大多数研究倦怠的作者都使用了近年来受到批评的MBI。OLBI是针对MBI的批评和心理测量局限性而开发的。OLBI-S尚未在PT学生中得到验证。科目。参与者包括2020年秋季学期在休斯顿德克萨斯女子大学就读的DPT学生的方便样本。方法。学生完成了OLBI-S和MBI-GSS,并在一周后完成了第二次OLBI-S。计算类内相关系数(ICCs)来检验重测信度,计算Cronbach’s α来评估内部一致性,通过计算Pearson相关来比较OLBI-S和MBI-GSS的相应子量表来评估收敛效度。结果。OLBI-S耗尽分量表(ICC = .916, P < .001)和OLBI-S脱离分量表(ICC = .955, P < .001)的重测信度都很好。耗尽分量表(Cronbach’s α = .833)和脱离分量表(Cronbach’s α = .784)的内部一致性均较好。结果发现,OLBI-S与MBI-GSS的衰竭子量表(r = 0.741, P < 0.001)以及OLBI-S的脱离子量表与MBI-GSS的愤世嫉俗子量表(r = 0.766, P < 0.001)具有较好的收敛效度。讨论与结论。该量表具有良好的信度和效度,是MBI-GSS测量DPT学生职业倦怠的自由替代结果测量。
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
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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