Xiaomeng Sun, Beenish Fatima Alam, Muhammad Aamir Ghafoor Chaudhary, Summara Khan, Amna Khan, Hassan Jan, Talib Hussain, Shahid Khan
{"title":"评估哥本哈根职业倦怠工具和 DASS-21 在教师中的有效性和可靠性。","authors":"Xiaomeng Sun, Beenish Fatima Alam, Muhammad Aamir Ghafoor Chaudhary, Summara Khan, Amna Khan, Hassan Jan, Talib Hussain, Shahid Khan","doi":"10.3233/WOR-240075","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Various tools had been used to measure the level of burnout, anxiety, and depression. The Copenhagen Burnout Inventory assesses personal, work or job, and patient related burnout. While DASS21 assesses stress, anxiety, and depression.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate the validity, reliability of Copenhagen burnout tool and DASS-21 amongst the faculty members employed in Pakistan.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cross-sectional research incorporated 384 medical, dental, and nursing faculty working full time at university. Data for research was collected from January to May 2023. Copenhagen and DASS21 survey were the survey tools used to identify the level of burnout and stress. Reliability of both tools was assessed using Cronbach alpha. Confirmatory factor analysis was performed to detect factorial structure of both tools. Pearson correlation was conducted to detect association between various domains. Multiple logistic regression was computed to detect relationship between the domains.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From a total of 384 participants, there were 118 (30.7%) males, 266 (69.3%) females. There were 169 (44%) medical, 140 (36.5%) dental, and 75 (19.5%) nursing faculty. Reliability analysis revealed satisfactory results for both tools. Confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated a four-model fit for the CBI, whilst a three-factor model was observed for DASS21. Personal burnout demonstrated positive and significant correlation with work related burnout, and stress, while it showed significant but negative correlation with depression.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Female faculty displaced higher academic burnout as compared to men. A statistically significant correlation between burnout, anxiety, and depression. Both tools displayed high reliability and validity for the current sample.</p>","PeriodicalId":51373,"journal":{"name":"Work-A Journal of Prevention Assessment & Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing validity and reliability of Copenhagen burnout tool and DASS-21 amongst the faculty members.\",\"authors\":\"Xiaomeng Sun, Beenish Fatima Alam, Muhammad Aamir Ghafoor Chaudhary, Summara Khan, Amna Khan, Hassan Jan, Talib Hussain, Shahid Khan\",\"doi\":\"10.3233/WOR-240075\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Various tools had been used to measure the level of burnout, anxiety, and depression. The Copenhagen Burnout Inventory assesses personal, work or job, and patient related burnout. While DASS21 assesses stress, anxiety, and depression.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate the validity, reliability of Copenhagen burnout tool and DASS-21 amongst the faculty members employed in Pakistan.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cross-sectional research incorporated 384 medical, dental, and nursing faculty working full time at university. Data for research was collected from January to May 2023. Copenhagen and DASS21 survey were the survey tools used to identify the level of burnout and stress. Reliability of both tools was assessed using Cronbach alpha. Confirmatory factor analysis was performed to detect factorial structure of both tools. Pearson correlation was conducted to detect association between various domains. Multiple logistic regression was computed to detect relationship between the domains.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From a total of 384 participants, there were 118 (30.7%) males, 266 (69.3%) females. There were 169 (44%) medical, 140 (36.5%) dental, and 75 (19.5%) nursing faculty. Reliability analysis revealed satisfactory results for both tools. Confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated a four-model fit for the CBI, whilst a three-factor model was observed for DASS21. Personal burnout demonstrated positive and significant correlation with work related burnout, and stress, while it showed significant but negative correlation with depression.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Female faculty displaced higher academic burnout as compared to men. A statistically significant correlation between burnout, anxiety, and depression. Both tools displayed high reliability and validity for the current sample.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51373,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Work-A Journal of Prevention Assessment & Rehabilitation\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Work-A Journal of Prevention Assessment & Rehabilitation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-240075\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Work-A Journal of Prevention Assessment & Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-240075","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Assessing validity and reliability of Copenhagen burnout tool and DASS-21 amongst the faculty members.
Background: Various tools had been used to measure the level of burnout, anxiety, and depression. The Copenhagen Burnout Inventory assesses personal, work or job, and patient related burnout. While DASS21 assesses stress, anxiety, and depression.
Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the validity, reliability of Copenhagen burnout tool and DASS-21 amongst the faculty members employed in Pakistan.
Methods: This cross-sectional research incorporated 384 medical, dental, and nursing faculty working full time at university. Data for research was collected from January to May 2023. Copenhagen and DASS21 survey were the survey tools used to identify the level of burnout and stress. Reliability of both tools was assessed using Cronbach alpha. Confirmatory factor analysis was performed to detect factorial structure of both tools. Pearson correlation was conducted to detect association between various domains. Multiple logistic regression was computed to detect relationship between the domains.
Results: From a total of 384 participants, there were 118 (30.7%) males, 266 (69.3%) females. There were 169 (44%) medical, 140 (36.5%) dental, and 75 (19.5%) nursing faculty. Reliability analysis revealed satisfactory results for both tools. Confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated a four-model fit for the CBI, whilst a three-factor model was observed for DASS21. Personal burnout demonstrated positive and significant correlation with work related burnout, and stress, while it showed significant but negative correlation with depression.
Conclusion: Female faculty displaced higher academic burnout as compared to men. A statistically significant correlation between burnout, anxiety, and depression. Both tools displayed high reliability and validity for the current sample.
期刊介绍:
WORK: A Journal of Prevention, Assessment & Rehabilitation is an interdisciplinary, international journal which publishes high quality peer-reviewed manuscripts covering the entire scope of the occupation of work. The journal''s subtitle has been deliberately laid out: The first goal is the prevention of illness, injury, and disability. When this goal is not achievable, the attention focuses on assessment to design client-centered intervention, rehabilitation, treatment, or controls that use scientific evidence to support best practice.