Burnout syndrome in the professionals employed in special education schools

Niki Panagouli, E. Meimeti, P. Galanis, Maria Tsiachri, Pagona Koutsogianni, A. Yfantis, I. Moisoglou
{"title":"Burnout syndrome in the professionals employed in special education schools","authors":"Niki Panagouli, E. Meimeti, P. Galanis, Maria Tsiachri, Pagona Koutsogianni, A. Yfantis, I. Moisoglou","doi":"10.24283/hjns.2019.3.5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: The working environment in special education school units may lead to personnel burnout syndrome for the various professionals working in such field.\nObjective: To investigate the extent of burnout syndrome among special education school units’ personnel and the factors affecting its manifestation.\nMethodology: A cross-sectional study was conducted, with a convenience sample of 346 people, working at special education school units. The Copenhagen Burnout Inventory was used for data collection.\nResults: Cronbach’s alpha internal consistency value was 0.85 regarding personal burnout, 0.73 regarding professional burnout, and 0.83 regarding burnout related to students. As for the participants, 45% were teachers, 23.7% school nurses, 12.9% speech therapists and 18.4% other professionals. The average on all three subscales of the inventory was <50, which shows a low level of burnout. According to the results of the multivariate linear regression, permanent (coefficient b=8.0, 95% CI=3.2-12.9, p=0.001) and contract staff (coefficient b=15.4, 95% CI=8.4-22.4, p<0.001) presented higher levels of personal burnout, in comparison to substitute personnel. Permanent staff (coefficient b=8.9, 95% CI=3.9-13.9, p=0.001) and contract staff (coefficient b=10.0, 95% CI 95=2.9-17.2, p=0.006) presented higher levels of professional burnout, in comparison to substitute staff. Finally, the higher the work experience in the specialty, the higher the level of burnout related to students (coefficient b=0.4, 95% CI=0.01-0.7, p=0.042).\nConclusions: The special education school units’ personnel go presented low levels of burnout. It is proposed that more studies would be conducted in the future, where, apart from the demographic characteristics of the participants, other factors that contribute to personnels’ burnout syndrome would be examined, such as work environment characteristics.","PeriodicalId":126636,"journal":{"name":"Hellenic Journal of Nursing Science","volume":"87 1‐2","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hellenic Journal of Nursing Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24283/hjns.2019.3.5","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: The working environment in special education school units may lead to personnel burnout syndrome for the various professionals working in such field. Objective: To investigate the extent of burnout syndrome among special education school units’ personnel and the factors affecting its manifestation. Methodology: A cross-sectional study was conducted, with a convenience sample of 346 people, working at special education school units. The Copenhagen Burnout Inventory was used for data collection. Results: Cronbach’s alpha internal consistency value was 0.85 regarding personal burnout, 0.73 regarding professional burnout, and 0.83 regarding burnout related to students. As for the participants, 45% were teachers, 23.7% school nurses, 12.9% speech therapists and 18.4% other professionals. The average on all three subscales of the inventory was <50, which shows a low level of burnout. According to the results of the multivariate linear regression, permanent (coefficient b=8.0, 95% CI=3.2-12.9, p=0.001) and contract staff (coefficient b=15.4, 95% CI=8.4-22.4, p<0.001) presented higher levels of personal burnout, in comparison to substitute personnel. Permanent staff (coefficient b=8.9, 95% CI=3.9-13.9, p=0.001) and contract staff (coefficient b=10.0, 95% CI 95=2.9-17.2, p=0.006) presented higher levels of professional burnout, in comparison to substitute staff. Finally, the higher the work experience in the specialty, the higher the level of burnout related to students (coefficient b=0.4, 95% CI=0.01-0.7, p=0.042). Conclusions: The special education school units’ personnel go presented low levels of burnout. It is proposed that more studies would be conducted in the future, where, apart from the demographic characteristics of the participants, other factors that contribute to personnels’ burnout syndrome would be examined, such as work environment characteristics.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
特殊教育学校专业人员职业倦怠综合征的研究
特殊教育学校单位的工作环境可能导致在该领域工作的各种专业人员出现人员倦怠综合征。目的:了解特殊教育学校单位人员的职业倦怠程度及影响其表现的因素。方法:采用横断面研究方法,选取在特殊教育学校单位工作的346人作为方便样本。采用哥本哈根倦怠量表进行数据收集。结果:个人倦怠的内部一致性值为0.85,职业倦怠的内部一致性值为0.73,学生倦怠的内部一致性值为0.83。在受访者中,教师占45%,学校护士占23.7%,言语治疗师占12.9%,其他专业人员占18.4%。量表三个分量表的平均值均<50,显示出较低的职业倦怠水平。多元线性回归结果显示,永久员工(系数b=8.0, 95% CI=3.2 ~ 12.9, p=0.001)和合同制员工(系数b=15.4, 95% CI=8.4 ~ 22.4, p<0.001)的个人倦怠水平高于替代员工。长期工作人员(系数b=8.9, 95% CI=3.9-13.9, p=0.001)和合同制工作人员(系数b=10.0, 95% CI 95=2.9-17.2, p=0.006)的职业倦怠水平高于替代工作人员。最后,专业工作经验越高,学生的职业倦怠水平越高(系数b=0.4, 95% CI=0.01-0.7, p=0.042)。结论:特殊教育学校单位人员职业倦怠水平较低。建议未来进行更多的研究,除了研究参与者的人口学特征外,还将研究其他导致员工倦怠综合征的因素,如工作环境特征。
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 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The communication satisfaction of patients by health care professionals and its implications The Policy for psychiatric hospitals in Greece in the 19th century Health care for the wounded combatants during the Greek Revolution of 1821 Nurses’ resilience and self-care in the era of the covid-19 pandemic: a pilot study Investigating internet addiction: a citizen survey
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1