Vulnerability profiles of workers and the relation with burnout symptoms: results from the Netherlands working conditions survey.

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-27 DOI:10.1007/s00420-024-02071-1
Luuk Bouwens, Sander K R van Zon, Roy Peijen, Marloes Vooijs
{"title":"Vulnerability profiles of workers and the relation with burnout symptoms: results from the Netherlands working conditions survey.","authors":"Luuk Bouwens, Sander K R van Zon, Roy Peijen, Marloes Vooijs","doi":"10.1007/s00420-024-02071-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Unfavorable working conditions may place workers in a vulnerable position in the labour market, but studies on the clustering of these factors and their relation to burnout symptoms are lacking. This study aims to identify subgroups of workers in potentially vulnerable positions in the labour market and examine whether burnout symptoms differ across the established subgroups.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study utilizes cross-sectional data from 2019 of the Netherlands Working Conditions Survey (n = 55,283). Working conditions included employment contracts, working hours, multiple jobs, tenure, physical strain, autonomy, and workload. Burnout symptoms were measured with five items on a 7-point Likert scale. Latent Class Analysis was used to identify vulnerability subgroups based on working conditions and educational level. Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used to examine whether burnout symptoms differed between the identified subgroups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Three out of nine subgroups (i.e., classes 4, 6, and 7) presented combinations of multiple unfavourable working conditions. The vulnerability of class 4, characterized by low educational level, physically demanding work, low autonomy, and a high workload, was underscored by a significantly higher burnout symptom score (M = 2.91;SD = 0.97) compared to all other subgroups. Subgroups 3 (M = 2.69;SD = 1.43) and 8 (M = 2.41;SD = 1.41), without striking unfavourable conditions, had the second and third highest scores on burnout symptoms.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Determining vulnerability in the labour market is not straightforward as not all profiles that presented clusters of unfavourable working conditions scored high on burnout symptoms, and vice versa. Future research should investigate whether findings are similar to other mental health outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":13761,"journal":{"name":"International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health","volume":" ","pages":"651-660"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11245419/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-024-02071-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Unfavorable working conditions may place workers in a vulnerable position in the labour market, but studies on the clustering of these factors and their relation to burnout symptoms are lacking. This study aims to identify subgroups of workers in potentially vulnerable positions in the labour market and examine whether burnout symptoms differ across the established subgroups.

Methods: This study utilizes cross-sectional data from 2019 of the Netherlands Working Conditions Survey (n = 55,283). Working conditions included employment contracts, working hours, multiple jobs, tenure, physical strain, autonomy, and workload. Burnout symptoms were measured with five items on a 7-point Likert scale. Latent Class Analysis was used to identify vulnerability subgroups based on working conditions and educational level. Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used to examine whether burnout symptoms differed between the identified subgroups.

Results: Three out of nine subgroups (i.e., classes 4, 6, and 7) presented combinations of multiple unfavourable working conditions. The vulnerability of class 4, characterized by low educational level, physically demanding work, low autonomy, and a high workload, was underscored by a significantly higher burnout symptom score (M = 2.91;SD = 0.97) compared to all other subgroups. Subgroups 3 (M = 2.69;SD = 1.43) and 8 (M = 2.41;SD = 1.41), without striking unfavourable conditions, had the second and third highest scores on burnout symptoms.

Conclusions: Determining vulnerability in the labour market is not straightforward as not all profiles that presented clusters of unfavourable working conditions scored high on burnout symptoms, and vice versa. Future research should investigate whether findings are similar to other mental health outcomes.

Abstract Image

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
工人的脆弱性概况及其与职业倦怠症状的关系:荷兰工作条件调查的结果。
导言:不利的工作条件可能会使工人在劳动力市场中处于弱势地位,但有关这些因素的聚集及其与职业倦怠症状之间关系的研究却十分缺乏。本研究旨在确定劳动力市场中处于潜在弱势地位的工人亚群,并研究倦怠症状在已确定的亚群中是否存在差异:本研究利用了 2019 年荷兰工作条件调查的横截面数据(n = 55,283 人)。工作条件包括雇用合同、工作时间、多重工作、任期、身体负荷、自主性和工作量。倦怠症状采用 7 点李克特量表的五个项目进行测量。根据工作条件和教育水平,采用潜类分析法确定易受影响的亚组。采用 Wilcoxon 秩和检验来检测所确定的亚组之间的职业倦怠症状是否存在差异:结果:在九个亚组中,有三个亚组(即第 4、第 6 和第 7 组)综合了多种不利的工作条件。与所有其他亚组相比,第 4 亚组的职业倦怠症状得分(中值 = 2.91;标度 = 0.97)明显更高,这凸显了第 4 亚组的脆弱性,其特点是教育水平低、工作强度大、自主性低、工作量大。第三分组(中=2.69;标清=1.43)和第八分组(中=2.41;标清=1.41)没有明显的不利条件,但其职业倦怠症状得分分别位居第二和第三位:确定劳动力市场中的脆弱性并不简单,因为并非所有出现不利工作条件群组的人在职业倦怠症状上的得分都很高,反之亦然。未来的研究应调查这些结果是否与其他心理健康结果相似。
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
International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health
International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
6.70%
发文量
127
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health publishes Editorials, Review Articles, Original Articles, and Letters to the Editor. It welcomes any manuscripts dealing with occupational or ambient environmental problems, with a special interest in research at the interface of occupational health and clinical medicine. The scope ranges from Biological Monitoring to Dermatology, from Fibers and Dust to Human Toxicology, from Nanomaterials and Ultra-fine Dust to Night- and Shift Work, from Psycho-mental Distress and Burnout to Vibrations. A complete list of topics can be found on the right-hand side under For authors and editors. In addition, all papers should be based on present-day standards and relate to: -Clinical and epidemiological studies on morbidity and mortality -Clinical epidemiological studies on the parameters relevant to the estimation of health risks -Human experimental studies on environmental health effects. Animal experiments are only acceptable if relevant to pathogenic aspects. -Methods for studying the topics mentioned above.
期刊最新文献
Association of long working hours and multi-site work-related musculoskeletal disorders among transportation industry workers in Beijing, China. Explaining presenteeism behaviour with the theory of planned behaviour - a longitudinal study. Impact of extreme bushfire seasons on rates of occupational injury and disease compensation claims in first responders. Personal inhalable paper dust exposure and potential determinants among paper industry workers in Ethiopia. Association between dust exposure and lung function levels in steelworkers: mediation analysis of inflammatory biomarkers.
×
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