Nader A. Fawzy , Muhammad Junaid Tahir , Abdullah Saeed , Mohammad J. Ghosheh , Tamara Alsheikh , Ali Ahmed , Ka Yiu Lee , Zohaib Yousaf
{"title":"Incidence and factors associated with burnout in radiologists: A systematic review","authors":"Nader A. Fawzy , Muhammad Junaid Tahir , Abdullah Saeed , Mohammad J. Ghosheh , Tamara Alsheikh , Ali Ahmed , Ka Yiu Lee , Zohaib Yousaf","doi":"10.1016/j.ejro.2023.100530","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Rationale and objectives</h3><p>Burnout among physicians has a prevalence rate exceeding 50%. The radiology department is not immune to the burnout epidemic. Understanding and addressing burnout among radiologists has been a subject of recent interest. Thus, our study aims to systematically review studies reporting the prevalence of burnout in physicians in the radiology department while providing an overview of the factors associated with burnout among radiologists.</p></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><p>The search was conducted from inception until November 13th, 2022, in PubMed, Embase, Education Resources Information Center, PsycINFO, and psycArticles. Studies reporting the prevalence of burnout or any subdimensions among radiology physicians, including residents, fellows, consultants, and attendings, were included. Data on study characteristics and estimates of burnout syndrome or any of its subdimensions were collected and summarized.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>After screening 6379 studies, 23 studies from seven countries were eligible. The number of participants ranged from 26 to 460 (median, 162; interquartile range, 91–264). In all, 18 studies (78.3%) employed a form of the Maslach Burnout Inventory. In comparison, four studies (17.4%) used the Stanford Professional Fulfillment Index, and one study (4.3%) used a single-item measure derived from the Zero Burnout Program survey. Overall burnout prevalence estimates were reported by 14 studies (60.9%) and varied from 33% to 88%. High burnout prevalence estimates were reported by only five studies (21.7%) and ranged from 5% to 62%. Emotional exhaustion and depersonalization prevalence estimates were reported by 16 studies (69.6%) and ranged from 11%−100% and 4%−97%, respectively. Furthermore, 15 studies (65.2%) reported low personal accomplishment prevalence, ranging from 14.7% to 84%. There were at least seven definitions for overall burnout and high burnout among the included studies, and there was high heterogeneity among the cutoff scores used for the burnout subdimensions.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Burnout in radiology is increasing globally, with prevalence estimates reaching 88% and 62% for overall and high burnout, respectively. A myriad of factors has been identified as contributing to the increased prevalence. Our data demonstrated significant variability in burnout prevalence estimates among radiologists and major disparities in burnout criteria, instrument tools, and study quality.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":38076,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Radiology Open","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10618688/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Radiology Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352047723000564","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Rationale and objectives
Burnout among physicians has a prevalence rate exceeding 50%. The radiology department is not immune to the burnout epidemic. Understanding and addressing burnout among radiologists has been a subject of recent interest. Thus, our study aims to systematically review studies reporting the prevalence of burnout in physicians in the radiology department while providing an overview of the factors associated with burnout among radiologists.
Materials and methods
The search was conducted from inception until November 13th, 2022, in PubMed, Embase, Education Resources Information Center, PsycINFO, and psycArticles. Studies reporting the prevalence of burnout or any subdimensions among radiology physicians, including residents, fellows, consultants, and attendings, were included. Data on study characteristics and estimates of burnout syndrome or any of its subdimensions were collected and summarized.
Results
After screening 6379 studies, 23 studies from seven countries were eligible. The number of participants ranged from 26 to 460 (median, 162; interquartile range, 91–264). In all, 18 studies (78.3%) employed a form of the Maslach Burnout Inventory. In comparison, four studies (17.4%) used the Stanford Professional Fulfillment Index, and one study (4.3%) used a single-item measure derived from the Zero Burnout Program survey. Overall burnout prevalence estimates were reported by 14 studies (60.9%) and varied from 33% to 88%. High burnout prevalence estimates were reported by only five studies (21.7%) and ranged from 5% to 62%. Emotional exhaustion and depersonalization prevalence estimates were reported by 16 studies (69.6%) and ranged from 11%−100% and 4%−97%, respectively. Furthermore, 15 studies (65.2%) reported low personal accomplishment prevalence, ranging from 14.7% to 84%. There were at least seven definitions for overall burnout and high burnout among the included studies, and there was high heterogeneity among the cutoff scores used for the burnout subdimensions.
Conclusion
Burnout in radiology is increasing globally, with prevalence estimates reaching 88% and 62% for overall and high burnout, respectively. A myriad of factors has been identified as contributing to the increased prevalence. Our data demonstrated significant variability in burnout prevalence estimates among radiologists and major disparities in burnout criteria, instrument tools, and study quality.