Shona Mair , Liz Crowe , Mark Nicholls , Siva Senthuran , Kristen Gibbons , Daryl Jones
{"title":"澳大利亚和新西兰重症监护人员职业倦怠的患病率、特征和工作场所因素","authors":"Shona Mair , Liz Crowe , Mark Nicholls , Siva Senthuran , Kristen Gibbons , Daryl Jones","doi":"10.51893/2022.3.OA8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><strong>Objectives:</strong> To investigate the prevalence and features of self-reported burnout among intensivists working in Australia and New Zealand, and evaluate potentially modifiable workplace stressors associated with increased risk of self-reported burnout.</p><p><strong>Methods:</strong> We performed an electronic survey among registered intensivists in Australia and New Zealand. Burnout and professional quality of life were measured using the Professional Quality of Life Scale version 5 (ProQOL-5). Socio-organisational factors were defined <em>a priori</em> and assessed using a five-point Likert scale. Thematic analysis was conducted on an open-ended question on workplace stressors.</p><p><strong>Results:</strong> 261 of 921 estimated intensivists responded (response rate, 28.3%). Overall, few participants (0.8%) demonstrated high scores (> 75th centile) for burnout, and 70.9% of participants scored in the average range for burnout. Of note, 98.1% of participants scored in the average to high range for compassion satisfaction. No association was found between sex, age, or years of practice with the level of burnout or compassion satisfaction. Seven themes emerged regarding intensivists' most stressful aspects of work: interpersonal interactions and workplace relationships (25.5%), workload and its impact (24.9%), resources and capacity (22.6%), health systems leadership and bureaucracy (16.1%), end-of-life issues and moral distress (8.4%), clinical management (4.9%), and job security and future uncertainty (1.3%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion:</strong> Fewer Australian and New Zealand intensivists experienced burnout than previously reported. Many self-reported work stressors do not relate to clinical work and are due to interpersonal interactions with other colleges and hospital administrators. Such factors are potentially modifiable and could be the focus of future interventions.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":49215,"journal":{"name":"Critical Care and Resuscitation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1441277223000571/pdfft?md5=958b6f6067cfe235c4067dee5ae60ed5&pid=1-s2.0-S1441277223000571-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prevalence, features and workplace factors associated with burnout among intensivists in Australia and New Zealand\",\"authors\":\"Shona Mair , Liz Crowe , Mark Nicholls , Siva Senthuran , Kristen Gibbons , Daryl Jones\",\"doi\":\"10.51893/2022.3.OA8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p><strong>Objectives:</strong> To investigate the prevalence and features of self-reported burnout among intensivists working in Australia and New Zealand, and evaluate potentially modifiable workplace stressors associated with increased risk of self-reported burnout.</p><p><strong>Methods:</strong> We performed an electronic survey among registered intensivists in Australia and New Zealand. Burnout and professional quality of life were measured using the Professional Quality of Life Scale version 5 (ProQOL-5). Socio-organisational factors were defined <em>a priori</em> and assessed using a five-point Likert scale. Thematic analysis was conducted on an open-ended question on workplace stressors.</p><p><strong>Results:</strong> 261 of 921 estimated intensivists responded (response rate, 28.3%). Overall, few participants (0.8%) demonstrated high scores (> 75th centile) for burnout, and 70.9% of participants scored in the average range for burnout. Of note, 98.1% of participants scored in the average to high range for compassion satisfaction. No association was found between sex, age, or years of practice with the level of burnout or compassion satisfaction. Seven themes emerged regarding intensivists' most stressful aspects of work: interpersonal interactions and workplace relationships (25.5%), workload and its impact (24.9%), resources and capacity (22.6%), health systems leadership and bureaucracy (16.1%), end-of-life issues and moral distress (8.4%), clinical management (4.9%), and job security and future uncertainty (1.3%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion:</strong> Fewer Australian and New Zealand intensivists experienced burnout than previously reported. Many self-reported work stressors do not relate to clinical work and are due to interpersonal interactions with other colleges and hospital administrators. Such factors are potentially modifiable and could be the focus of future interventions.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49215,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical Care and Resuscitation\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1441277223000571/pdfft?md5=958b6f6067cfe235c4067dee5ae60ed5&pid=1-s2.0-S1441277223000571-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical Care and Resuscitation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1441277223000571\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Care and Resuscitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1441277223000571","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Prevalence, features and workplace factors associated with burnout among intensivists in Australia and New Zealand
Objectives: To investigate the prevalence and features of self-reported burnout among intensivists working in Australia and New Zealand, and evaluate potentially modifiable workplace stressors associated with increased risk of self-reported burnout.
Methods: We performed an electronic survey among registered intensivists in Australia and New Zealand. Burnout and professional quality of life were measured using the Professional Quality of Life Scale version 5 (ProQOL-5). Socio-organisational factors were defined a priori and assessed using a five-point Likert scale. Thematic analysis was conducted on an open-ended question on workplace stressors.
Results: 261 of 921 estimated intensivists responded (response rate, 28.3%). Overall, few participants (0.8%) demonstrated high scores (> 75th centile) for burnout, and 70.9% of participants scored in the average range for burnout. Of note, 98.1% of participants scored in the average to high range for compassion satisfaction. No association was found between sex, age, or years of practice with the level of burnout or compassion satisfaction. Seven themes emerged regarding intensivists' most stressful aspects of work: interpersonal interactions and workplace relationships (25.5%), workload and its impact (24.9%), resources and capacity (22.6%), health systems leadership and bureaucracy (16.1%), end-of-life issues and moral distress (8.4%), clinical management (4.9%), and job security and future uncertainty (1.3%).
Conclusion: Fewer Australian and New Zealand intensivists experienced burnout than previously reported. Many self-reported work stressors do not relate to clinical work and are due to interpersonal interactions with other colleges and hospital administrators. Such factors are potentially modifiable and could be the focus of future interventions.
期刊介绍:
ritical Care and Resuscitation (CC&R) is the official scientific journal of the College of Intensive Care Medicine (CICM). The Journal is a quarterly publication (ISSN 1441-2772) with original articles of scientific and clinical interest in the specialities of Critical Care, Intensive Care, Anaesthesia, Emergency Medicine and related disciplines.
The Journal is received by all Fellows and trainees, along with an increasing number of subscribers from around the world.
The CC&R Journal currently has an impact factor of 3.3, placing it in 8th position in world critical care journals and in first position in the world outside the USA and Europe.