全科医生职业倦怠的多维因素:横断面调查。

IF 2.5 Q2 PRIMARY HEALTH CARE BJGP Open Pub Date : 2024-07-29 Print Date: 2024-07-01 DOI:10.3399/BJGPO.2023.0171
Marie Bayot, Anke Boone, Lode Godderis, Anne-Laure Lenoir
{"title":"全科医生职业倦怠的多维因素:横断面调查。","authors":"Marie Bayot, Anke Boone, Lode Godderis, Anne-Laure Lenoir","doi":"10.3399/BJGPO.2023.0171","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>GPs are particularly vulnerable to job burnout. Tailored prevention and intervention strategies are needed.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To investigate organisational, interpersonal, and individual factors contributing to exhaustion and disengagement at work among GPs.</p><p><strong>Design & setting: </strong>We conducted a cross-sectional study in a sample of Belgian GPs.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A total of 358 doctors (73% females, 301 with complete data) completed an online anonymous questionnaire assessing job burnout, psychosocial characteristics of the work environment, perceived social support in the private domain, emotional competence, and self-compassion.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>GPs reported moderate levels of exhaustion and disengagement. Regression models showed that included factors jointly explained 69% of the variance in exhaustion and 63% in disengagement. Exhaustion was significantly predicted by female sex (<i>β</i> effect size = -0.1), high perceived emotional demands (<i>β</i> = 0.19), as well as low self-compassion (<i>β</i> = -0.14) and low emotional competence (<i>β</i> = 0.09). Disengagement was significantly predicted by low seniority (<i>β</i> = -0.12) and limited opportunities for development (<i>β</i> = -0.16). Both exhaustion and disengagement were predicted by low perceived quality of work (<i>β</i> = -0.19 and -0.14, respectively), meaning of work (<i>β</i> = -0.17 and -0.31, respectively), and role clarity (<i>β</i> = 0.09 and 0.12, respectively), as well as high perceived work-life conflict (<i>β</i> = 0.46 and 0.21, respectively). Moreover, GPs working in a multidisciplinary group reported lower levels of exhaustion and disengagement than those working in a monodisciplinary group or a solo practice, and this difference was associated with factors such as work-life conflict.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Organisational, interpersonal, and intrapersonal factors interact to predict a substantial part of burnout in general practice. The most significant risk factors were perceived work-life conflict and poor meaning of work. Policymakers should work to support more sustainable practices based on the specific needs and constraints reported by GPs.</p>","PeriodicalId":36541,"journal":{"name":"BJGP Open","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11300977/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Multidimensional factors of burnout in general practice: a cross sectional survey.\",\"authors\":\"Marie Bayot, Anke Boone, Lode Godderis, Anne-Laure Lenoir\",\"doi\":\"10.3399/BJGPO.2023.0171\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>GPs are particularly vulnerable to job burnout. Tailored prevention and intervention strategies are needed.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To investigate organisational, interpersonal, and individual factors contributing to exhaustion and disengagement at work among GPs.</p><p><strong>Design & setting: </strong>We conducted a cross-sectional study in a sample of Belgian GPs.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A total of 358 doctors (73% females, 301 with complete data) completed an online anonymous questionnaire assessing job burnout, psychosocial characteristics of the work environment, perceived social support in the private domain, emotional competence, and self-compassion.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>GPs reported moderate levels of exhaustion and disengagement. Regression models showed that included factors jointly explained 69% of the variance in exhaustion and 63% in disengagement. Exhaustion was significantly predicted by female sex (<i>β</i> effect size = -0.1), high perceived emotional demands (<i>β</i> = 0.19), as well as low self-compassion (<i>β</i> = -0.14) and low emotional competence (<i>β</i> = 0.09). Disengagement was significantly predicted by low seniority (<i>β</i> = -0.12) and limited opportunities for development (<i>β</i> = -0.16). Both exhaustion and disengagement were predicted by low perceived quality of work (<i>β</i> = -0.19 and -0.14, respectively), meaning of work (<i>β</i> = -0.17 and -0.31, respectively), and role clarity (<i>β</i> = 0.09 and 0.12, respectively), as well as high perceived work-life conflict (<i>β</i> = 0.46 and 0.21, respectively). Moreover, GPs working in a multidisciplinary group reported lower levels of exhaustion and disengagement than those working in a monodisciplinary group or a solo practice, and this difference was associated with factors such as work-life conflict.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Organisational, interpersonal, and intrapersonal factors interact to predict a substantial part of burnout in general practice. The most significant risk factors were perceived work-life conflict and poor meaning of work. Policymakers should work to support more sustainable practices based on the specific needs and constraints reported by GPs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36541,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BJGP Open\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11300977/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BJGP Open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGPO.2023.0171\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Print\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PRIMARY HEALTH CARE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BJGP Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGPO.2023.0171","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Print","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PRIMARY HEALTH CARE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:全科医生(GPs)特别容易出现工作倦怠。目的:调查导致全科医生工作倦怠和脱离工作的组织、人际和个人因素:我们对比利时全科医生样本进行了横断面研究:共有358名医生(73%为女性,301人数据完整)填写了一份在线匿名问卷,对工作倦怠、工作环境的社会心理特征、感知到的私人领域社会支持、情感能力和自我同情进行了评估:结果:全科医生报告了中等程度的工作倦怠和脱离。回归模型显示,所包含的因素共同解释了69%的疲惫方差和63%的脱离方差。性别(女性)(β效应大小=-.1)、高感知情绪需求(β=.19)、低自我同情(β=-.14)和低情绪能力(β=.09)对精疲力竭有明显的预测作用。低资历(β=-.12)和有限的发展机会(β=-.16)对脱离工作有明显的预测作用。工作质量感知低(β=-.19 和-.14)、工作意义感知低(β=-.17 和-.31)、角色清晰度感知低(β=.09 和.12),以及工作与生活冲突感知高(β=.46 和.21),都会导致全科医生疲惫不堪和脱离工作。此外,在多学科小组工作的全科医生比在单学科小组或单独执业的全科医生报告的疲惫和脱离程度更低,这种差异与工作-生活冲突等因素有关:结论:组织、人际和个人因素相互作用,在很大程度上预测了全科医生的职业倦怠。最重要的风险因素是感知到的工作与生活冲突和工作意义不佳。政策制定者应根据全科医生报告的具体需求和限制因素,努力支持更可持续的实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Multidimensional factors of burnout in general practice: a cross sectional survey.

Background: GPs are particularly vulnerable to job burnout. Tailored prevention and intervention strategies are needed.

Aim: To investigate organisational, interpersonal, and individual factors contributing to exhaustion and disengagement at work among GPs.

Design & setting: We conducted a cross-sectional study in a sample of Belgian GPs.

Method: A total of 358 doctors (73% females, 301 with complete data) completed an online anonymous questionnaire assessing job burnout, psychosocial characteristics of the work environment, perceived social support in the private domain, emotional competence, and self-compassion.

Results: GPs reported moderate levels of exhaustion and disengagement. Regression models showed that included factors jointly explained 69% of the variance in exhaustion and 63% in disengagement. Exhaustion was significantly predicted by female sex (β effect size = -0.1), high perceived emotional demands (β = 0.19), as well as low self-compassion (β = -0.14) and low emotional competence (β = 0.09). Disengagement was significantly predicted by low seniority (β = -0.12) and limited opportunities for development (β = -0.16). Both exhaustion and disengagement were predicted by low perceived quality of work (β = -0.19 and -0.14, respectively), meaning of work (β = -0.17 and -0.31, respectively), and role clarity (β = 0.09 and 0.12, respectively), as well as high perceived work-life conflict (β = 0.46 and 0.21, respectively). Moreover, GPs working in a multidisciplinary group reported lower levels of exhaustion and disengagement than those working in a monodisciplinary group or a solo practice, and this difference was associated with factors such as work-life conflict.

Conclusion: Organisational, interpersonal, and intrapersonal factors interact to predict a substantial part of burnout in general practice. The most significant risk factors were perceived work-life conflict and poor meaning of work. Policymakers should work to support more sustainable practices based on the specific needs and constraints reported by GPs.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BJGP Open
BJGP Open Medicine-Family Practice
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
181
审稿时长
22 weeks
期刊最新文献
General practice characteristics associated with pay-for-performance in the UK: a systematic review. How do GPs communicate the urgent suspected cancer referral pathway to patients? A qualitative study of GP-patient consultations. Could a behaviour change intervention be used to address under-recognition of work-related asthma in primary care? A systematic review. Editorial: Global health inequity and primary care. Clinical decision making and risk appraisal using electronic risk assessment tools (eRATs) for cancer diagnosis: A qualitative study of GP experiences.
×
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