急诊医学哥本哈根倦怠调查表缩写本的前瞻性有效性证据。

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q1 EMERGENCY MEDICINE Academic Emergency Medicine Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-17 DOI:10.1111/acem.14892
Earl J Reisdorff, Mary M Johnston, Michelle D Lall, Dave W Lu, Karl Y Bilimoria, Melissa A Barton
{"title":"急诊医学哥本哈根倦怠调查表缩写本的前瞻性有效性证据。","authors":"Earl J Reisdorff, Mary M Johnston, Michelle D Lall, Dave W Lu, Karl Y Bilimoria, Melissa A Barton","doi":"10.1111/acem.14892","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Prior research has provided retrospective validity evidence for an abbreviated Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI) to measure burnout among emergency medicine (EM) residents. We sought to provide additional validity and reliability evidence for the two-factor, six-item abbreviated CBI.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cross-sectional study used data from the abbreviated CBI that was administered following the 2022 American Board of Emergency Medicine In-training Examination. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed and the prevalence of burnout among EM residents was determined.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 8918 eligible residents, 7465 (83.7%) completed the abbreviated CBI. CFA confirmed the previously developed model of two factors using six items answered with a 1- to 5-point Likert scale. The internal factor was derived from personal and work-related burnout and the external factor was related to caring for patients. The reliability was determined using Cronbach's alpha (0.87). The overall prevalence of burnout was 49.4%; the lowest prevalence was at the EM1 level (43.1%) and the highest was at the EM2 level (53.8%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>CFA of the abbreviated CBI demonstrated good reliability and model fit. The two-factor, six-item survey instrument identified an increase in the prevalence of burnout among EM residents that coincided with working in the COVID-19 environment. The abbreviated CBI has sufficient reliability and validity evidence to encourage its broader use.</p>","PeriodicalId":7105,"journal":{"name":"Academic Emergency Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"782-788"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prospective validity evidence for the abbreviated emergency medicine Copenhagen Burnout Inventory.\",\"authors\":\"Earl J Reisdorff, Mary M Johnston, Michelle D Lall, Dave W Lu, Karl Y Bilimoria, Melissa A Barton\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/acem.14892\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Prior research has provided retrospective validity evidence for an abbreviated Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI) to measure burnout among emergency medicine (EM) residents. We sought to provide additional validity and reliability evidence for the two-factor, six-item abbreviated CBI.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cross-sectional study used data from the abbreviated CBI that was administered following the 2022 American Board of Emergency Medicine In-training Examination. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed and the prevalence of burnout among EM residents was determined.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 8918 eligible residents, 7465 (83.7%) completed the abbreviated CBI. CFA confirmed the previously developed model of two factors using six items answered with a 1- to 5-point Likert scale. The internal factor was derived from personal and work-related burnout and the external factor was related to caring for patients. The reliability was determined using Cronbach's alpha (0.87). The overall prevalence of burnout was 49.4%; the lowest prevalence was at the EM1 level (43.1%) and the highest was at the EM2 level (53.8%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>CFA of the abbreviated CBI demonstrated good reliability and model fit. The two-factor, six-item survey instrument identified an increase in the prevalence of burnout among EM residents that coincided with working in the COVID-19 environment. The abbreviated CBI has sufficient reliability and validity evidence to encourage its broader use.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7105,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Academic Emergency Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"782-788\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Academic Emergency Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/acem.14892\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/3/17 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EMERGENCY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Academic Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/acem.14892","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:先前的研究为哥本哈根倦怠量表(CBI)测量急诊医学(EM)住院医生的倦怠感提供了回顾性的有效性证据。我们试图为这一双因素、六项目的简略哥本哈根倦怠量表提供更多的有效性和可靠性证据:这项横断面研究使用了 2022 年美国急诊医学委员会在岗培训考试后进行的缩写 CBI 数据。结果:在8918名符合条件的住院医师中,74%的住院医师有职业倦怠:在 8918 名符合条件的住院医师中,有 7465 人(83.7%)完成了简略 CBI。CFA证实了之前开发的两个因子模型,该模型由6个项目组成,采用1-5点李克特量表。内部因子来自个人和工作相关的职业倦怠,外部因子则与护理病人有关。信度采用 Cronbach's alpha(0.87)进行测定。职业倦怠的总体发生率为 49.4%;发生率最低的是 EM1 级(43.1%),最高的是 EM2 级(53.8%):结论:缩写 CBI 的 CFA 显示了良好的可靠性和模型拟合度。双因素、六项目调查工具发现,在COVID-19环境中工作的急诊科住院医师倦怠感增加。缩写 CBI 有足够的可靠性和有效性证据来鼓励更广泛地使用。
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
Prospective validity evidence for the abbreviated emergency medicine Copenhagen Burnout Inventory.

Background: Prior research has provided retrospective validity evidence for an abbreviated Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI) to measure burnout among emergency medicine (EM) residents. We sought to provide additional validity and reliability evidence for the two-factor, six-item abbreviated CBI.

Methods: This cross-sectional study used data from the abbreviated CBI that was administered following the 2022 American Board of Emergency Medicine In-training Examination. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed and the prevalence of burnout among EM residents was determined.

Results: Of the 8918 eligible residents, 7465 (83.7%) completed the abbreviated CBI. CFA confirmed the previously developed model of two factors using six items answered with a 1- to 5-point Likert scale. The internal factor was derived from personal and work-related burnout and the external factor was related to caring for patients. The reliability was determined using Cronbach's alpha (0.87). The overall prevalence of burnout was 49.4%; the lowest prevalence was at the EM1 level (43.1%) and the highest was at the EM2 level (53.8%).

Conclusions: CFA of the abbreviated CBI demonstrated good reliability and model fit. The two-factor, six-item survey instrument identified an increase in the prevalence of burnout among EM residents that coincided with working in the COVID-19 environment. The abbreviated CBI has sufficient reliability and validity evidence to encourage its broader use.

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
Academic Emergency Medicine
Academic Emergency Medicine 医学-急救医学
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
6.80%
发文量
207
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Academic Emergency Medicine (AEM) is the official monthly publication of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM) and publishes information relevant to the practice, educational advancements, and investigation of emergency medicine. It is the second-largest peer-reviewed scientific journal in the specialty of emergency medicine. The goal of AEM is to advance the science, education, and clinical practice of emergency medicine, to serve as a voice for the academic emergency medicine community, and to promote SAEM''s goals and objectives. Members and non-members worldwide depend on this journal for translational medicine relevant to emergency medicine, as well as for clinical news, case studies and more. Each issue contains information relevant to the research, educational advancements, and practice in emergency medicine. Subject matter is diverse, including preclinical studies, clinical topics, health policy, and educational methods. The research of SAEM members contributes significantly to the scientific content and development of the journal.
期刊最新文献
Can first impressions predict patient outcomes? Epidemiology of sepsis presentations and management among United States emergency departments from 2016 to 2023. Ruling out pulmonary embolism safely: Standardized reporting of the failure rate. Opening invisible wounds. Failure rate of the pulmonary embolism rule-out criteria rule for adults 35 years or younger: Findings from the RIETE Registry.
×
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