Dataset Information

Factors Associated With Burnout and Stress in Trainee Physicians: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Evidence suggests that physicians experience high levels of burnout and stress and that trainee physicians are a particularly high-risk group. Multiple workplace- and non-workplace-related factors have been identified in trainee physicians, but it is unclear which factors are most important in association with burnout and stress. Better understanding of the most critical factors could help inform the development of targeted interventions to reduce burnout and stress.

Objective

To estimate the association between different stressors and burnout/stress among physicians engaged in standard postgraduate training (ie, trainee physicians).

Data sources

Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Database of Systematic reviews from inception until April 30, 2019. Search terms included trainee, foundation year, registrar, resident, and intern.

Study selection

Studies that reported associations between stressors and burnout/stress in trainee physicians.

Data extraction and synthesis

Two independent reviewers extracted the data and assessed the quality of the evidence. The main meta-analysis was followed by sensitivity analyses. All analyses were performed using random-effects models, and heterogeneity was quantified using the I2 statistic.

Main outcome and measures

The main outcome was the association between burnout/stress and workplace- or non-workplace-related factors reported as odds ratios (ORs) and their 95% CIs.

Results

Forty-eight studies were included in the meta-analysis (n = 36 266, median age, 29 years [range, 24.6-35.7 years]). One study did not specify participants' sex; of the total population, 18 781 participants (52%) were men. In particular, work demands of a trainee physician were associated with a nearly 3-fold increased odds for burnout/stress (OR, 2.84; 95% CI, 2.26-3.59), followed by concerns about patient care (OR, 2.35; 95% CI, 1.58-3.50), poor work environment (OR, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.57-2.70), and poor work-life balance (OR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.53-2.44). Perceived/reported poor mental or physical health (OR, 2.41; 95% CI, 1.76-3.31), female sex (OR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.20-1.50), financial worries (OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.07-1.72), and low self-efficacy (OR, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.31-3.46) were associated with increased odds for burnout/stress, whereas younger age and a more junior grade were not significantly associated.

Conclusions and relevance

The findings of this study suggest that the odds ratios for burnout and stress in trainee physicians are higher than those for work-related factors compared with nonmodifiable and non-work-related factors, such as age and grade. These findings support the need for organizational interventions to mitigate burnout in trainee physicians.

SUBMITTER: Zhou AY

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7435345 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Physicians often suffer from burnout and stress, not only affecting themselves, but also their patients and the healthcare system in general. An increasing number of studies suggest that mindfulness-based interventions improve physicians' well-being as well as the quality of care they deliver. However, the evidence is scattered, and a systematic review and meta-analysis is lacking. To the best of our knowledge, this systematic review and meta-analysis will be the first to assess the effectiveness of mindfulness-based interventions in reducing burnout and stress among physicians. Further, it aims to uncover potential moderators of intervention effectiveness. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, PSYINDEX, Web of Science, CINAHL and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials will be screened without language or publication date restrictions. In addition, backward and forward citation searches of included studies and relevant reviews will be conducted. Studies examining the effect of interventions for physicians explicitly based on mindfulness will be included. Primary outcomes will be pre-post changes in burnout and stress if assessed with validated measures. Two reviewers independently search, select and extract data, and rate the methodological quality of the studies. Both controlled and uncontrolled studies will be included. Randomised controlled trails will be meta-analysed separately using between-group effect. In addition, non-randomised trials including non-controlled before-after studies will be meta-analysed using within-group effect. Potential moderators and sources of between-study heterogeneity will be tested using meta-regression and subgroup analyses. Futhermore, a narrative synthesis will be pursued. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system (GRADE) will be used to assess the quality of the cumulated evidence. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:Ethical approval is not required. Results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at international conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42019133077.

Project description:PurposeThe prevalence of burnout in intensive care unit (ICU) professionals is difficult to establish due to the variety of survey instruments used, the heterogeneity of the targeted population, the design of the studies, and the differences among countries regarding ICU organization.MethodsWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis examining the prevalence of high-level burnout in physicians and nurses working in adult ICUs, including only studies that use the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) as a tool to evaluate burnout and involving at least 3 different ICUs.ResultsTwenty-five studies with a combined population of 20,723 healthcare workers from adult ICUs satisfied the inclusion criteria. Combining 18 studies including 8187 ICU physicians, 3660 of them reported a high level of burnout (prevalence 0.41, range 0.15-0.71, 95% CI [0.33; 0.5], I2 97.6%, 95% CI [96.9%; 98.1%]). The heterogeneity can be at least in part explained by the definition of burnout used and the response rate as confirmed by the multivariable metaregression done. In contrast, there was no significant difference regarding other factors such as the study period (before or during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic), the income of the countries, or the Healthcare Access and Quality (HAQ) index. Combining 20 studies including 12,536 ICU nurses, 6232 of nurses were reporting burnout (prevalence 0.44, range 0.14-0.74, [95% CI 0.34; 0.55], I2 98.6% 95% CI [98.4%; 98.9%]). The prevalence of high-level burnout in ICU nurses for studies performed during the COVID-19 pandemic was higher than that reported for studies performed before the COVID-19 pandemic (0.61 [95% CI, 0.46; 0.75] and 0.37 [95% CI, 0.26; 0.49] respectively, p = 0.003). As for physicians, the heterogeneity is at least in part explained by the definition used for burnout using the MBI but not by the number of participants. When compared, the prevalence of high-level burnout was not different between ICU physicians and ICU nurses. However, the proportion of ICU nurses with a high level of emotional exhaustion was higher than for ICU physicians (0.42 [95% CI, 0.37; 0.48] and 0.28 [0.2; 0.39], respectively, p = 0.022).ConclusionAccording to this meta-analysis, the prevalence of high-level burnout is higher than 40% in all ICU professionals. However, there is a great heterogeneity in the results. To evaluate and to compare preventive and therapeutic strategies, there is the need to use a consensual definition of burnout when using the MBI instrument.

Project description:ImportanceBurnout is a self-reported job-related syndrome increasingly recognized as a critical factor affecting physicians and their patients. An accurate estimate of burnout prevalence among physicians would have important health policy implications, but the overall prevalence is unknown.ObjectiveTo characterize the methods used to assess burnout and provide an estimate of the prevalence of physician burnout.Data sources and study selectionSystematic search of EMBASE, ERIC, MEDLINE/PubMed, psycARTICLES, and psycINFO for studies on the prevalence of burnout in practicing physicians (ie, excluding physicians in training) published before June 1, 2018.Data extraction and synthesisBurnout prevalence and study characteristics were extracted independently by 3 investigators. Although meta-analytic pooling was planned, variation in study designs and burnout ascertainment methods, as well as statistical heterogeneity, made quantitative pooling inappropriate. Therefore, studies were summarized descriptively and assessed qualitatively.Main outcomes and measuresPoint or period prevalence of burnout assessed by questionnaire.ResultsBurnout prevalence data were extracted from 182 studies involving 109 628 individuals in 45 countries published between 1991 and 2018. In all, 85.7% (156/182) of studies used a version of the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) to assess burnout. Studies variably reported prevalence estimates of overall burnout or burnout subcomponents: 67.0% (122/182) on overall burnout, 72.0% (131/182) on emotional exhaustion, 68.1% (124/182) on depersonalization, and 63.2% (115/182) on low personal accomplishment. Studies used at least 142 unique definitions for meeting overall burnout or burnout subscale criteria, indicating substantial disagreement in the literature on what constituted burnout. Studies variably defined burnout based on predefined cutoff scores or sample quantiles and used markedly different cutoff definitions. Among studies using instruments based on the MBI, there were at least 47 distinct definitions of overall burnout prevalence and 29, 26, and 26 definitions of emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and low personal accomplishment prevalence, respectively. Overall burnout prevalence ranged from 0% to 80.5%. Emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and low personal accomplishment prevalence ranged from 0% to 86.2%, 0% to 89.9%, and 0% to 87.1%, respectively. Because of inconsistencies in definitions of and assessment methods for burnout across studies, associations between burnout and sex, age, geography, time, specialty, and depressive symptoms could not be reliably determined.Conclusions and relevanceIn this systematic review, there was substantial variability in prevalence estimates of burnout among practicing physicians and marked variation in burnout definitions, assessment methods, and study quality. These findings preclude definitive conclusions about the prevalence of burnout and highlight the importance of developing a consensus definition of burnout and of standardizing measurement tools to assess the effects of chronic occupational stress on physicians.

Project description:ObjectiveThis systematic review and meta-analysis aims to explore overall prevalence of burnout among physicians during early and late COVID-19 pandemic and geographical differences in burnout.MethodsThis review was registered prospectively with PROSPERO (CRD42022327959). A comprehensive search of several databases, including Ovid MEDLINE(R) and Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations and Daily, Ovid Embase, Ovid Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, PsycINFO, and Scopus, spanning from December 2019 to May 2022 was conducted. Eligible studies included physicians or medical professionals including physicians that worked directly or indirectly with COVID-19 patients, whilst reporting burnout outcomes using a validated scale. Literature that did not include physicians or did not occur in a hospital setting were excluded. Literature including medical students were also excluded.ResultsForty-five observational studies were included, all of which were cross-sectional studies. The pooled estimate of overall prevalence of burnout was 54.60% (95% CI: 46.7, 62.2). Mean emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and personal accomplishment was found to be 22.06% (95% CI: 18.19, 25.94), 8.72 (95% CI: 6.48, 10.95) and 31.18 (95% CI: 27.33, 35.03) respectively. Frontline workers displayed higher rates of burnout than second-line healthcare workers (HCW) (OR: 1.64, 95% CI: 1.13, 2.37). Studies from the early pandemic period reported burnout prevalence of 60.7% (95% CI: 48.2, 72) compared to a prevalence of 49.3% (95% CI: 37.7, 60.9) from the late pandemic period. Geographically, burnout was highest amongst Middle East and North Africa (MENA) studies (66.6%, 95% CI: 54.7, 78.5), followed by Europe (48.8%, 95% CI: 40.3, 57.3) and then South America (42%, 95% CI: -0.4, 84.4). Lastly, burnout prevalence overall (OR = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.36, 1.67) emotional exhaustion (MD = -0.36, 95% CI: -4.64, 3.91), depersonalization (MD = -0.31, 95% CI: -1.80, 1.18), and personal accomplishment (MD = 0.55, 95% CI: -0.73, 1.83) were found comparable between physicians and nurses.ConclusionCOVID-19 has had significant consequences on HCW burnout. Further research is needed to examine early signs of burnout and to develop effective coping strategies.