Occupational Risk Factors for Burnout Syndrome Among Healthcare Professionals: A Global Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
2024

Occupational Risk Factors for Burnout Syndrome Among Healthcare Professionals

Sample size: 109 publication Evidence: high

Author Information

Author(s): Sohrab Amiri, Nailah Mahmood, Mustafa Halla, Syed Fahad Javaid, Moien AB Khan

Primary Institution: Baqiyatallah University of Medical Sciences, Lancaster University, United Arab Emirates University

Hypothesis

This study aims to systematically review and meta-analyze thirteen occupational risk factors related to burnout syndrome among health professionals globally.

Conclusion

The study found that workplace bullying, job stress, and low job satisfaction are significant risk factors for burnout syndrome among healthcare professionals.

Supporting Evidence

  • Workplace bullying was strongly associated with increased burnout (OR 4.05–15.01, p < 0.001).
  • Low job satisfaction and high job stress were also strongly associated with burnout, with ORs of 5.05 (95% CI 3.88–6.56, p < 0.001) and 4.21 (95% CI 1.62–10.94, p = 0.003), respectively.
  • All risk factors examined showed a significant positive relationship with burnout incidence.

Takeaway

Healthcare workers often feel very tired and stressed because of their jobs, especially when they face bullying or have too much work.

Methodology

A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted, including a comprehensive literature search and assessment of occupational risk factors related to burnout.

Potential Biases

The study assessed the risk of bias using the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool.

Limitations

The study's results may have been influenced by the heterogeneity in the results of most of the studies included, and causal relationships cannot be drawn due to the cross-sectional nature of many studies.

Participant Demographics

The population studied included healthcare professionals aged 18 years and older, primarily consisting of nurses and physicians.

Statistical Information

P-Value

p<0.001

Confidence Interval

95% CI 3.88–6.56

Statistical Significance

p<0.001

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.3390/ijerph21121583

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication