Burnout has been recognized as a serious health problem. In Portugal, before COVID-19 Pandemic, there were strong indicators of high prevalence of burnout in physicians and nurses. However, the Portuguese Health Care Service was able to efficiently respond to the increased demands. This study intends to understand how psychosocial variables might have been protective factors for burnout in physicians and nurses in Portugal. Specifically, we considered several psychosocial variables that have been found to be protective factors for burnout in previous research and we compared their predictive and unique impact in the prediction of burnout. These variables are perceptions of justice (distributive, procedural, justice from colleagues, justice from patients, and their families), professional identification, meaningful work and empathy. We also included workload, as a risk factor, and controlled other variables that can be confounds for burnout, such as socio-demographic variables, ideological variables (religiosity, political orientation), and specific variables related with COVID-19 pandemic. The sample of the present study is composed by 229 physicians (aged between 23 and 70 years old, M = 36.54; SD = 10.72; 48% male and 52% female) and 268 nurses (aged between 22 and 69 years old, M = 34.96; SD = 9.52; 27% male and 73% female). An online survey was created using Qualtrics and participants were recruited via Facebook and LinkedIn. The data were collected during 29 days (between the 45th and the 74th days after the first diagnosed case of COVID-19 in Portugal). The results showed that workload was a significant risk factor, except for disengagement in physicians. The most consistent protectors across samples were procedural justice (for both dimensions of burnout, both in physicians and nurses) and professional identification (for disengagement, both in physicians and nurses; for exhaustion only in physicians). This study suggests that decreasing workload and promoting procedural justice and professional identification are key factors that might be simultaneously and independently addressed in interventions for reducing the risk of burnout or preventing it from occurring in the first place.
This study aims to identify the determinants of burnout in police officers. We considered a wide range of psychosocial risk factors, individual variables that have been previously found to be associated with burnout in police officers (affective and cognitive empathy, self-care), and variables whose unique impact on burnout of police officers needs further clarification (organizational justice and organizational identification). The study was conducted in Portugal, and the sample was constituted by 573 members of the National Republican Guard (GNR—Guarda Nacional Republicana). The participants were invited to answer an online anonymous survey, which included previously validated measures of the following variables: burnout (exhaustion and disengagement), psychosocial risk factors, self-care, empathy (cognitive and affective), organizational justice, and organizational identification. Furthermore, we controlled for the potential impact of demographic variables (age, gender, years of professional experience, religiosity, political orientation, and income). Multiple regression analysis showed that when taken together, only a few of the variables associated with burnout had a unique impact on both exhaustion and disengagement: quantitative demands and affective empathy were burnout risk factors; meaningful work, organizational justice (distributive justice, procedural justice, and interactional justice), and organizational identification were burnout protective factors. Our results highlight the importance of developing theoretical models and planning interventions to prevent burnout in police officers, focusing mainly on the above-mentioned variables.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
334 Leonard St
Brooklyn, NY 11211
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.