MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3212968063 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1065169/v1

Trends in Burnout and Psychological Distress in Hospital Staff Over 12 Months of The COVID-19 Pandemic: A Prospective Longitudinal Survey

2021· preprint· en· W3212968063 on OpenAlexafffund
Robert Maunder, Natalie D. Heeney, Jonathan Hunter, Gillian Strudwick, Lianne Jeffs, Leanne Ginty, Jennie Johnstone, Alex Kiss, Carla Loftus, Lesley Wiesenfeld

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
Canadian institutionsLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthSinai Health SystemSunnybrook Health Science CentreHealth Canada
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsBurnoutEmotional exhaustionOccupational burnoutMedicineDistressLongitudinal studyMental healthPandemicProspective cohort studyEmotional distressDemographyHealth careCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Cohort studyPsychologyClinical psychologyPsychiatryAnxietyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background . The mental health effects of healthcare work during the COVID-19 pandemic have been substantial, but it is not known how long they will persist. This study aimed to determine if hospital workers’ burnout and psychological distress increased monotonically over one year, during which waves of case numbers and hospitalizations waxed and waned, or followed some other pattern. Methods . A prospective longitudinal survey was conducted at four time-points over one year in a cohort of 538 hospital workers and learners, which included validated measures of burnout (emotional exhaustion scale of Maslach Burnout Inventory) and psychological distress (K6). Repeated measures ANOVA tested changes over time and differences between subjects by occupational role and age. The direction and magnitude of changes over time were investigated by plotting rates of high scores (using cut-offs) at each time-point compared to case rates of COVID-19 in the city in which the study took place. Results . There were significant changes in emotional exhaustion over time (F = 4.6, p = .004) and significant effects of occupational role (F = 11.4, p < .001) and age (F = 12.3, p < .001). The rate of high burnout was highest in nurses, followed by other healthcare professionals, other clinical staff, and lowest in non-clinical staff. Peak rates of high burnout occurred at the second or third measurement point for each occupational group, with lower rates at the fourth measurement point. Similarly to the results for emotional exhaustion, rates of high psychological distress peaked at the winter 2021 or spring 2021 measurement point in each occupational group and were highest in nurses. Conclusions. Neither emotional exhaustion nor psychological distress was rising monotonically. Burnout and psychological distress were consistently related to occupational role and were highest in nurses. Although emotional exhaustion improved as the case rate of COVID-19 decreased, rates of high emotional exhaustion in nurses and other healthcare professionals remained higher than was typically measured in hospital-based healthcare workers prior to the pandemic. Ongoing monitoring of healthcare workers’ mental health is warranted. Organizational and individual interventions to support healthcare workers continue to be important.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.108
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.265
GPT teacher head0.558
Teacher spread0.293 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch SquareSame topicHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnoutFrench-language works237,207