Next Article in Journal
Estrogen and Progesterone Receptor Immunoexpression in Fallopian Tubes among Postmenopausal Women Based on Time since the Last Menstrual Period
Next Article in Special Issue
New Avenues for Prevention of Work-Related Diseases Linked to Psychosocial Risks
Previous Article in Journal
Determining Validity of Critical Power Estimated Using a Three-Minute All-Out Test in Hot Environments
Previous Article in Special Issue
Supporting Occupational Physicians in the Implementation of Workers’ Health Surveillance: Development of an Intervention Using the Behavior Change Wheel Framework
Systematic Review

Predictors of Occupational Burnout: A Systematic Review

1
Center of Primary Care and Public Health (Unisanté), University of Lausanne, 1066 Epalinges-Lausanne, Switzerland
2
Institute of Work and Organizational Psychology, University of Neuchâtel, 2000 Neuchâtel, Switzerland
3
National Institute of Occupational Health (STAMI), 0363 Oslo, Norway
4
Department of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, Kocaeli University, İzmit 41001, Turkey
5
Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy, Nicolae Testemitanu State University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 2004 Chisinau, Moldova
6
Department of Public Health, Experimental and Forensic Medicine, University of Pavia, 27100 Pavia, Italy
7
Department of Primary Care and Public Health, University of Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium
8
Institute of Public Health, Hacettepe University, Ankara 06800, Turkey
9
Institute of Occupational Medicine, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9WU, UK
10
Institute of Occupational Health of RNM, WHO Collaborating Center, 1000 Skopje, North Macedonia
11
Faculty of Medicine, Ss. Cyril and Methodius, University in Skopje, 1000 Skopje, North Macedonia
12
Center for Occupational Diseases, Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands
13
Medical School, Democritus University of Thrace, 68100 Alexandroupolis, Greece
14
Clinical Department 5, Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 020021 Bucharest, Romania
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editor: Paul B. Tchounwou
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18(17), 9188; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18179188
Received: 3 August 2021 / Revised: 25 August 2021 / Accepted: 26 August 2021 / Published: 31 August 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Etiology and Preventive Measures to Reduce Work Related Diseases)
We aimed to review occupational burnout predictors, considering their type, effect size and role (protective versus harmful), and the overall evidence of their importance. MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Embase were searched from January 1990 to August 2018 for longitudinal studies examining any predictor of occupational burnout among workers. We arranged predictors in four families and 13 subfamilies of homogenous constructs. The plots of z-scores per predictor type enabled graphical discrimination of the effects. The vote-counting and binomial test enabled discrimination of the effect direction. The size of the effect was estimated using Cohen’s formula. The risk of bias and the overall evidence were assessed using the MEVORECH and GRADE methods, respectively. Eighty-five studies examining 261 predictors were included. We found a moderate quality of evidence for the harmful effects of the job demands subfamily (six predictors), and negative job attitudes, with effect sizes from small to medium. We also found a moderate quality of evidence for the protective effect of adaptive coping (small effect sizes) and leisure (small to medium effect sizes). Preventive interventions for occupational burnout might benefit from intervening on the established predictors regarding reducing job demands and negative job attitudes and promoting adaptive coping and leisure. View Full-Text
Keywords: burnout; etiology; exhaustion; occupational health; prevention burnout; etiology; exhaustion; occupational health; prevention
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Shoman, Y.; El May, E.; Marca, S.C.; Wild, P.; Bianchi, R.; Bugge, M.D.; Caglayan, C.; Cheptea, D.; Gnesi, M.; Godderis, L.; Kiran, S.; McElvenny, D.M.; Mediouni, Z.; Mehlum, I.S.; Mijakoski, D.; Minov, J.; van der Molen, H.F.; Nena, E.; Otelea, M.; Guseva Canu, I. Predictors of Occupational Burnout: A Systematic Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 9188. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18179188

AMA Style

Shoman Y, El May E, Marca SC, Wild P, Bianchi R, Bugge MD, Caglayan C, Cheptea D, Gnesi M, Godderis L, Kiran S, McElvenny DM, Mediouni Z, Mehlum IS, Mijakoski D, Minov J, van der Molen HF, Nena E, Otelea M, Guseva Canu I. Predictors of Occupational Burnout: A Systematic Review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021; 18(17):9188. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18179188

Chicago/Turabian Style

Shoman, Yara, Emna El May, Sandy C. Marca, Pascal Wild, Renzo Bianchi, Merete D. Bugge, Cigdem Caglayan, Dimitru Cheptea, Marco Gnesi, Lode Godderis, Sibel Kiran, Damien M. McElvenny, Zakia Mediouni, Ingrid S. Mehlum, Dragan Mijakoski, Jordan Minov, Henk F. van der Molen, Evangelia Nena, Marina Otelea, and Irina Guseva Canu. 2021. "Predictors of Occupational Burnout: A Systematic Review" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18, no. 17: 9188. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18179188

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop