Work Engagement and Compassion Fatigue Among Nursing Professionals During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross-Sectional and Single-Center Study Using the ProQOL-BR and UWES-9 Scales

Abstract

Objectives: This study investigated levels of work engagement and the occurrence of compassion fatigue among nursing professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: A cross-sectional, descriptive, and correlational study was conducted at a Brazilian university hospital between February and April 2022. The Brazilian versions of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES-9) and the Professional Quality of Life Scale (ProQOL-BR) were administered. Results: High levels of compassion satisfaction (44.9 points), low levels of burnout (21.0 points), and low levels of secondary traumatic stress (22.8 points) were observed. No professional demonstrated a profile consistent with compassion fatigue. Engagement levels were high for dedication (5.3) and moderate for vigor (4.9), absorption (4.5), and overall engagement (4.9). Burnout showed moderate negative correlations with vigor (r = −0.611, p = 0.005) and dedication (r = −0.599, p = 0.019). Compassion satisfaction showed moderate positive correlations with vigor (r = 0.522, p < 0.001) and dedication (r = 0.572, p < 0.001). The overall engagement score was moderately and positively correlated with compassion satisfaction (r = 0.532, p < 0.001). Conclusions: This study identified high levels of work engagement, especially regarding dedication, and low levels of compassion fatigue among nursing professionals. The data suggest that even amid the emotional and physical demands imposed by the pandemic, participants preserved their emotional well-being and maintained a positive relationship with their work.

1. Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, posed numerous challenges to public health and exposed the vulnerability of healthcare systems in responding to emergencies. In addition to the severity of the disease, the pandemic raised concerns about mental health, particularly among frontline professionals [1,2].

Nurses and other healthcare workers were at high risk of COVID-19 infection due to their direct care of patients and the performance of invasive procedures such as biological specimen collection, intubation, and bronchoscopy [3]. According to the Federal Nursing Council (Cofen), Brazil recorded the highest number of nurse deaths due to complications from COVID-19 [4].

The removal of infected professionals further burdened healthcare teams, increasing the physical and emotional strain on those who remained and placing them at continued risk of infection. This overload and constant threat contributed to fear, anxiety, and emotional distress, which may have led to the onset of compassion fatigue [3,5].

This syndrome—a negative dimension of professional quality of life—is characterized by work-related suffering that may lead to physical and psychological illness. Compassion fatigue includes symptoms such as exhaustion, frustration, anger, and depression, along with secondary traumatic stress, an adverse emotional response linked to fear and trauma experienced in the workplace [6].

It can arise when healthcare professionals are no longer able to manage patients’ suffering in a healthy manner, potentially developing somatic and emotional symptoms in response to their occupational environment [6]. These conditions are believed to have been exacerbated during the pandemic due to the intense physical and emotional demands placed on nursing staff [7].

Conversely, work engagement is associated with a positive and productive psychological state related to professional activity. It is characterized by dedication (motivation), absorption (deep concentration), and vigor (energy and resilience) [8,9]. Engagement is influenced by organizational factors such as leadership, availability of resources, and job demands. Within the pandemic context, nurses faced stressful conditions that could both positively and negatively affect their performance [8,10].

Work engagement may serve as a protective factor against psychological distress, mitigating the impact of adverse working conditions. Professionals with high levels of engagement tend to experience less moral distress, defined as the psychological discomfort resulting from being unable to act in accordance with one’s ethical and professional values, thereby reducing emotional suffering related to moral conflict and unmet goals [8,9,10].

A recent study with Brazilian nurses found that occupational stress and compassion fatigue were negatively associated with work engagement, particularly affecting the dimensions of dedication and vigor [11]. These findings highlight the importance of addressing psychosocial risks in hospital environments.

The theoretical framework of this study is based on the Job Demands–Resources (JD-R) model, which posits that burnout results from an imbalance between job demands (e.g., workload, emotional strain) and the resources available to manage them (e.g., autonomy, support, recognition). When sufficient, these resources not only prevent burnout but also enhance engagement. Additionally, the Professional Quality of Life (ProQOL) model [12] conceptualizes compassion satisfaction and fatigue as outcomes of caregiving roles, enabling a multidimensional understanding of both the positive and negative aspects of helping professions.

Based on these theoretical models, this study tested the following hypotheses: (1) higher levels of compassion satisfaction would be positively associated with higher levels of work engagement; (2) higher levels of burnout and secondary traumatic stress would be negatively associated with work engagement; and (3) longer professional experience would be associated with lower levels of compassion fatigue.

This study investigated levels of work engagement and the occurrence of compassion fatigue among nursing professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic.

2. Materials and Methods

This cross-sectional, descriptive, and correlational study is part of the macroproject entitled “Compassion fatigue, work engagement, occupational stress, and musculoskeletal symptoms among nursing professionals in university hospitals.” It was conducted between February and April 2022 with nursing professionals working in the COVID-19 ward and in the emergency and urgent care units of the University Hospital of the Federal University of Rio Grande (FURG), located in Rio Grande, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil.

The hospital is a state reference center for several medical specialties, including maternal and child health and infectious diseases. During the COVID-19 pandemic, its emergency department was restructured into two areas: a COVID-19 ward, with an exclusive entrance for patients with respiratory symptoms, and a non-COVID-19 ward. The COVID-19 ward provided care for patients requiring intermediate and semi-intensive care. Additionally, the surgical clinic unit was converted into a COVID-19 ward, receiving patients from both the university hospital and Santa Casa de Misericórdia in Rio Grande. Across both wards, 18 intermediate and semi-intensive care beds were made available.

The study population included nurses and nursing technicians/assistants working in these COVID-19 units, totaling 77 participants: 23 nurses (29.9%) and 54 nursing technicians/assistants (70.1%). Inclusion criteria were employment at the institution for at least two months—considered the average adaptation period to organizational routines [13]—and active work in the COVID-19 or emergency wards during the pandemic. We excluded temporary workers and those in high-risk groups who were transferred to other units after the onset of the pandemic (March 2020).

Temporary workers were excluded to enhance data consistency and ensure sample homogeneity in terms of organizational adaptation and institutional affiliation. Despite facing similar or greater pressures, temporary workers have distinct contractual characteristics, such as short-term employment and the transient nature of their roles, which could introduce confounding variables, especially in relation to work engagement, sense of belonging, and perceived organizational support.

Data were collected using three self-administered instruments: (1) a general questionnaire developed by the researchers to assess sociodemographic and professional variables; (2) the Brazilian version of the Professional Quality of Life Scale (ProQoL-BR) [14]; and (3) the Brazilian version of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES-9) [15,16].

The ProQoL-BR consists of 30 items on a five-point Likert scale measuring professional quality of life, particularly in relation to compassion-related experiences. Response options range from 0 (never) to 5 (almost always) [12]. The scale comprises three subscales of 10 items each: Compassion Satisfaction (items 3, 6, 12, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 27, 30), Burnout (items 1, 4, 8, 10, 15, 17, 19, 21, 26, 29), and Secondary Traumatic Stress (items 2, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 14, 23, 25, 28). Scores are calculated by summing item values, with reverse scoring applied to items 1, 4, 15, 17, and 29. Compassion fatigue results from the combination of high burnout and high secondary traumatic stress [12].

The UWES-9 is composed of nine items assessing work engagement across three dimensions: dedication, absorption, and vigor. Responses are scored on a seven-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (never) to 6 (always). Mean scores are calculated for each dimension [17]. Dedication reflects enthusiasm, inspiration, and pride in one’s work. Absorption measures immersion and involvement. Vigor refers to energy, resilience, and persistence. An overall engagement score is derived from the average of all items [15,16].

Data collection took place between February and April 2022, during the end of the third wave of the pandemic. This wave was marked by the emergence of highly transmissible variants (e.g., Delta), followed a brief period of stabilization, and was fueled by the early relaxation of public health measures, vaccine hesitancy, and overwhelmed healthcare systems [18,19].

The instruments were administered by a trained nurse with a master’s degree in nursing. Participants were approached in their workplaces, informed about the study, and provided written informed consent. They received printed questionnaires in unmarked envelopes, with instructions to complete them at a location of their choice. Participants had seven days to return the materials. If additional time was needed, they could schedule a return with the researcher. All responses were completed independently, without researcher intervention.

Data were analyzed using SPSS version 25.0. The Kolmogorov–Smirnov test was used to assess normality. Cronbach’s alpha coefficients ranged from 0.70 to 0.86, indicating good reliability. Sociodemographic and professional variables were used to characterize the sample.

ProQoL-BR subscale scores were calculated according to the ProQoL Manual [12]. Raw scores were converted to Z-scores and subsequently to T-scores using the formula T = (Z × 10) + 50, enabling standardized comparisons across subscales. Participants scoring at or above the 75th percentile on both the Burnout and Secondary Traumatic Stress subscales were classified as experiencing compassion fatigue.

Work engagement scores were calculated according to the UWES manual. Based on means and standard deviations, scores were classified as Very Low (0 to 0.99), Low (1 to 1.99), Medium (2 to 3.99), High (4 to 4.99), and Very High (5 to 6) [17].

Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) was used to examine associations between compassion fatigue and work engagement. The strength of the correlations was interpreted according to Cohen’s guidelines [20], where values between 0.10 and 0.29 are considered low, between 0.30 and 0.49 moderate, and 0.50 or higher high.

To examine the simultaneous effects of the dimensions of compassion fatigue on work engagement, multiple linear regression analyses were conducted using compassion satisfaction, burnout, and secondary traumatic stress as predictors. The total work engagement score was used as the dependent variable. Additional models were run separately for the three dimensions of engagement (Absorption, Dedication, and Vigor). A significance level of p < 0.05 was adopted. Cases with missing values in the variables included in the regression were listwise excluded.

3. Results

The study included 77 nursing professionals, of whom 23 (29.9%) were nurses and 54 (70.1%) were nursing technicians or assistants. The majority of participants were women (68.8%), predominantly aged between 36 and 50 years (45.5%). In terms of education, 66.2% had completed high school. Additionally, 58.4% were married or in a stable relationship, 75.3% held permanent positions, and 57.1% reported a family income between two and five minimum wages. Most professionals worked night shifts (53.2%), had no other paid employment (77.9%), did not engage in physical activity (58.4%), reported sleeping between six and eight hours per day (63.6%), had between 10 and 20 years of professional experience (62.3%), and had between two and 10 years of experience at the hospital (57.1%) (

Table 1. Sociodemographic and professional characteristics of nursing professionals.

Variables	n	%
Professional Category
Nurse	23	29.9
Nursing Assistant/Technician	54	70.1
Sex
Male	24	31.2
Female	53	68.8
Age Group * (years)
26–35 (professional formation)	18	23.4
36–50 (professional maturity)	35	45.5
51–60 (professional deceleration)	6	7.8
61 or older (retirement)	2	2.6
No response	16	20.8
Educational Level
High School	51	66.2
Higher Education (completed)	26	33.8
Marital Status
Married/Stable union	45	58.4
Single	23	29.9
Separated	6	7.8
Widowed	1	1.3
No response	2	2.6
Employment Type
Permanent/Public employee	58	75.3
Temporary/Contracted	19	24.7
Household Income (minimum wages)
Two to five	44	57.1
Six to ten	22	28.6
More than ten	8	10.4
No response	3	3.9
Work Shift
Morning	8	11.7
Afternoon	8	9.1
Night	41	53.2
Full-time Day	16	20.8
On-call	4	5.2
Has Other Paid Job
Yes	16	20.8
No	60	77.9
No response	1	1.3
Engages in Physical Activity
Yes	32	41.6
No	45	58.4
Daily Sleep Duration
Less than 6 hours	24	31.2
6 to 8 hours	49	63.6
More than 8 hours	4	5.2
Professional Experience
≤2 years	3	3.9
>2 to ≤10 years	26	33.8
>10 to ≤20 years	48	62.3
Length of Employment at the Hospital
≤2 years	19	24.7
>2 to ≤10 years	44	57.1
>10 to ≤20 years	14	18.2

* Age groups classified according to Machado et al. (2016) [21].

).

Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for the ProQOL-BR subscales were as follows: Compassion Satisfaction (0.854), Burnout (0.691), and Secondary Traumatic Stress (0.720).

The ProQOL-BR analysis revealed high levels of compassion satisfaction (mean = 44.9), while burnout (mean = 21.0) and secondary traumatic stress (mean = 22.8) levels were low (

Table 2. Analysis of ProQol-BR scale dimensions among nursing professionals.

ProQol-BR * Dimensions	Cronbach’s Alpha	Min	Max	Mean	Standard Deviation
Compassion Satisfaction	0.854	34.0	50.0	44.9	4.1
Burnout	0.691	14.0	28.0	21.0	4.2
Secondary Traumatic Stress	0.720	19.0	27.0	22.8	3.1

* ProQol-BR = Professional Quality of Life Scale—BR.

).

No participant exhibited a profile consistent with compassion fatigue, as there was no simultaneous occurrence of high scores in both burnout and secondary traumatic stress. According to the cut-off points, 28.6% of professionals demonstrated high compassion satisfaction, 26.0% exhibited high levels of burnout, and 23.4% presented high levels of secondary traumatic stress (

Table 3. Cutoff points and distribution of nursing professionals across ProQol-BR scale dimensions.

	Cut-off Points Percentiles (t Scores)			Classification Levels n (%)
	25	50	75	Low	Moderate	High
Compassion Satisfaction	40.4	52.5	59.7	21 (27.3)	34 (44.1)	22 (28.6)
Burnout	42.1	47.6	59.5	20 (26.0)	37 (48.0)	20 (26.0)
Secondary Traumatic Stress	39.0	50.5	58.7	18 (23.4)	41 (53.2)	18 (23.4)

Note. ProQol-BR = Professional Quality of Life Scale—BR.

).

The Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for the UWES-9 subscales were as follows: Vigor (0.774), Dedication (0.766), Absorption (0.711), and Total Score (0.797), indicating acceptable internal consistency.

Regarding work engagement, professionals demonstrated a high level of dedication (mean = 5.3), while vigor (mean = 4.9), absorption (mean = 4.5), and the overall score (mean = 4.9) indicated moderate levels (

Table 4. Levels of work engagement among nursing professionals.

Dimension	Cronbach’s Alpha	Min	Max	Median	Mean ± SD	95% CI	Interpretation
Vigor	0.774	2.7	6.0	5.0	4.9 ± 0.8	4.7–5.1	Moderate
Dedication	0.766	3.0	6.0	5.3	5.3 ± 0.7	5.1–5.4	High
Absorption	0.711	2.0	6.0	4.7	4.5 ± 0.9	4.3–4.8	Moderate
Overall Score	0.797	3.0	6.0	5.0	4.9 ± 0.1	4.7–5.1	Moderate

Note. Min: minimum, Max: maximum, SD: standard deviation, 95% CI: 95% confidence interval.

). These results suggest a good quality of professional involvement, particularly in terms of motivation, energy, and immersion in work activities.

Comparative analyses showed that professionals without other employment ties had significantly higher scores for vigor (p = 0.007) and absorption (p = 0.005) compared to those working double shifts. In addition, individuals who engaged in physical activity demonstrated higher levels of vigor (p = 0.043) than those who were sedentary. These findings suggest that factors related to work–life balance, such as reduced working hours and self-care practices, may influence engagement levels.

Compassion satisfaction was significantly higher among professionals with more work experience (p = 0.044). No other demographic or socioeconomic variables showed statistically significant associations with ProQOL-BR or UWES-9 scores.

The correlation analysis (

Table 5. Correlation analysis between the dimensions of the ProQol-BR scale and work engagement.

		Compassion Satisfaction	Burnout	Secondary Traumatic Stress	Vigor	Dedication	Overall Engagement
Burnout	r	−0.532 *
	p-value	0.023
Secondary Traumatic Stress	r	−0.192	0.331
	p-value	0.551	0.423
Vigor	r	0.522 **	−0.611 **	−0.439
	p-value	<0.001	0.005	0.134
Dedication	r	0.572 **	−0.599 **	0.019	0.656 **
	p-value	<0.001	0.007	0.951	<0.001
Absorption	r	0.351 **	−0.385	0.082	0.423 **	0.457 **	0.792
	p-value	0.004	0.104	0.790	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001
Overall Engagement	r	0.582 **	−0.678 **	−0.135	0.842 **	0.827 **
	p-value	<0.001	0.001	0.660	<0.001	<0.001

Pearson’s correlation coefficients (r). * Significant correlation at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). ** Significant correlation at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

) revealed meaningful associations between professional quality of life and work engagement. Compassion satisfaction demonstrated strong positive correlations with vigor (r = 0.522, p < 0.001) and dedication (r = 0.572, p < 0.001), indicating that professionals who experienced greater satisfaction with their work also reported higher engagement. Burnout was strongly and negatively correlated with vigor (r = −0.611, p = 0.005) and dedication (r = −0.599, p = 0.007), supporting the hypothesis that emotional exhaustion may reduce energy levels and professional motivation.

Compassion satisfaction also showed a strong positive correlation with the overall engagement score (r = 0.532, p < 0.001), whereas burnout presented a strong negative correlation with overall engagement (r = −0.678, p = 0.001). These findings suggest a potential inverse relationship between emotional exhaustion and work engagement in this population. The strength of these correlations highlights the protective role of compassion satisfaction against emotional exhaustion, suggesting that positive work-related feelings may help mitigate the negative effects of occupational stress.

In addition, the strong internal correlations among the UWES-9 dimensions—vigor, dedication, and absorption (r > 0.79)—reinforce the internal consistency of the engagement construct, as professionals who exhibited high energy also demonstrated high levels of involvement and concentration in their activities.

To further examine the influence of occupational stressors on work engagement, multiple linear regression analyses were conducted. The overall model, which included compassion satisfaction, burnout, and secondary traumatic stress as predictors of total work engagement, accounted for 41.6% of the variance (adjusted R² = 0.416), although it did not reach statistical significance (F (3,3) = 2.43, p = 0.243). Among the predictors, burnout had the strongest negative standardized coefficient, although it was not statistically significant (β = −0.840, p = 0.146).

Separate regression models for each dimension of engagement (Absorption, Dedication, and Vigor) yielded similarly high R² values, ranging from 0.57 to 0.79; however, none reached statistical significance, likely due to the limited sample size in the regression subset.

Although bivariate correlations demonstrated strong associations between burnout, compassion satisfaction, and work engagement, the multiple regression analyses revealed that none of these predictors were statistically significant when considered simultaneously. This may reflect multicollinearity or limited statistical power due to the small sample size. Notably, however, burnout continued to exhibit the strongest independent, though non-significant, negative effect on engagement.

4. Discussion

The profile of the nursing professionals in this study aligns with the broader Brazilian nursing workforce, predominantly composed of mid-level workers (technicians and assistants), women, and professionals in the maturity phase of their careers (ages 36–50) [5,21,22]. The presence of younger professionals (39% under 40 years old) was significant at that time, reflecting the Federal Nursing Council’s recommendation to reassign older or at-risk professionals to administrative roles [4].

Although younger professionals were prioritized for frontline COVID-19 care, newly graduated nurses faced challenges related to insecurity and expectations from both themselves and their teams, despite reporting high satisfaction with their roles during the pandemic [23]. Inexperienced staff in critical care settings are generally more susceptible to psychological disorders, including compassion fatigue [6]. Conversely, professionals in the maturity phase tend to pursue career development and are more capable of making strategic decisions [24]. This may explain the favorable levels of professional quality of life and work engagement observed in this study.

The results revealed a positive profile among these professionals who worked in COVID-19 units. Participants reported high levels of compassion satisfaction and professional engagement, especially in terms of dedication. Levels of burnout and secondary traumatic stress were low, and no professional met the criteria for compassion fatigue. Correlation analysis revealed that compassion satisfaction was positively associated with vigor and dedication, while burnout was negatively correlated with both, highlighting the positive impact of compassion satisfaction on professional well-being.

In contrast to national and international studies that report high rates of emotional exhaustion and distress among healthcare professionals during the pandemic [10,24,25,26], the results of this study suggest the presence of relevant protective factors in the context studied. These factors may include professional maturity, team cohesion, institutional experience, and organizational support, elements widely associated with occupational resilience [27,28].

Compassion satisfaction was positively associated with engagement, particularly vigor and dedication, corroborating previous findings that positive work-related emotions, such as feeling effective, valued, and fulfilled, can buffer the negative effects of chronic stress [24,28,29]. The absence of compassion fatigue in the study sample reinforces the interpretation that, despite intense exposure to others’ suffering, professionals were able to preserve their emotional stability.

Although the multiple regression models did not reach statistical significance, the standardized coefficients indicated directions of effect consistent with this study’s theoretical assumptions. In particular, burnout had the highest negative coefficient (β = −0.840), reinforcing its role as a central predictor of work engagement. These findings suggest that, even with limitations related to sample size and potential multicollinearity among predictor variables, there is a consistent trend supporting the hypotheses that compassion satisfaction enhances engagement, while emotional exhaustion undermines it.

In addition, it was observed that professional experience, although not included in the regression models, was significantly associated with compassion satisfaction, suggesting that seniority may act as an indirect protective factor against compassion fatigue. Thus, even with statistical limitations, the data reinforce the relevance of the proposed hypotheses and point to directions for more comprehensive investigations into factors that promote engagement and prevent emotional distress in highly complex care environments.

From a theoretical standpoint, these findings align with the Job Demands–Resources Model (JD-R), which posits that personal and organizational resources, such as motivation, sense of purpose, and institutional support, can compensate for high job demands and promote engagement [26]. The strong negative correlation between burnout and engagement (r = −0.678, p = 0.001) observed in this study reinforces this model and provides evidence that emotional exhaustion can directly impair dedication, energy, and focus at work.

The results also suggest that compassion satisfaction may function as a mediating variable between burnout and engagement. In this context, professionals who experience pleasure and fulfillment in their work would be less prone to emotional exhaustion and more capable of maintaining engagement. This hypothesis is supported by Lee et al. [22], who identified compassion satisfaction as a protective factor against burnout.

Furthermore, the data revealed that engaging in physical activity and not having another paid occupation were conditions associated with greater professional engagement. These findings highlight the importance of organizational strategies and public policies that promote self-care and work–life balance. Interventions in this regard may help preserve the mental health of workers, especially in high-complexity care settings such as those encountered during pandemic response efforts.

4.1. Limitations and Contributions

Among the limitations of this study, its cross-sectional design stands out, as it precludes the establishment of causal relationships between variables. The sample, restricted to a single public institution in southern Brazil, limits the generalizability of the findings to other contexts, such as private hospitals or different regions of the country.

Data collection occurred at the end of the third wave of the pandemic. In Brazil, this period was characterized by increased vaccine availability, a more structured institutional response, and better access to personal protective equipment (PPE) [18,19]. These elements may have contributed to greater emotional stability and lower perceived occupational stress, which in turn may explain the reduced levels of burnout. Previous research indicates that contextual factors, such as institutional support and adaptability, are inversely related to burnout [10,24].

The exclusion of temporary workers and at-risk groups resulted in a sample with longer tenure and greater institutional adaptation, which may have positively influenced the results. Additionally, the use of self-administered instruments may have introduced social desirability bias.

Finally, preexisting conditions among participants, such as chronic diseases, prior burnout symptoms, or other emotional issues, were not investigated, despite being relevant to interpreting responses to the instruments used (ProQOL-BR and UWES-9). Qualitative approaches, which would allow for a more in-depth understanding of professionals’ perceptions of suffering and engagement in the pandemic context, were also not included. Therefore, future studies should incorporate mixed methods to deepen the understanding of these constructs.

Nonetheless, this study contributes valuable insights into compassion fatigue and work engagement among nursing professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic. It demonstrates high levels of compassion satisfaction and engagement, along with low levels of burnout and secondary traumatic stress, reinforcing the leadership capacity and commitment of nursing professionals in both care and management, despite the high risks imposed by SARS-CoV-2 [30,31].

4.2. Reflections and Planning

The positive experience reported by participants may be related to the fact that data collection was conducted at the end of the third wave of the pandemic, a period in which institutions were already more structured, with defined routines, trained teams, and widespread vaccination. According to Markov et al. [18] and Moura et al. [19], this context fosters the emotional stabilization of healthcare professionals, which may explain the low levels of burnout observed in this sample.

In addition, the participant profile—predominantly composed of professionals with more than 10 years of experience—may have favored the development of more effective coping strategies. Previous studies show that professional experience supports emotional adaptation in challenging contexts [22,27].

These findings reinforce the importance of investing in programs that value nursing teams, focusing on professional recognition, strengthening institutional ties, and promoting mental health. They also underscore the need for continuous preventive actions, even during periods of lower collective stress, such as training in emotional intelligence, clinical-institutional supervision, and wellness policies within the hospital environment.

Thus, to sustain positive outcomes, health managers must actively recognize, support, and value nursing professionals, while implementing measures to prevent psychological distress, such as adequate staffing levels and psychosocial support systems to help professionals cope with stress and end-of-life care [5,25].

Future studies may benefit from the application of more robust statistical techniques, such as structural equation modeling, which enables the simultaneous assessment of direct and mediating effects among psychosocial variables, including length of experience and its interactions with components of professional quality of life.

5. Conclusions

This study identified high levels of work engagement, particularly in the dimension of dedication, and low levels of compassion fatigue among nursing professionals working in COVID-19 units at a university hospital. The data revealed that, even in the face of the emotional and physical demands imposed by the pandemic, participants preserved their emotional well-being and maintained a positive relationship with their work.

The absence of profiles compatible with compassion fatigue, combined with the strong correlation between compassion satisfaction and engagement, reinforces the hypothesis that positive emotions, such as pleasure, recognition, and a sense of meaning in caregiving, act as protective factors against burnout. Conversely, the negative effects of burnout on vigor and dedication highlight the need for institutional strategies to prevent emotional exhaustion.

Such strategies should include actions aimed at valuing the healthcare team, promoting work–life balance, and strengthening both individual and organizational resources that foster resilience. Promoting positive emotions in the workplace may be an effective way to sustain engagement and mitigate the adverse impacts of burnout in highly complex healthcare settings.

Finally, the findings contribute to scientific knowledge by highlighting a noteworthy and encouraging scenario in which engagement and emotional well-being were preserved amid a large-scale health crisis. Multicenter studies employing mixed methods are recommended to further explore the factors that support mental health and professional motivation in challenging contexts.