Aims: Occupational Burnout (OB) is currently measured through several Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) and some of them have become widely used in occupational health research and practice. We, therefore, aimed to review and grade the psychometric validity of the five OB PROMs considered as valid for OB measure in mental health professionals (the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI), the Pines' Burnout Measure (BM), the Psychologist Burnout Inventory (PBI), the OLdenburg Burnout Inventory (OLBI) and the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI)). Methods: We conducted systematic literature searches in MEDLINE, PsycINFO and EMBASE databases. We reviewed studies published between January 1980 and September 2018 following a methodological framework, in which each step of PROM validation, the reference method, analytical technics and result interpretation criteria were assessed. Using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments we evaluated the risk of bias in studies assessing content and criterion validity, structural validity, internal consistency, reliability, measurement error, hypotheses testing and responsiveness of each PROM. Finally, we assessed the level of evidence for the validity of each PROM using the GRADE approach. Results: We identified 6541 studies, 19 of which were included for review. Fifteen studies dealt with MBI whereas BM, PBI, OLBI and CBI were each examined in only one study. OLBI had the most complete validation, followed by CBI, MBI, BM and PBI, respectively. When examining the result interpretation correctness, the strongest disagreement was observed for MBI (27% of results), BM (25%) and CBI (17%). There was no disagreement regarding PBI and OLBI. For OLBI and CBI, the quality of evidence for sufficient content validity, the crucial psychometric property, was moderate; for MBI, BM and PBI, it was very low. Conclusion: To be validly and reliably used in medical research and practice, PROM should exhibit robust psychometric properties. Among the five PROMs reviewed, CBI and, to a lesser extent, OLBI meet this prerequisite. The cross-cultural validity of these PROMs was beyond the scope of our work and should be addressed in the future. Moreover, the development of a diagnostic standard for OB would be helpful to assess the sensitivity and specificity of the PROMs and further reexamine their validity. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD 42019124621).

We aimed to review the determinants of burnout onset in teachers. The study was conducted according to the PROSPERO protocol CRD42018105901, with a focus on teachers. We performed a literature search from 1990 to 2021 in three databases: MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Embase. We included longitudinal studies assessing burnout as a dependent variable, with a sample of at least 50 teachers. We summarized studies by the types of determinant and used the MEVORECH tool for a risk of bias assessment (RBA). The quantitative synthesis focused on emotional exhaustion. We standardized the reported regression coefficients and their standard errors and plotted them using R software to distinguish between detrimental and protective determinants. A qualitative analysis of the included studies (n = 33) identified 61 burnout determinants. The RBA showed that most studies had external and internal validity issues. Most studies implemented two waves (W) of data collection with 6–12 months between W1 and W2. Four types of determinants were summarized quantitatively, namely support, conflict, organizational context, and individual characteristics, based on six studies. This systematic review identified detrimental determinants of teacher exhaustion, including job satisfaction, work climate or pressure, teacher self-efficacy, neuroticism, perceived collective exhaustion, and classroom disruption. We recommend that authors consider using harmonized methods and protocols such as those developed in OMEGA-NET and other research consortia.

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.

Isoprostanes are physiopathologic mediators of oxidative stress, resulting in lipid peroxidation. 8-isoprostane seems particularly useful for measuring oxidative stress damage. However, no reference range values are available for 8-isoprosante in exhaled breath condensate (EBC) of healthy adults, enabling its meaningful interpretation as a biomarker. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis according to the protocol following PROSPERO (CRD42020146623). After searching and analyzing the literature, we included 86 studies. After their qualitative synthesis and risk of bias assessment, 52 studies were included in meta-analysis. The latter focused on studies using immunological analytical methods and investigated how the concentrations of 8-isoprostane differ based on gender. We found that gender had no significant effect in 8-isoprostane concentration. Among other studied factors, such as individual characteristics and factors related to EBC collection, only the device used for EBC collection significantly affected measured 8-isoprostane concentrations. However, adjustment for the factors related to EBC collection, yielded uncertainty whether this effect is due to the device itself or to the other factors. Given this uncertainty, we estimated the reference range values of 8-isoprostane stratified by gender and EBC collection device. A better standardization of EBC collection seems necessary; as well more studies using chemical analytical methods to extend this investigation.

AIMS OF THE STUDY: To estimate the prevalence of occupational burnout among the Swiss working population. METHODS: We interrogated three international databases (Medline (PubMed), EMBASE, and PsycINFO) and the databases of 15 Swiss universities to identify studies reporting the prevalence of occupational burnout in Swiss workers over the last 10 years, before the COVID-19 pandemic. Data were summarised descriptively and quantitatively using random-effects meta-analysis. We investigated between-study heterogeneity by stratifying results according to the type of burnout measurement tool, by occupation and by cut-off values. Three outcomes were considered: clinical/severe burnout, overall burnout and emotional exhaustion. RESULTS: We identified 23 studies about workers in Switzerland and estimated the prevalence of clinical or severe burnout at 4% (95% confidence interval [CI] 2–6%). The average prevalence estimates for overall burnout and emotional exhaustion were similar at 18% (95% CI 12–25%) and 18% (95% CI 15–22%), respectively. When stratified by occupation, the clinical or severe burnout rates were higher among the healthcare workers than the general working population. CONCLUSIONS: These estimates of prepandemic (baseline) prevalence of occupational burnout are comparable with those available in the other countries where it is recognised and treated as a disease. They may prove useful in planning and assessing the effectiveness of interventions for prevention of occupational burnout and in minimising its negative consequences on individuals and on societies during and after the pandemic.

Background: This meta-analysis summarized longitudinal findings pertaining to exhaustion’s predictors. In so doing, our aim was ultimately to identify target factors for the prevention of burnout. Methods: We searched for studies that (a) examined predictors of exhaustion longitudinally and (b) reported correlation coefficients as an effect estimate. We conducted our literature search in three databases: MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Embase. We focused on studies published between January 1990 and November 2020. Predictors were grouped into families, subfamilies, and subgroups. A meta-analysis of z-transformed correlation coefficients (rho) was performed. The results were scrutinized in relation to studies’ follow-up length. Results: We included 65 studies assessing 242 predictors of different types captured across different occupations. Our findings highlighted mostly weak associations (rho < 0.30). For six predictors—Job control, Job resources, Interactions at work, Communication and leadership, Job attitudes, and Work-family interface—longer length of follow-up involved weaker associations with exhaustion. The quality of the evidence available was generally low. Conclusions: The evidence available does not point to clear target factors for preventing burnout. The decrease in associations as the follow-up length increases may suggest a relatively short latency period, followed by recovery. Higher-quality cohorts should be conducted to better understand the etiology and course of burnout.