The Impact of Employment on Burnout Levels among Master’s Degree Students

Download PDF Article Download Graphical Abstract The Impact of Employment on Burnout Levels among Master's Degree Students     Abstract The paper analyses the impact of employment status on Burnout levels among master’s degree students at the University of Petroșani, Romania. For this, a questionnaire designed and validated by researchers at Purdue university and which is aimed at identifying the level of Burnout has been applied to the target group of 27 working students following a master’s degree program at this university. The results were interpreted with help of descriptive statistics and the Burnout scoring system provided by the authors of the questionnaire and show that although participants were both hired and following a master’s degree program, the levels of observed Burnout among them were moderate with only isolated cases of participants experiencing what would be considered high or severe levels of Burnout. This moderate level of Burnout might have been linked to the seemingly healthy work environments that the students reported working in, environments in which they felt safe, and supported, and which provided good rewarding systems.   Keywords Burnout, Academic Burnout, Working Students, Work-life Balance JEL Classification I19, I21, I23   1. Introduction Burnout, the syndrome that has such a significant negative impact on both the personal and professional lives of those who experience it, has shown to also negatively impact the economy and the public health sector of the most affected countries. (Edú-Valsania et al., 2022) This alone is a good enough reason to take a closer look and examine the leading causes of this syndrome and coping strategies, but this concern becomes even more important when taking into account the fact that the number of people who experience Burnout is increasing (Shah et al., 2021). When analysing the Burnout syndrome, its manifestation, implication, and suggested approaches to addressing this issue, the available research focused on key groups of professions such as those working in the health sector (Rotenstein et al., 2018; West et al., 2018), parental Burnout (Griffith, 2020), those employed in the education sector (Agyapong, et al., 2023; Bezliudnyi et al., 2019; Pressley, 2021) with recent concerns for Burnout among students (Liu et al., 2023; Madigan et al., 2024). In this context, the current paper aims to contribute to this research gap regarding Burnout among university students. This issue is analysed through the perspective of Burnout among master’s degree students by also taking into account the students’ job status, to identify if working students experience higher levels of Burnout than those who are not employed. For this, a questionnaire was used on master’s degree students at the University of Petrosani, Romania, who are also employed in various fields. This study was based on the work of Liu et al. (Liu, et al., 2023) who in their thorough study analysed the results obtained from applying the Maslach Burnout Inventory General Survey on 22.983 students in Chinese college students. In their study, the authors focused on the Burnout levels of students in general, without taking into account whether these are employed or are working, and the results showed that 59.9% of the analysed students had what is considered to be academic Burnout. In contrast, in the current paper, only those students who were also employed have been considered for the questionnaire in order to see if the Burnout levels were affected by employment and thus higher.   2. Literature Review The term “Burnout” was first introduced around the 1970s when it emerged concerning what some people were experiencing at their workplace. The term is used as a metaphor for how energy can be drained at higher rates after a certain threshold is reached – if not enough resources are present to keep the fire replenished. Past this point, a fire continues to smoulder, uneventful, and inconsequential rather than be able to burn. Similarly, if an employee reaches a point of exhaustion, if they continue working, they will achieve less, will have a harder time trying to achieve meaningful work, and will suffer repercussions to their health (Maslach & Leiter, 2009). Burnout is considered to be a psychological syndrome that affects the individual by causing them to suffer feelings of emotional exhaustion, depersonalisation along with a sense of reduced accomplishment in their daily work (Patel et al., 2018). The syndrome has been seriously considered by some European countries such as Sweden and The Netherlands. In these countries it is considered to be an established medical diagnosis and it is included in the handbooks that are used for training physicians and health professionals. Furthermore, in these countries, healthcare professionals offer a wide array of interventions for people who experience Burnout (Maslach & Leiter, 2009). Cristina Maslach - an important figure in the field of Burnout and the creator of the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI), in her research, highlighted not only the symptoms associated with Burnout and possible causes that lead to job Burnout but also the coping mechanisms of individuals who experience Burnout and the negative effects linked to these coping strategies. As noted by Maslach, often time, professionals who experience Burnout are also unable to cope with clients’ requirements and in an attempt to defend themselves start thinking of clients in more derogatory terms, creating a distance between themselves and the clients and at times even being able to convince themselves that their clients deserve the problems that they are faced with. She also notes that Burnout is one of the key factors of low employee morale, absenteeism, and high job turnover (Maslach C., 1976). An interesting aspect to be noted is that Burnout seemed to be virtually absent in monasteries, Montessori schools, and religious care centres. This, research considered, was mainly because in these cases, people consider their work to be more of a calling rather than a job (Cherniss & Kranz, 1983). Among the contributing factors of Burnout are noted: work-related stressors (Maslach & Jackson, 1996; Maslach & Leiter, 2009; Shanafelt et al., 2016; William et al., 2007; Williams et al., 2002), excessive workloads, work-home conflicts, loss of support from colleagues, deterioration in control, autonomy, (Hertzberg & Vaglum, 2016; Richter et al., 2014; Shanafelt et al., 2012; Shanafelt et al., 2003; Shanafelt et al., 2016; Wallace et al., 2009), the rewarding systems used (both monetary as well as social and intrinsic), the work community, lack of fairness at the workplace, a misalignment between individual and company values (Maslach & Leiter, 2017). Three basic domains have been noted as being part of the Burnout experience: overwhelming exhaustion, feelings of cynicism and detachment from the job, and a sense of ineffectiveness or lack of accomplishment (Maslach & Leiter, 2017). Given the effects of Burnout on both employee well-being (with Burnout being regarded as a contributing factor for depression and anxiety (Koutsimani et al., 2019)) as well as the organisation’s and even the economy, tools that help determine and measure the level of Burnout have emerged. The most commonly used, and well-established tool is the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) developed by Cristina Maslach (West et al, 2018). The core of the MBI is a questionnaire of 22 items, which can be scored from 0 to 6 based on self-reported frequency of the feelings described by each item, and 9 items for emotional exhaustion, for a total score range of 0-54. (West et al, 2018). The tool measures Burnout as defined by the World Health Organisation (WHO) in the ICD-11 and it even includes different variants depending on the type of groups that it aims for, with adaptations for medical personnel, human service workers, educators, students, and general use (Maslach et al., 2016). In time, new questionnaires emerged to help address some of the concerns of the MBI, with one such concern being that available questionnaires mask evidence of the syndrome until critical points are reached (Edú-Valsania et al., 2022). One such new tool is the Burnout Assessment Tool (BAT), which is founded on theoretical considerations that introduce the concept of cut-off scores for Burnout, and include two additional dimensions: cognitive impairment and emotional impairment (Schaufeli et al., 2023). Although there is a significant amount of research articles that talk about Burnout among working students worldwide, this issue has been studied a lot less in Romania, where only one research article covers the topic and two research studies cover topics related to stress and Burnout in students in general in Romania. The most significant study is that of Drăghici and Cazan, who in their research examined the level of Burnout and maladjustment among 151 employed students from various universities in Romania (Drăghici & Cazan, 2022). A study by Silistraru et al. examined the prevalence of Burnout in medical students during the COVID-19 pandemic (Silistraru et al., 2021). Another study concerning students in Romania evaluated the stress levels and time management studies of students at the University of Galați, Romania (Lovin & Bernardeau-Moreau, 2022). As it can be observed, the issue of Burnout in working students has become a concern recently, with very few articles covering this topic. It is in this context that the current paper aims to help provide some insights and contribute to the developing body of knowledge in the field.   3. Methodology The level of Burnout for the working master’s degree students was assessed with the help of a free and easy to understood Burnout questionnaire from Purdue University (Purdue University, 2020), which was slightly modified, in the sense that it was translated so that it would be clearly understood by the master’s students which didn’t have a good grasp on the English language and included 5 additional questions which aimed at getting a better understanding of the workplace context of the respondents to help conclude the level of Burnout, its peak occurrence in different contexts and depending on the type of employment and work schedule. The additional five questions were: 1. Regarding the gender of the participant, 2. the age group, 3. the job title, 4. the job type – whether it was full-time or part-time, and 5. the period that the respondent worked at that job. The Purdue University questionnaire contained a total of 28 questions regarding physiological and psychological symptoms manifested by the respondents in the past six weeks, which could be rated on a scale from 1 to 5 (where one signified a “Never/No change” response and 5 signified a “Always/Significant Change”). The 28 questions of the questionnaire which were strictly about Burnout symptoms, were divided into three major categories, the first category of 10 questions emphasised the feelings of the respondent (whether they felt overwhelmed, used, tired, less competent, etc), the second category containing 10 questions emphasised the effects on the workplace (whether the respondent was more likely to get into conflicts with co-workers, took more sick leave days, avoided conversations with co-workers, applied rigid rules without considering alternative solutions and so on), and the last category of 8 questions covered aspects of the work environment itself (whether the pay is too little, it doesn’t offer access to social-professional support groups, entails many different tasks, demands coping with an angry public, and so on). The results of the questionnaire show 5 levels of Burnout, with participants having scored between 28 and 38 points having almost no sign of Burnout, individuals with scores of 38 and up to 50 showing a low amount of job-related stress and not likely to suffer from Burnout shortly, participants with scores ranging from 51-70 having a moderate amount of stress on the job and fair chance of future Burnout, participants with scores ranging from 71-90 expressing a high amount of job-related stress and showing early signs of Burnout and participants with scores equal or higher than 91 demonstrating a concerning amount of stress and nearing advanced Burnout. The study of the research was a cross-sectional study that aimed at identifying the level of Burnout within working students. The target group was made up of master’s degree students who were also employed (whether this was part-time or full-time employment) from a master’s degree program at the Faculty of Sciences at the University of Petrosani.  The total number of students enrolled in the class was 35 but only 27 students were eligible (meaning these were also employed). Before distributing the questionnaire, a few basic aspects of Burnout were discussed with the students, the purpose of the questionnaire and the usage of its results for scientific research were explained and students were instructed that participation was not mandatory, so only those interested replied to the questionnaire. The questionnaire was designed with the help of Google Forms and was then sent by email to all eligible students (27) at the beginning of May, and they were reminded once during the responding period (around the last week of May) that the deadline for collecting data if they wanted to partake in the survey was the end of May given to the small number of collected responses. At the end of May, the questionnaire was set to not accept any more answers. Out of the 27 eligible participants in the study, 15 students responded, meaning a 55.55% response rate which is a good response rate and can be taken into account as a representative result for the selected sample.   The results were interpreted with the help of descriptive statistics, including the mean and frequency distributions. Burnout levels were interpreted according to the scoring guidelines provided by the study from Purdue University, according to which, each reply to the questionnaire was numbered on a Likert scale from 1 to 5, where 1 represented a “Never/no change” response (and cumulated 1 point towards the Burnout score) and 5 represented an “Always/significant change” answer (cumulated 5 points towards the Burnout score). Burnout was calculated with the help of five thresholds depending on the obtained score as follows: a score from 28-38 points indicated mellow feelings with almost no job stress and inexistent Burnout symptoms; a score from 38-50 points expressed a low amount of job-related stress with little change of experiencing Burnout symptoms; a score of 51-70 points indicated a moderate amount of stress on the job and the presence of some Burnout symptoms; a score of 71-90 points expressed a high amount of job-related stress and early signs of Burnout accompanied by Burnout symptoms; scores of 91 points or higher signified a concerning amount of stress and near advanced Burnout.   The results of the questionnaire and the interpretation of the data can be found in the Results section of the current paper.   4. Results and Discussions The answers received from the questionnaire were checked for validity, and afterward were interpreted. All responses met the criteria and therefore no response was eliminated from the data analysis process.  The answer to the first question (regarding the gender of the participants) revealed that there was an almost equal number of participants from both groups (46.7% of respondents were male and 53.3% were female). The age groups of the respondents were divided into 5 categories (18-25 , 25-35, 35-45, 45-55, 55-65), and a conclusion that can be drawn from the results is that the highest number of respondents (33.3%) can be found in the 25 to 35 age group and the least number of respondents (13.3%) in the 35-45 age group. Figure 1 shows the distribution of the job type (whether it is part-time, full-time, or other) and it can be observed that the vast majority of students (86.7%) hold a full-time job. Figure 2 shows the period that the participants have been employed at their current employee, and it can be observed that almost half of the participants have 10+ years of experience within the company that they are currently employed by, and an equal number of participants (6.7%) have either 3 to 5 years or 5 to 10 years of experience inside the company. Figure 1. The type of job of respondents   Figure 2. The experience inside the company where respondents are currently employed   The last of the questions added to the original Burnout questionnaire was an open question that asked participants about the title of their job/position inside the company. The results revealed some variations in the occupation of the respondents and the field of occupation, with respondents being employed as: police officers (2), military personnel (1), economist (4), programmer (2), bank worker (2), health worker (1), telecommunication worker (1), salesperson (2). Figure 3. Answers to the first six questions of the survey   For the first question “Do you worry at night, have trouble falling or staying asleep?”, 13% of the participants answered that they never have problems asleep, 40% responded that they rarely have issues, 33% have this issue sometimes and 13% always have issues.  For the second question “Do you feel less competent/effective than before, or work harder yet accomplish less?” 33% of respondents said that they never experienced this, 6.66% rarely have this issue, 40% sometimes and 20% often have this issue.  For the third question “Do you consider yourself unappreciated or “used” on the job?” the vast majority of respondents (80%) said that it was either never the case (40%) or it was rarely the case (40%), 13% said that they sometimes feel like that and 6.66% said that they often feel that.  For the fourth question “Do you feel tired/fatigued rather than energetic, even when you get enough sleep?”26% of participants said that it is never the case, 26% stated that it is sometimes the case, 26% said that it is often the case, 13% said that it is rarely the case and 6.66% said that it was almost always the case.  For the fifth question “Do you dread going to work or feel trapped in your job situation?” the majority of respondents (60%) stated that it is never the case, for 20% this is rarely the case, for 13% this is sometimes the case and for 6.66% this is almost always the case. For the sixth question “Do you feel angry, irritated, annoyed, or disappointed in people around you?” 26% of respondents said that this is never the case, 33% of respondents said that it is rarely the case, 266% said that it is sometimes the case and 13% of respondents said that it is often the case. Figure 4. Answers to questions 7-12   The majority of answers show that respondents never have problems with the aspects described in question 9 – “Do you think that sex seems like more trouble than it is worth?”, 10 – “Do you see close friends and family less often?”, 13 – “Are you avoiding conversations with co-workers or isolating from people in general?” and 14 – “Are you rigidly applying rules without considering alternative solutions?” An interesting significant difference can be observed in question no 13 where the majority of respondents (66%) said that it is never the case, that they are never avoiding conversations with co-workers or isolating from people in general. This sort of behaviour has been linked to a reduction in the level of Burnout and in this case, could be one of the main reasons why most of the respondents had a small to moderate level of Burnout. Figure 5. Answers to questions 13-17   An overwhelming number of participants (86%) replied that it is never the case for the answer to question number 15 – “Are you increasing your substance use? (Alcohol, cannabis, etc.)”. For questions 15-20 the most answers revealed that the majority of respondents are never in the following scenarios: The majority of participants are never in a situation where they “Easily or automatically express negative attitudes, especially to change?” (question number 16) – 53% of respondents, “Absent, out sick more often, or sick at work?” (question number 17) - 66% of respondents. Figure 6. Answers to questions 18 and 20   As shown in Figure 6, for question 18 - “Are you unable to laugh at a joke about yourself or have difficulty finding joy?” – 60% of respondents said that it was never the case and only a very small percentage said that it was sometimes the case. For question 19 “Are you experiencing increased interpersonal conflict with co-workers/family?” 53% of respondents said that it was never the case and 40% of them said that it was rarely the case. 40% of respondents said that it was never the case for them to feel too busy to do ordinary things as shown in question number 20 (“Are you feeling too busy to do ordinary things (make phone calls, read, contact friends /family)”). Figure 7. Answers to questions 21-24   The last batch of eight questions presented in Figure 7 (4 questions) and Figure 8 (4 questions) related mostly to the workplace environment rather than the attitudes and symptoms of the individuals (which was the case in the first 20 questions). Figure 8. Answers to questions 24-28   Another trend regarding the “never the case” answer for the majority of respondents has been noticed for the case of question 21 “Does your job seem meaningless or filled with too many repetitive situations?”, 22 “Does your job pay too little?”, 26 “Does your job entail so many different tasks that you feel fragmented?” and 27 “Does your job demand coping with an angry public?”. After interpreting the results of the questionnaire, three respondents (20%) cumulated scores between 28-38 indicating nothing more than a feeling of mellowness, with almost no job stress and an almost non-existent level of job Burnout. An equal number of respondents cumulated scores between 38-50 points, expressing a low amount of job-related stress and an unlikeliness of Burnout in the future. Seven participants (46%) cumulated scores between 51-70 points highlighting a moderate amount of stress on the job and the likelihood of individuals experiencing Burnout shortly, with recommendations to already consider ways of reducing the stress that they experience at work or even in their home settings.  One individual cumulated a score of 75 points, placing them in the 71-90 category which meant that a high amount of job-related stress had been observed and early signs of Burnout were present. This respondent was employed as a salesperson, working in a field that is known for high levels of job Burnout.  Just one individual cumulated a score of 94 points, placing them in the 91 and up category which shows a concerning amount of job-related stress and nearing an advanced stage of Burnout. According to the authors of the questionnaire, for this individual, professional help is recommended. This respondent was employed in the banking sector. The majority of respondents were female students, which could be explained by the fact that the specialists in this field (Human Resources) are also female employees. Most of the respondents were in the 25 to 35 age group, which is an expected result for master’s degree students, followed by the 45-55 and 55-65 age groups. This could be because around that age people sometimes are forced to change professions due to technological advancements or changes in lifestyle.  An important thing to note is that the vast majority of respondents were employed in a full-time job while also studying for their master’s degree and the majority of students had more than 10 years’ experience at their current employer. Even more interesting is that the highest value for Burnout levels was not amongst these students who had full-time jobs, but among the students with part-time jobs. Some things to consider in this case is whether the field of the job has more significance and more impact on Burnout levels than the time a student spends at work as both respondents with high values for Burnout levels had part-time jobs, but both were working in fields known for high levels of Burnout. One other thing that could be leading to a higher level of Burnout among part-time working students is the fact that the salary for part-time jobs could be less than the pay of a full-time employee, and furthermore, these respondents were most likely looking for opportunities for full-time jobs.  Although the type of sector for their job was not one of the questions for this survey, some respondents left comments in which they specified the type of sector they work for. In this regard, it has been observed that all of the students working in the public sector were less likely to have higher scores for Burnout levels, while respondents working in the private sector registered higher levels of Burnout.  Higher Burnout scores were registered among the 25-35 age group, followed by the respondents in the 35-45 age group, except one respondent in the 45 to 55 age group. The literature does highlight the different styles of work ethic and work-life balance of different generations and higher levels of Burnout among younger age groups could be related to a series of factors which in itself would be an interesting starting point for more research in the field. The majority of respondents (46.67%) said that they’ve been employed at the same company for more than 10 years, almost all of them coming from companies working in the public sector. This could also be a reason behind lower levels of Burnout as these individuals were most likely well acclimated to their work environment and were also most likely very skilled given the experience of working at the same company over a long period. Perhaps, even the fact that they felt more “at home” in their current work environment contributed to the low levels of Burnout and stress. The only sections where even those with low levels of Burnout did register specific signs of stress and job Burnout were present in replies to the second question (“Do you feel less competent/effective than before, or work harder yet accomplish less?”), the fourth question (Do you feel tired/fatigued rather than energetic, even when you get enough sleep?”) and the twentieth question (Are you feeling too busy to do ordinary things (make phone calls, read, contact friends /family)”). All of these questions related to the time management aspect of the respondents and it is perhaps unsurprising that even those with lower levels of Burnout scores still had higher values for all of these questions. This could be easily explained by the fact that the respondents had to juggle work responsibilities as well as school responsibilities while also handling aspects of their personal lives.  Notably, no respondents indicated that their job felt meaningless nor did any report their job as dependent on capricious funding or lacking funding for accomplishing the established goals. With a small exception, the vast majority of respondents stated that their job was not overloading them with tasks or demanding long shifts. This could also be a key reason why respondents had relatively low Burnout scores. Overwhelming and demanding environments, with strict rules and short deadlines, have been observed to be places where Burnout levels seem to rise, and in that context, the results of this study seem to be consistent with those observations.   5. Conclusions This paper analysed the state of Burnout levels among master’s university students who were also employed, to understand if the added stress of working while studying could increase the Burnout levels of these individuals. The study contributes to the literature body of knowledge by providing an insight into the unique challenges and circumstances experienced by master’s degree students who are also employed. Findings suggest that employment may influence Burnout levels, given how students who are also employed are exposed to additional stressors which can contribute to emotional exhaustion and decreased job satisfaction (two of the main indicators of Burnout). The results of the study show that while a significant portion of the respondents experience what is considered a moderate stress level, certain aspects of their work and personal life such as a positive workplace relationship and supportive work environment seem to help these individuals and contribute to lower their Burnout score. The respondents with the highest level of Burnout were those working in the private sector, in part-time jobs, in fields such as sales, banking, or programming, except one respondent working a full-time job in the public sector as a health worker. The profile of the respondents with the lowest level of Burnout matched someone working in the public sector, a full-time job, or working for the same employer for 10 or more years. Although these are just some ideas of starting points when analysing the factors that affect the Burnout levels of working students, no certain conclusion can be drawn until more research in the field covers these aspects. In this context, further research directions could include analyses on how the type of job, level of experience as well and the work environment and company culture affect the Burnout levels of working students, as well as the effectiveness of various intervention strategies in the case of employed students.  The research limitations of the study are related to the usage of an alternative survey to the MBI for measuring Burnout due to lack of funding and the small sample of respondents which could lead to inaccuracies in the obtained results, even though the results were consistent with the observations from other researchers. An additional research direction could include enlarging the sample size and attracting funds for acquiring and applying the MBI questionnaire for Burnout levels.    About the Author Raluca Nicolaescu ORCID ID: 0000-0001-5153-7092 University of Petroșani, Romania [email protected]   References Agyapong, B., Brett-MacLean, P., Burback, L., Agyapong , V. I., & Wei, Y. (2023). Interventions to Reduce Stress and Burnout among Teachers: A Scoping Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, pp. 1-22. Bezliudnyi, O., Kravchenko, O., Maksymchuk, B., Mishchenko, M., & Maksymchuk , I. (2019). Psycho-correction of Burnout syndrome in sports educators. Journal of Physical Education and Sport, pp. 1585-1590. Cherniss, C., & Kranz, D. L. (1983). The ideological community is an antidote to Burnout in human services. In B. A. Farber, Stress and Burnout in the Human Services (pp. 198-212). New York: Pergamon. Drăghici, G. L., & Cazan, A.-M. (2022). Burnout and Maladjustment Among Employed Students. Frontiers in Psychology, pp. 1-10. Edú-Valsania, S., Laguía, A., & Moriano, J. A. (2022). Burnout: A Review of Theory and Measurement. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, pp. 1-27. Griffith, A. K. (2020). Parental Burnout and Child Maltreatment During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Journal of Family Violence. Hertzberg, T., Ro, K., & Vaglum, P. (2016). Work-home interface stress: an important predictor of emotional exhaustion 15 years into a medical career. Ind Health, pp. 139-148. Koutsimani, P., Anthony, M., & Georganta, K. (2019). The relationship between Burnout, depression, and anxiety: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, pp. 1-36. Liu, Z., Xie, Y., Sun, Z., Liu, D., Yin, H., & Shi, L. (2023). Factors associated with academic Burnout and its prevalence among university students: a cross-sectional study. BMC Medical Education, pp. 1-13. Lovin, D., & Bernardeau-Moreau, D. (2022). Stress among Students and Difficulty with Time Management: A Study at the University of Galați in Romania. Soc. Sci. Madigan, D. J., Kim, L. E., & Glandorf, H. L. (2024). Interventions to reduce Burnout in students: A systematic review and meta-analysis. European Journal of Psychology of Education, pp. 931-957. Maslach, C. (1976). Burned-Out. Human Relations. Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. (1996). Maslach Burnout Inventory Manual, 3rd edition. Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press. Maslach, C., & Leiter, M. P. (2009). Burnout: 35 years of research and practice. Career Development International, pp. 204-220. Maslach, C., & Leiter, M. P. (2017). Understanding Burnout - New Models. In C. L. Cooper, & J. C. Quick, The Handbook of Stress and Health: A Guide to Research and Practice (pp. 36-56). John Wiley & Sons. Maslach, C., Jackson, S. E., Leiter, M. P., Schaufeli, W. B., & Schwab, R. L. (2016, 02 16). Maslach Burnout Inventory. Retrieved 09 16, 2024, from mind garden: https://www.mindgarden.com/117-maslach-Burnout-inventory-mbi. Patel, R. S., Bachu, R., Adikey, A., Malik, M., & Shah, M. (2018). Factors Related to Physician Burnout and Its Consequences: A Review. Behav. Sci, pp. 1-7. Pressley, T. (2021). Factors Contributing to Teacher Burnout During COVID-19. Educational Researcher, pp. 325-327. Purdue University. (2020, 03). BURNOUT QUESTIONNAIRE. Retrieved 09 23, 2024, from Purdue University: https://extension.purdue.edu/hub/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Burnout-Questionnaire.pdf. Richter, A., Kostova, P., Baur , X., & Wegner, R. (2014). Less work: more Burnout? A comparison of working conditions and the risk of Burnout by German physicians before and after the implementation of the EU Working Time Directive. Int Arch Occup Environ Health, pp. 205-215. Rotenstein, L. S., Torre, M., Ramos, M. A., Rosales, R. C., Guille, C., Sen, S., & Mata, D. (2018). Prevalence of Burnout Among Physicians A Systematic Review. JAMA, pp. 1131-1150. Schaufeli, W. B., De Witte, H., Hakanen, J. J., Kaltiainen, J., & Kok, R. (2023). How to assess severe Burnout? Cutoff points for the Burnout Assessment Tool (BAT) based on three European samples. Scand J Work Environ Health, pp. 293-302. Shah, M. K., Gandrakota, N., Cimiotti, J. P., Ghose, N., Moore, M., & Ali, M. K. (2021). Prevalence of and Factors Associated With Nurse Burnout in the US. JAMA Network Open, pp. 1-11. Shanafelt , T., & Noseworthy, J. (2016). Executive leadership and physician well-being: nine organizational strategies to promote engagement and reduce Burnout. Mayo Clin Proc, pp. 129-146. Shanafelt, T., Dyrbye, L., & Sinsky, C. (2016). Relationship between clerical burden and characteristics of the electronic environment with physician Burnout and professional satisfaction. Mayo Clin Proc, pp. 836-848. Shanafelt, T., Boone, S., & Tan, L. (2012). Burnout and satisfaction with work-life balance among US physicians relative to the general US population. Arch Intern Med, pp. 1377-1385. Shanafelt, T., Sloan, J., & Habermann, T. (2003). The well-being of physicians. Am J Med, pp. 513-519. Silistraru, I., Ciureanu, I.-A., Ciubara, A., & Olariu, O. (2021). Prevalence of Burnout in medical students in Romania during COVID-19 pandemic restrictions (preliminary data). Public Health, 12-15. Wallace, J., Lemaire, J., & Ghali, W. (2009). Physician wellness: a missing quality indicator. Lancet, pp. 1714-1721. West, C. P., Dyrbye, L. N., & Shanafelt, T. D. (2018). Physician Burnout: contributors, consequences and. Journal of Internal Medicine, pp. 516-529. Williams , E., Konrad, T., & Linzer, M. (2002). Physician, practice, and patient characteristics related to primary care physician physical and mental health: results from the Physician Worklife Study. Health Serv Res, pp. 119-141. Williams, E., Manwell, L., Konrad, T., & Linzer, M. (2007). The relationship of organizational culture, stress, satisfaction, and Burnout with physician-reported error and suboptimal patient care: results from the MEMO study. Health Care Manage Rev, pp. 203-212. Gallery [caption id=attachment_1817 align=alignnone width=300] Figure 1[/caption] [caption id=attachment_1817 align=alignnone width=300] Figure 2[/caption] [caption id=attachment_1817 align=alignnone width=300] Figure 3[/caption] [caption id=attachment_1817 align=alignnone width=300] Figure 4[/caption] [caption id=attachment_1817 align=alignnone width=300] Figure 5[/caption] [caption id=attachment_1817 align=alignnone width=300] Figure 6[/caption] [caption id=attachment_1817 align=alignnone width=300] Figure 7[/caption] [caption id=attachment_1817 align=alignnone width=300] Figure 8[/caption]