
==== Front
BMC Prim Care
BMC Prim Care
BMC Primary Care
2731-4553
BioMed Central London

2593
10.1186/s12875-024-02593-0
Research
Prevalence and factors associated with burnout among primary health-care workers in China during COVID-19: a national survey
Huang Jiaoling 1
Zhu Ping 1
Yan Yuge 1
Xi Biao 2
Zhu Shanzhu 3
Ji Jiayi jjy2876@gmail.com

1
Gu Jie gu.jie@zs-hospital.sh.cn

34
1 https://ror.org/0220qvk04 grid.16821.3c 0000 0004 0368 8293 School of Public Health, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, 200025 China
2 https://ror.org/04eymdx19 grid.256883.2 0000 0004 1760 8442 Hebei Medical University, Hebei, 050017 China
3 grid.413087.9 0000 0004 1755 3939 Department of General Practice, Zhongshan Hospital of Fudan University, Shanghai, 200032 China
4 https://ror.org/032x22645 grid.413087.9 0000 0004 1755 3939 International Medical Center, Zhongshan Hospital of Fudan University, Shanghai, 200032 China
17 9 2024
17 9 2024
2024
25 3414 6 2024
5 9 2024
© The Author(s) 2024
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
Background

Primary health-care workers (PHWs) managed increased workloads and pressure during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study conducted a national survey examining burnout among PHWs at the end of the COVID-19 pandemic, and identifies related factors. By doing so, it addresses the gap in understanding the burnout situation among PHWs at a national level, taking into account urban-rural disparities.

Methods

We conducted a nationwide cross-sectional survey of PHWs in China from May to October 2022, covering 31 provinces. The MBI-HSS was used to measure overall burnout and emotional exhaustion (EE), depersonalization (DP), and reduced personal accomplishment (PA). We used multivariable logistic regression to identify risk factors, and subgroup analyses to identify differences between rural and urban areas.

Results

3769 PHWs from 44 primary health-care institutions completed the survey. Overall, 16.6% reported overall burnout, and the prevalence of EE, DP, and reduced PA was 29.7%, 28.0%, and 62.9%, respectively. The prevalence of overall burnout (17.6% vs. 13.7%, P = 0.004) and EE (31.5% vs. 24.8%, P < 0.001) was higher in urban than rural areas (AOR = 1.285; 95%CI, 1.021–1.617). Job satisfaction was a protective factor against burnout in both settings. The protective factors of overall burnout, EE and DP vary between urban and rural areas.

Conclusions

The Mental Health Status Questionnaire-Short Form (MSQ-SF) score functioned as a protective factor against burnout across both rural and urban locales, highlighting the intrinsic link between job satisfaction and burnout. Other influencing factors differed between urban and rural areas, so interventions should be tailored to local conditions. Rural married PHWs experienced the lower prevalence of burnout indicates the support structure may play a significant role. In urban settings, it is recommended to strategically pre-emptively stock essential supplies like PPE.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12875-024-02593-0.

Keywords

Burnout
China
Primary health-care workers
Risk factors
Urban-rural disparities
http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100001809 National Natural Science Foundation of China 72274122 http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100003399 Science and Technology Commission of Shanghai Municipality 23692113400 http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100003395 Shanghai Municipal Education Commission C2021027 Shanghai Municipal Three Year Action Plan for Strengthening the Construction of Public Health System - Excellent Youth ProjectGWVI-11.2-YQ54 issue-copyright-statement© BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2024
==== Body
pmcIntroduction

Burnout, characterized by EE, DP, and PA [1], is a psychological syndrome garnering significant attention within the medical community. The inaugural large-scale national survey of burnout amongst US physicians was conducted in 2011, revealing that approximately 45% reported experiencing at least one symptom of burnout [2]. Recent studies have underscored the alarming escalation of physician burnout, with prevalence rates reaching or surpassing 50% [3, 4]. This trend coincides with notable changes in medical practice dynamics over the past two decades, marked by diminishing autonomy, declining physician status, and escalating work pressures [5], all of which may contribute to the exacerbation of burnout among medical professionals.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare workers have played a pivotal role in treating affected patients, yet have faced a considerable surge in their workload. Prior research has surveyed physicians at regional or national levels to explore the impact of COVID-19 on burnout, identifying various risk factors such as work-related psychosocial elements, personal protective equipment (PPE) availability, electronic health records, and performance measures [6–10]. Existing literature consistently indicates a heightened prevalence of burnout among medical staff during the COVID-19 crisis. For instance, a national survey conducted in the USA revealed that burnout rates ranging from 33.6 to 53.1%, varying across different categories of medical personnel [11]. Similarly, a national study in China found that burnout among nurses in secondary and tertiary hospitals reached 34% [12]. A meta-analysis of 45 articles worldwide demonstrated that more than half of healthcare workers experienced burnout during the pandemic [13]. The burnout of healthcare workers was linked to the career disengagement, turnover of physicians, and reduction in the quality of patient care. In the context of pandemic, it would damage the sustainability of healthcare system [14]. However, previous reports have overlooked primary health-care workers (PHWs), despite their significant contributions to public health during this pandemic. A bibliometric study revealed a decline in publications trends regarding burnout among primary healthcare workers after 2021, suggesting a decline in attention to job burnout among PHWs [15].

During the COVID-19 pandemic, primary health-care (PHC) initiatives received limited attention compared to the focus on hospital resources and intensive care units. Reports from various countries, including Singapore, Australia, China, Iceland, highlighted lessons learned regarding PHC preparedness. These lessons encompassed strategies such as remote consultations to minimize crowd gathering and infection risks, the provision of treatment and support services particularly targeting the vulnerable populations [16, 17], and close collaboration with public health clinics for screening and testing [18]. China, for instance, maintained its zero-COVID strategy until the end of 2022, during which PHWs played crucial roles in health checks, medical advice dissemination, patient referrals, contact tracing efforts, and the management of both community and hospitalized patients, including those discharged [19]. Studies in Australia [20], America [21], Malaysia [22] and Turkey [23] have found that more than 30% of PHWs experience burnout. Despite their significant contributions, burnout among PHWs remains inadequately addressed, with PHWs in Australia reportedly being undersupported and undervalued during the initial months of the COVID-19 pandemic [24]. International qualitative research conducted in Ontario has highlighted disparities in burnout levels across genders, job categories, and regions (rural/urban) [25]. Although existing research has begun to explore the phenomenon of burnout among PHWs, there is a notable gap in understanding the nuanced regional differences within China, particularly at the rural-urban level.

As a significant public health crisis, the COVID-19 pandemic has amplified burnout among medical workers, yet comprehensive nationwide research, particularly focusing on PHWs, remains scarce. While previous studies underscored the pivotal role of PHWs during the pandemic and highlighted their increased workload [26, 27], the precise extent of burnout among PHWs at a national scale, three years post-pandemic onset, remains undetermined. Therefore, we conducted a nationwide survey to ascertain the prevalence of burnout among PHWs in China following three years of battling COVID-19. Additionally, we aimed to identify associated risk factors, with separate analysis conducted for subgroups working in rural and urban settings.

Methods

Study design

A nationwide cross-sectional online survey was conducted from May to October 2022, encompassing 31 provinces in China. This timeframe coincided with the enforcement of the zero-COVID policy, which remained in effect until December 2022.

Sampling

To ensure nationwide coverage across mainland China, we employed a combination of multistage and cluster sampling methods. First, we randomly selected a community health center (CHC) within the capital city of each province. This selection was based on a meticulously compiled sampling frame, which included all CHC in the provincial capitals. A random number generator was utilized to ensure the selection process adhered to principles of true randomness, with the randomization validated to confirm its integrity. Second, we focused on rural PHC facilities by randomly selecting an administrative city, excluding the provincial capitals, and identifying a township hospital along with its affiliated village clinics within this city. The sampling frame for this phase was similarly comprehensive, encompassing all township hospitals in the selected administrative cities. The random selection process was again facilitated by a random number generator, ensuring that the chosen samples were representative and randomly distributed. Typically, urban PHC facilities comprise CHCs their associated stations, while rural counterparts include township hospitals and affiliated village clinics. However, in some administrative cities, township hospitals have been restructured into CHCs due to urbanization; in such cases, we still sampled CHCs instead of township hospitals. In our sample, 9 township hospitals and affiliated village clinics in non-provincial capital cities have been transformed into CHCs. For the four municipalities directly under central government jurisdiction, —Beijing, Shanghai, Tianjin, and Chongqing—we randomly selected one CHC each from urban and suburban areas, and a random number generator was used to sample from these distinct groups. Ultimately, our study included 44 CHCs representing urban areas and 18 township hospitals representing rural areas from 27 provinces and four municipalities (excluding Hong Kong, Macao, and Taiwan).

Participants and data collection

From May to October 2022, a nationwide cross-sectional online survey was conducted in 31 provinces in China. All PHWs within the sampled PHC facilities were invited to participate in the survey. We define PHWs as those who work at CHC or township hospitals and affiliated village clinics. Individuals lacking a smartphone or facing challenges in completing the electronic questionnaire due to visual or intellectual impairments were excluded. We reached out to the directors of the selected PHC facilities via academic organizations. The questionnaire’s QR code, generated through the Questionnaire Star website (https://www.wjx.cn/), was provided to these facility directors, who then disseminated it via a WeChat working group comprising all the facility staff. The total staff count within each facility was reported to us in order to calculate the response rate. In total, 3,769 individuals participated in the survey, yielding a response rate of 93.7% (3,769 out of 4,021).

Measures and covariates

The primary outcome assessed in this study was job burnout, gauged using the Chinese version of Maslach Burnout Inventory-Human Services Survey (MBI-HSS) [28]. This 22-item instrument evaluates three dimensions: EE (nine items), DP (five items), and reduced PA (eight items). Respondents rated the frequency of experiencing specific feelings on a seven-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (never) to 6 (every day). Scores across items with each dimension were summed to determine overall burnout and levels within each domain [29]. In our analysis, we adopted widely utilized scoring criteria based a systematic review [28], employing the following cut-off points: overall burnout (EE ≥ 27, DP ≥ 10 and PA ≤ 33), high EE (EE ≥ 27), high DP (DP ≥ 10), and low PA (PA ≤ 33). The Chinese version of MBI-HSS has been shown to have good reliability and validity [30]. In our study, Cronbach’s α coefficient for the overall MBI-HSS, EE, DP, and PA were 0.89, 0.71, 0.74 and 0.72, respectively, indicating high internal consistency.

Covariates were categorized into four dimensions. Sociodemographic factors encompassed age, gender, marital status, educational status, living arrangements, and family relationships. Individual health characteristics included smoking, drinking, disability, number of chronic diseases, and self-rated health (SRH). Occupational factors comprised practice location, occupation category, professional title, years of experience in PHC, and monthly income. COVID-19 pandemic-related variables encompassed front-line health worker status, satisfaction with PPE, self-rated work intensity, and job satisfaction. Job satisfaction was assessed using the 20-item Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire-Short Form (MSQ-SF) [31], Yielding a Cronbach’s α coefficient of 0.97 in our study. Details of the questionnaires used in the study are shown in the supplementary file 2.

Data analysis

Analyses were performed using SPSS v22 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Participant characteristics and outcomes were succinctly summarized using descriptive statistics such as means and standard deviations (SD), medians and quartiles for continuous variables, or frequencies and percentages for categorical variables. To explore the differences in burnout prevalence between rural and urban PHC facilities, a suite of appropriate tests including the t-test, Kruskal-Wallis H test, and chi-squared test were employed as per the nature of the variables. Potential risk factors were identified through univariate analysis, and significant variables from the univariate analysis were included in a multivariate logistic regression model to obtain adjusted odds ratios (AOR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Subsequent subgroup analyses within rural and urban areas employed the same set of identified risk factors derived from the overall population. These findings were visually represented using a forest plot. All statistical analyses in this study were two-tailed, with a P-value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Ethical considerations

This study received ethical approval from Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University (B2021-605). The online questionnaire includes a checkbox for respondents to make sure whether they give their voluntary informed consent before their involvement.

Results

Sociodemographic characteristics

A total of 3769 PHWs completed the survey comprising 1,174 general practitioners (GPs) (31.1%), 1282 nurses (34.0%), 253 public health physicians (6.7%), 221 managerial staff (5.9%), and 839 support staff (22.3%). Among them, 989 (26.2%) worked in rural areas and 2780 (73.8%) worked in urban areas. The majority of participants were female (2971 [78.8%]), married (2926 [77.6%]), living with their families (3,281 [87.1%]), and reported good family relations (3,060 [81.2%]). Furthermore, most participants were non-smokers (3,453 [91.6%]), non-drinkers (3,211 [85.2%]) and not disabled (3,680 [97.6%]), and did not suffer from chronic diseases (2,936 [77.9%]). A large proportion of participants worked as frontline health workers during COVID-19 pandemic (3649 [96.8%]) and reported satisfaction with the PPE [3050 (80.9%)]. The average MSQ-SF score was 69.9 ± 13.4 (Table 1).

Table 1 Characteristics of the 3769 participants

Characteristics	No. (%)	
Sociodemographic	
Age (years)	
 ≤ 30	974(25.8)	
 31–40	1521(40.4)	
 41–50	880(23.3)	
 > 50	394(10.5)	
Gender	
 Male	798(21.2)	
 Female	2971(78.8)	
Marital status	
 Single	649(17.2)	
 Married	2926(77.6)	
 Divorced/Widowed	194(5.2)	
Educational status	
 High School or below	407(10.8)	
 Junior college	1132(30.0)	
 Undergraduate or above	2230(59.2)	
Living arrangement	
 Living alone	310(8.2)	
 Living with family	3281(87.1)	
 Living with others	178(4.7)	
Family relations	
 Poor	132(3.5)	
 General	577(15.3)	
 Good	3060(81.2)	
Individual health	
Smoking	
 Non-smoker	3453(91.6)	
 Once, now quit	107(2.8)	
 Current smoking	209(5.6)	
Drinking	
 Non-drinker	3211(85.2)	
 Once, now quit	181(4.8)	
 Current drinking	377(10.0)	
Disability	
 Yes	89(2.4)	
 No	3680(97.6)	
Number of chronic diseases	
 0	2936(77.9)	
 1	598(15.9)	
 2 and above	235(6.2)	
SRH 	
 Bad	397(10.5)	
 General	2082(55.3)	
 Good	1290(34.2)	
Occupational status	
Practice location	
 Rural area	989(26.2%)	
 Urban area	2780(73.8%)	
Occupation category	
 GP	1174(31.1)	
 Nurse	1282(34.0)	
 Public health physician	253(6.7)	
 Managerial staff	221(5.9)	
 Support staff	839(22.3)	
Professional title	
 Not rated	548(14.6)	
 Junior	1686(44.7)	
 Intermediate grade	1225(32.5)	
 Senior	310(8.2)	
Length of career in primary care (years)	
 ≤ 10	1945(51.6)	
 11–20	986(26.2)	
 > 20	838(22.2)	
Monthly income (CNY) 	
 < 3000	916(24.3)	
 3000–5000	1620(43.0)	
 > 5000	1233(32.7)	
COVID-19 pandemic	
Front-line health workers	
 Yes	3649(96.8)	
 No	120(3.2)	
Satisfaction with institutional provision of PPE	
 Low	127(3.4)	
 Medium	592(15.7)	
 High	3050(80.9)	
Self-rated work intensity during COVID-19	
 Low	19(0.5)	
 Medium	1145(30.4)	
 High	2605(69.1)	
 MSQ-SF (Mean ± SD)	69.9 ± 13.4	
SRH Self-rated health, GP general practitioner, PPE personal prevention equipment, MSQ-SF Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire-Short Form

Prevalence of burnout

Among the total sample, 625 (16.6%) participants experienced overall burnout, with 1,120 (29.7%) scoring EE ≥ 27, 1057 (28.0%) scoring DP ≥ 10, and 2371 (62.9%) scoring PA ≤ 33 (Table 2). The prevalence of overall burnout (490 [17.6%] vs. 135 [13.7%], P = 0.004) and EE (875 [31.5%] vs. 245 [24.8%], P < 0.001) was higher among urban than rural PHWs. There was no difference in the prevalence of DP (P = 0.093) and PA (P = 0.532) between rural and urban areas.

Table 2 Prevalence of burnout among PHWs in China

Category	Total	Practice location	
Rural	Urban	Statistics	P	
Overall burnout	
 EE ≥ 27 and DP ≥ 10 and PA ≤ 33 [n(%)]	625(16.6)	135(13.7)	490(17.6)	8.336c	0.004	
EE	
 Mean ± SD	19.0 ± 12.4	17.5 ± 11.9	19.5 ± 12.6	4.241a	< 0.001	
 Media (P25, P75)	18(9,27)	15(8,26)	18(9.27)	17.706b	< 0.001	
 EE ≥ 27 [n(%)]	1120(29.7)	245(24.8)	875(31.5)	15.690c	< 0.001	
DP	
 Mean ± SD	6.3 ± 6.7	5.8 ± 6.6	6.4 ± 6.8	2.480a	0.013	
 Media (P25, P75)	4(1,10)	3(1,10)	4(1,11)	8.870b	0.003	
 DP ≥ 10 [n(%)]	1057(28.0)	257(26.0)	800(28.8)	2.816c	0.093	
PA	
 Mean ± SD	28.5 ± 12.0	28.3 ± 12.3	28.5 ± 11.8	0.483a	0.629	
 Media (P25, P75)	29(21,39)	29(20,39)	29(21,39)	0.048b	0.827	
 PA ≤ 33 [n(%)]	2371(62.9)	614(62.1)	1757(63.2)	0.391c	0.532	
PHWs primary health care workers, EE emotional exhaustion, DP depersonalization, PA personal accomplishment; a: t-test; b: Kruskal-Wallis H test; c: Chi-square test

Figure 1 illustrates the prevalence of burnout among PHWs across various provinces in China; darker shades represent higher prevalence of burnout in respective provinces. Our analysis revealed that provinces in north-western and south-eastern China exhibited the highest incidences of overall burnout, EE, and DP, whereas provinces in the north-eastern and south-western regions showed elevated incidences of reduced PA.

Fig. 1 Geographic prevalence of burnout among PHWs in China. Note: All Chinese maps in Figure 1 were downloaded from the website: http://bzdt.ch.mnr.gov.cn/. The Audit Number is GS（2024）No.0650

Burnout related factors and regional differences

Following significant risk factor identification through univariable analysis (Supplementary Table 1), we conducted multivariate logistic regression (Table 3). Results indicated that PHWs living with families were less likely to suffer from EE (AOR, 0.727; 95%CI, 0.542–0.974) and DP (AOR, 0.592; 95%CI, 0.446–0.787), while those reporting good SRH were less likely to experience overall burnout (AOR,0.610; 95%CI, 0.440–0.846), EE (AOR,0.377; 95%CI, 0.283–0.502), and DP (AOR, 0.643; 95%CI, 0.488–0.848). Conversely, urban PHWs were more likely to suffer from overall burnout (AOR, 1.285; 95%CI, 1.021–1.617) and EE (AOR, 1.289; 95%CI, 1.069–1.554). Compared with GPs, nurses (AOR, 1.552; 95%CI, 1.296–1.858), managerial staff (AOR, 1.430; 95%CI, 1.042–1.962), and support staff (AOR, 1.386; 95%CI, 1.139–1.687) were more prone to low PA, whereas PHWs in intermediate (AOR, 0.709; 95%CI, 0.547–0.920) or senior grades (AOR, 0.665; 95%CI, 0.470–0.942), or with a salary of 3000 to 5000 CNY (AOR, 0.806; 95%CI, 0.665–0.977), were not prone to low PA. PPE was a protective factor against overall burnout (AOR, 0.581; 95%CI, 0.373–0.907), EE (AOR, 0.483; 95%CI, 0.319–0.731), and DP (AOR, 0.536; 95%CI, 0.358–0.801). Furthermore, higher MSQ-SF scores were associated with reduced susceptibility to overall burnout and each domain of burnout (P < 0.001).

Table 3 Multivariate logistic regression of burnout risk factors

Variables	Overall	EE	DP	PA	
AOR(95%CI)	P	AOR(95%CI)	P	AOR(95%CI)	P	AOR(95%CI)	P	
Sociodemographic	
Age (years)	
 ≤ 30	Ref.		Ref.		Ref.		Ref.		
 31–40	0.806(0.607–1.070)	0.135	0.750(0.588–0.957)	0.021	0.806(0.634–1.025)	0.079	0.970(0.767–1.226)	0.798	
 41–50	0.584(0.381–0.896)	0.014	0.499(0.353–0.773)	< 0.001	0.519(0.363–0.740)	< 0.001	0.776(0.566–1.063)	0.114	
 > 50	0.720(0.417–1.243)	0.238	0.621(0.402–0.958)	0.031	0.514(0.327–0.809)	0.004	0.684(0.466–1.004)	0.052	
Marital status	
 Single	Ref.		Ref.		Ref.		Ref.		
 Married	0.893(0.650–1.222)	0.467	0.793(0.609–1.032)	0.085	0.913(0.705–1.182)	0.489	1.010(0.800-1.276)	0.934	
 Divorced/Widowed	0.650(0.359–1.106)	0.115	0.691(0.450–1.063)	0.093	0.631(0.407–0.979)	0.040	1.261(0.853–1.862)	0.245	
Education status							NA		
 High School or below	Ref.		Ref.		Ref.				
 College	1.286(0.870–1.899)	0.207	1.181(0.869–1.606)	0.288	0.999(0.739–1.349)	0.992			
 Undergraduate or above	1.150(0.772–1.713)	0.491	1.206(0.896–1.625)	0.217	0.925(0.677–1.266)	0.628			
Living arrangement							NA		
 Living alone	Ref.		Ref.		Ref.				
 Living with family	0.735(0.525–1.029)	0.073	0.727(0.542–0.974)	0.033	0.592(0.446–0.787)	< 0.001			
 Living with others	0.835(0.517–1.350)	0.463	0.824(0.539–1.259)	0.370	1.067(0.714–1.594)	0.751			
Family relations	
 Poor	Ref.		Ref.		Ref.		Ref.		
 General	1.364(0.798–2.331)	0.257	1.224(0.771–1.943)	0.392	1.091(0.695–1.711)	0.706	0.854(0.549–1.329)	0.485	
 Good	1.198(0.718–1.999)	0.490	0.999(0.647–1.544)	0.998	0.928(0.607–1.418)	0.728	0.944(0.627–1.422)	0.783	
Individual health	
Disability	NA						NA		
 No			Ref.		Ref.				
 Yes			1.422(0.880–2.298)	0.151	1.359(0.844–2.189)	0.206			
Number of chronic diseases	NA				NA				
 0			Ref.				Ref.		
 1			1.034(0.826–1.293)	0.773			0.844(0.687–1.036)	0.104	
 2 and above			0.991(0.709–1.387)	0.959			1.010(0.738–1.381)	0.951	
SRH	
 Bad	Ref.		Ref.		Ref.		Ref.		
 General	0.954(0.726–1.253)	0.734	0.556(0.434–0.712)	< 0.001	0.957(0.751–1.220)	0.722	1.030(0.795–1.334)	0.825	
 Good	0.610(0.440–0.846)	0.003	0.377(0.283–0.502)	< 0.001	0.643(0.488–0.848)	0.002	0.831(0.626–1.104)	0.201	
Occupational status	
Practice location					NA		NA		
 Rural area	Ref.		Ref.						
 Urban area	1.285(1.021–1.617)	0.032	1.289(1069 − 1.554)	0.008					
Occupation category			NA						
 GP	Ref.				Ref.		Ref.		
 Nurse	1.164(0.912–1.485)	0.223			1.071(0.877–1.309)	0.502	1.552(1.296–1.858)	< 0.001	
 Public health physician	0.851(0.566–1.280)	0.439			0.8901(0.648–1.253)	0.5436	1.312(0.973–1.769)	0.075	
 Managerial staff	1.008(0.641–1.583)	0.974			1.029(0.713–1.486)	0.878	1.430(1.042–1.962)	0.027	
 Support staff	1.203(0.927–1.562)	0.165			1.182(0.953–1.465)	0.128	1.386(1.139–1.687)	0.001	
Professional title			NA						
 Not rated	Ref.				Ref.		Ref.		
 Junior	0.924(0.689–1.240)	0.599			1.082(0.845–1.385)	0.531	0.822(0.654–1.033)	0.093	
 Intermediate grade	1.003(0.711–1.415)	0.985			1.068(0.799–1.429)	0.656	0.709(0.547–0.920)	0.010	
 Senior	1.007(0.598–1.694)	0.980			0.886(0.574–1.367)	0.583	0.665(0.470–0.942)	0.022	
Length of career in primary care (years)	
 ≤ 10	Ref.		Ref.		Ref.		Ref.		
 11–20	0.831(0.641–1.077)	0.162	1.110(0.893–1.379)	0.346	0.928(0.747–1.151)	0.496	0.945(0.774–1.153)	0.578	
 > 20	0.817(0.541–1.234)	0.337	1.091(0.785–1.517)	0.604	1.047(0.747–1.468)	0.790	0.875(0.659–1.163)	0.358	
Monthly income (CNY)	NA		NA						
 ≤ 3000					Ref.		Ref.		
 3000–5000					0.999(0.815–1.226)	0.995	0.806(0.665–0.977)	0.028	
 > 5000					1.171(0.921–1.489)	0.198	0.844(0.678–1.050)	0.128	
COVID-19 pandemic	
Satisfaction with institutional provision of PPE	
 Low	Ref.		Ref.		Ref.		Ref.		
 Medium	0.919(0.578–1.460)	0.719	0.780(0.503–1.210)	0.267	0.955(0.626–1.458)	0.832	1.449(0.926–2.268)	0.105	
 High	0.581(0.373–0.907)	0.017	0.483(0.319–0.731)	0.001	0.536(0.358–0.801)	0.002	1.249(0.824–1.893)	0.294	
Self-assessment of work intensity during COVID-19	
 Low	Ref.		Ref.		Ref.		Ref.		
 Medium	0.751(0.191–2.956)	0.682	0.960(0.266–3.467)	0.950	1.507(0.433–5.249)	0.520	1.395(0.532–3.660)	0.499	
 High	1.008(0.258–3.942)	0.991	1.912(0.532–6.867)	0.321	1.530(0.441–5.316)	0.503	1.331(0.508–3.485)	0.561	
 MSQ-SF (Mean ± SD)	0.953(0.945–0.961)	< 0.001	0.956(0.949–0.963)	< 0.001	0.962(0.956–0.969)	< 0.001	0.956(0.950–0.962)	< 0.001	
SRH Self-rated health, GP general practitioner, PPE personal prevention equipment, MSQ-SF Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire-Short Form

The difference in risk factors between rural and urban areas

According to Fig. 2, marital status and SRH emerged as protective factors against overall burnout, EE, and DP among PHWs in different regions. Specifically, rural married PHWs exhibited the lowest rates of overall burnout (AOR,0.435; 95%CI, 0.243–0.778), EE (AOR,0.566; 95%CI, 0.346–0.927), and DP (AOR, 0.505; 95%CI, 0.309–0.827). Moreover, urban PHWs with good SRH were less likely to experience overall burnout (AOR, 0.04; 95%CI, 0.394–0.837), EE (AOR, 0.315; 95%CI, 0.226–0.439), or DP (AOR, 0.615; 95%CI, 0.446–0.846). Occupation category emerged as an independent risk factor for low PA among urban PHWs, with nurses, managerial staff, and support staff exhibiting a higher likelihood of reporting low PA than GPs. Satisfaction with the institutional provision of PPE was associated with reduced overall burnout, EE, and DP, among urban PHWs, while rural PHWs who were in the intermediate level of satisfaction with PPE provision were more likely to experience DP than those reporting lower satisfaction levels (AOR, 2.334; 95%CI, 1.007–5.409). The MSQ-SF score influenced all domains of burnout and affected both rural and urban PHWs.

Fig. 2 Risk factors for burnout stratified by region

Discussion

According to this study, the prevalence of burnout among PHWs was 16.6%, with a higher prevalence observed among those working in urban areas (17.6%) compared to their rural counterparts (13.7%). Wang et al.. reported that lower percentages of rural PHWs experiencing high levels of EE, DP, and reduced PA at 27.66%, 6.06%, and 38.74%, respectively [32], compared to their urban counterparts. Higher burnout among urban PHWs could be attributed to factors such as increased patient visits, higher numbers of contracted residents, and heavier health management workload, owing to the high population densities in urban settings. Further investigation is warranted to explore the difference in burnout between urban and rural PHWs.

Notably, a significant proportion (62.9%) reported low PA, followed by high EE (29.7%) and DP (28%). It is noteworthy that the reduced PA among PHWs in this study was considerably higher than that found in previous studies. Two limited studies published in 2019 in China, one involving 951 participants in Shandong Province and another encompassing 3,236 participants nationwide, have indicated the prevalence rates of high EE, DP, and low PA to be 33.12–43.17%, 8.83–22.93%, and 41.19–41.43%, respectively [33, 34]. A nationwide cross-sectional study in Lebanon, encompassing 960 primary healthcare center healthcare providers, revealed that 22.1%, 10.8%, and 20.8% of the respondents reported high levels of emotional exhaustion, high degrees of depersonalization, and low personal accomplishment, respectively [35]. Our study was conducted at the end of 2022, after nearly three years of the COVID-19 emergency response, which included tasks such as shelter hospital support, airport/crossing support, nucleic acid sampling. The prolonged overload may have eroded PHWs’ of a sense of accomplishment in disease treatment and health management.

Occupational-related factors were found to be significantly associated with reduced PA, rather than EE and DP. While much research has examined individual occupational groups independently, there’s evidence suggesting occupational disparities in burnout among medical staff, which is consistent with our results [36–40]. A study conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic, involving 606 frontline medical staff recruited from 133 cities in China, indicated that nurses experienced the highest incidence of burnout compared to doctors and medical technicians [41]. In this study, nurses, managerial staff, and support staff were more prone to experiencing reduced PA compared to GPs. A review that included 37 studies related to the psychological health of frontline healthcare workers during the pandemic have highlighted increased workload, aspects of the work environment, poor staffing ratios, lack of communication between doctors and nurses, and organizational leadership deficiencies as factors contributing to burnout among nurses and support staff [42]. In the context of this study, GPs primarily led the provision of PHC, while nurses, managerial staff, and support staff often assumed supportive roles to assist physicians in disease treatment and health management.

Interestingly, higher professional title and income levels seemed to offer some protective effect against reduced PA, contradicting the “stress of higher status” hypothesis, which posits that higher-status PHWs are more susceptible to burnout. However, this hypothesis has predominantly been explored in the context of the intensive care unit (ICU) [43], where work intensity and urgency are notably higher than in PHC setting. Surprisingly, work intensity was not a significant predictor variable, as typically observed, potentially due to the sustained high-intensity work experienced by PHWs. In such scenarios, where high-intensity work persists, difference in work intensity among medical staff diminish, with emotional perceptions such as job satisfaction emerging as more direct predictors of burnout.

The COVID-19 pandemic has undeniably posed significant challenges globally, prompting PHWs to engage in extensive efforts such as vaccination promotion, community PCR testing, and management of infected patients [18, 44]. Surprisingly, this study highlights that adequate PPE and job satisfaction played pivotal roles in mitigating burnout during the pandemic, rather than anticipated factor of work intensity. Consistent with existing literature, job satisfaction was inversely correlated with burnout, underscoring its importance in preserving PHWs’ well-being [32, 45, 46]. Conversely, inadequate PPE availability was significantly associated with burnout especially among PHWs in urban area, likely stemming from the heightened anxiety caused by uncertainties surrounding COVID-19 during periods of insufficient protection.

Remarkably, our findings reveal that familial support and higher SRH acted as significant protective factors against burnout among PHWs, especially in mitigating EE and DP. Our research findings demonstrate a lower prevalence of burnout among married rural PHWs. Within the context of China’s emphasis on family institution building and clan systems [47–49], this finding preliminarily suggests the supportive role of traditional Chinese familial culture in mitigating burnout. Recent studies have consistently demonstrated the inverse relationship between perceived family support and burnout among medical professionals. For example, Koutsimani et al. found that high levels of perceived family support were associated with reduced exhaustion and cynicism, emphasizing the protective role of familial support in preventing burnout [50]. Moreover, Taku’s research further elucidated the impact of family support in conjunction with perceived growth, significantly influenced EE and DP [51]. In addition, studies have indicated that physicians, nurses, dentists, and other medical staff with lower SRH were more susceptible to experiencing burnout [52–54]. However, the intricate interaction between SRH and burnout warrants further exploration.

Disparities in the risk factors for burnout were evident between urban and rural areas. Job satisfaction emerged as a protective factor against burnout across all PHWs, irrespective of their workplace setting. Conversely, the impact of PPE on burnout varied, affecting all burnout domains except PA in urban PHWs. This discrepancy in PPE’s protective effect may be attributed to the densely populated nature and unique epidemiological dynamics of urban environments, where PPE sensitivity could be higher due to increased exposure risk. In contrast, in rural areas characterized by vast expanses of land and sparser populations, the sensitivity to PPE may be comparatively lower [55].

Regarding EE and DP, living arrangements and SRH emerged as significant predictors for urban PHWs, whereas marital status was a notable factor for rural practitioners. In traditional rural settings, marriage serves as a protective factor against burnout, aligning with cultural norms that prioritize the supportive role a spouse in alleviating work-related stress [56]. For PA, pronounced disparities were observed among PHWs in different practice locations. In urban areas, occupational differences among physicians, nurses, managerial staff, and support staff influenced PA with higher professional titles associated with increased PA. However, such variations were less discernible in rural areas, where income emerged as a significant predictor. In these contexts, economic factors outweighed professional status and practice type, reflecting the relatively lower level of economic development in rural regions. The distinct patterns of burnout disparities and related factors between urban and rural areas underscore the importance of further investigation into these dynamics.

Our findings underscored the importance of adequate protective measures and health maintenance initiatives for PHWs in urban centers, alongside the traditional focus on ICU resources and care for critically ill patients. Rural-urban burnout gap among PHWs should be taken into account for the next emergency preparedness. Urban areas should strategically pre-emptively stock essential supplies like PPE to mitigate the anxiety among frontline healthcare workers. To alleviate burnout among rural primary healthcare workers, it is essential to foster a robust family support network that provides comprehensive backing.

Conclusion

To our knowledge, our study represents the first nationwide investigation into burnout among PHWs conducted at the conclusion of the COVID-19 pandemic. Notably, a striking 62.9% reported reduced personal accomplishment, potentially attributable to the prolonged and repetitive nature of COVID-related duties, such as extensive testing campaigns, without commensurate recognition or rewards. Furthermore, our study identified disparities in burnout prevalence between urban and rural areas, highlighting distinct impact mechanisms and the need for tailored intervention strategies. While metropolises faced significant strain on healthcare systems due to high population densities, burnout among PHWs in these settings received insufficient attention.

Limitations

This study represents the first nationwide investigation into burnout among PHWs in China during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, several limitations need to be acknowledged. Firstly, the study was cross-sectional, precluding the capture of burnout trajectories over time. Secondly, while variables such as work intensity, self-rated PPE, and occupational satisfaction during COVID-19 were included, additional COVID-related factors, such as the scale of infections could have been considered to provide a more comprehensive analysis. Thirdly, the focus was primarily on PHWs working in PHC facilities, potentially overlooking burnout disparities among specialists working in larger hospitals, warranting further investigation. Fourthly, our study has not extensively investigated the cultural factors underpinning this association. Future research is warranted to explore these cultural determinants in greater depth.

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Material 1.

Supplementary Material 2.

Acknowledgements

Our grateful thanks are due to the Society of General Practice of Chinese Medical Association and the Society of General Practice of Cross-straits Medicine Exchange Association for their help in the data gathering. We thank the healthcare workers who participated in this research. We also thank Yaoyao Xu and Yang Zhou of the Society of General Practice of Cross-straits Medicine Exchange Association, Zhigang Pan of Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Mei Feng of Shanxi Medical University, Jingjing Ren of The Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University and Zhaohui Du of Shanghai Shanggang CHC for their help with the collection.

Authors' contributions

Jie Gu: Design, Conceptualization, Writing–review & editing. Jiaoling Huang: Methodology, Writing– original draft, Writing– review & editing. Jiayi Ji: Writing– review & editing. Ping Zhu: Interpretation of data. Yuge Yan: Visualization, Data analysis, Statistical analysis. Biao Xi: Investigation. Shanzhu Zhu: Investigation.

Funding

This study was supported by the National Natural Science foundation of China [72274122], Science and Technology Commission of Shanghai Municipality [23692113400], Shanghai Municipal Education Commission [C2021027] and Shanghai Municipal Three Year Action Plan for Strengthening the Construction of Public Health System - Excellent Youth Project (GWVI-11.2-YQ54).

Availability of data and materials

The authors declare that the data supporting the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon request.

Declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study received ethical approval from Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University (B2021-605). The online questionnaire includes a checkbox for respondents to make sure whether they give their voluntary informed consent before their involvement. The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.

Consent for publication

All authors gave their consent for publication.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Jiaoling Huang and Ping Zhu these authors contributed equally to this work and should be considered co-first authors.
==== Refs
References

1. Van Dierendonck D Schaufeli WB Sixma HJ Burnout among general practitioners: a perspective from equity theory J Soc Clin Psychol 1994 13 1 86 100
Van Dierendonck D, Schaufeli WB, Sixma HJ. Burnout among general practitioners: a perspective from equity theory. J Soc Clin Psychol. 1994;13(1):86–100.
2. Shanafelt TD Boone S Tan L Dyrbye LN Sotile W Satele D Burnout and satisfaction with work-life balance among US physicians relative to the general US population Arch Intern Med 2012 172 18 1377 1385 22911330
Shanafelt TD, Boone S, Tan L, Dyrbye LN, Sotile W, Satele D, et al. Burnout and satisfaction with work-life balance among US physicians relative to the general US population. Arch Intern Med. 2012;172(18):1377–85.22911330
3. Shanafelt TD Hasan O Dyrbye LN Sinsky C Satele D Sloan J Changes in burnout and satisfaction with work-life balance in physicians and the general US working population between 2011 and 2014 Mayo Clin Proc. 2015 90 12 1600 1613 26653297
Shanafelt TD, Hasan O, Dyrbye LN, Sinsky C, Satele D, Sloan J, et al. Changes in burnout and satisfaction with work-life balance in physicians and the general US working population between 2011 and 2014. Mayo Clin Proc. 2015;90(12):1600–13.26653297
4. West CP Shanafelt TD Kolars JC Quality of life, burnout, educational debt, and medical knowledge among internal medicine residents JAMA 2011 306 9 952 960 21900135
West CP, Shanafelt TD, Kolars JC. Quality of life, burnout, educational debt, and medical knowledge among internal medicine residents. JAMA. 2011;306(9):952–60.21900135
5. Linzer M Visser MRM Oort FJ Smets EMA McMurray JE de Haes HCJM Predicting and preventing physician burnout: results from the United States and the Netherlands Am J Med 2001 111 2 170 175 11498074
Linzer M, Visser MRM, Oort FJ, Smets EMA, McMurray JE, de Haes HCJM. Predicting and preventing physician burnout: results from the United States and the Netherlands. Am J Med. 2001;111(2):170–5.11498074
6. Baxter SL Saseendrakumar BR Cheung M Savides TJ Longhurst CA Sinsky CA Association of electronic health record inbasket message characteristics with physician burnout JAMA Netw Open 2022 5 11 e2244363 36449288
Baxter SL, Saseendrakumar BR, Cheung M, Savides TJ, Longhurst CA, Sinsky CA, et al. Association of electronic health record inbasket message characteristics with physician burnout. JAMA Netw Open. 2022;5(11):e2244363.36449288
7. Fiabane E Margheritti S Aiello EN Magnone S Miglioretti M Gabanelli P Prevalence and determinants of Italian physicians’ burnout in the post-COVID-19 era Int Arch Occup Environ Health 2023 96 3 377 387 36335513
Fiabane E, Margheritti S, Aiello EN, Magnone S, Miglioretti M, Gabanelli P, et al. Prevalence and determinants of Italian physicians’ burnout in the post-COVID-19 era. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2023;96(3):377–87.36335513
8. Gluschkoff K Hakanen JJ Elovainio M Vänskä J Heponiemi T The relative importance of work-related psychosocial factors in physician burnout Occup Med (Lond) 2022 72 1 28 33 34729593
Gluschkoff K, Hakanen JJ, Elovainio M, Vänskä J, Heponiemi T. The relative importance of work-related psychosocial factors in physician burnout. Occup Med (Lond). 2022;72(1):28–33.34729593
9. Hartzband P Groopman J Physician burnout, interrupted N Engl J Med 2020 382 26 2485 2487 32356624
Hartzband P, Groopman J. Physician burnout, interrupted. N Engl J Med. 2020;382(26):2485–7.32356624
10. Weigl M Physician burnout undermines safe healthcare BMJ 2022 378 o2157 36104075
Weigl M. Physician burnout undermines safe healthcare. BMJ. 2022;378:o2157.36104075
11. Melnikow J Padovani A Miller M Frontline physician burnout during the COVID-19 pandemic: national survey findings BMC Health Serv Res 2022 22 1 365 35303889
Melnikow J, Padovani A, Miller M. Frontline physician burnout during the COVID-19 pandemic: national survey findings. BMC Health Serv Res. 2022;22(1):365.35303889
12. Li Y Fan R Lu Y Li H Liu X Kong G Prevalence of psychological symptoms and associated risk factors among nurses in 30 provinces during the COVID-19 pandemic in China Lancet Reg Health West Pac 2023 30 100618 36276987
Li Y, Fan R, Lu Y, Li H, Liu X, Kong G, et al. Prevalence of psychological symptoms and associated risk factors among nurses in 30 provinces during the COVID-19 pandemic in China. Lancet Reg Health West Pac. 2023;30:100618.36276987
13. Macaron MM, Segun-Omosehin OA, Matar RH, Beran A, Nakanishi H, Than CA, et al. A systematic review and meta analysis on burnout in physicians during the COVID-19 pandemic: a hidden healthcare crisis. Front Psychiatry. 2023;13. Available from: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychiatry/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2022.1071397/full. Cited 2024 Jul 12.
14. Hodkinson A Zhou A Johnson J Geraghty K Riley R Zhou A Associations of physician burnout with career engagement and quality of patient care: systematic review and meta-analysis BMJ 2022 378 e070442 36104064
Hodkinson A, Zhou A, Johnson J, Geraghty K, Riley R, Zhou A, et al. Associations of physician burnout with career engagement and quality of patient care: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2022;378:e070442.36104064
15. Shen J Chen L Huang J Visual analysis of international research hotspots in the field of professional burnout among primary healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic Shanghai J Prev Med 2023 35 8 810 818
Shen J, Chen L, Huang J. Visual analysis of international research hotspots in the field of professional burnout among primary healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Shanghai J Prev Med. 2023;35(8):810–8.
16. Kidd MR Five principles for pandemic preparedness: lessons from the Australian COVID-19 primary care response Br J Gen Pract 2020 70 696 316 317 32571772
Kidd MR. Five principles for pandemic preparedness: lessons from the Australian COVID-19 primary care response. Br J Gen Pract. 2020;70(696):316–7.32571772
17. Sigurdsson EL Blondal AB Jonsson JS Tomasdottir MO Hrafnkelsson H Linnet K How primary healthcare in Iceland swiftly changed its strategy in response to the COVID-19 pandemic BMJ Open 2020 10 12 e043151 33293329
Sigurdsson EL, Blondal AB, Jonsson JS, Tomasdottir MO, Hrafnkelsson H, Linnet K, et al. How primary healthcare in Iceland swiftly changed its strategy in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. BMJ Open. 2020;10(12):e043151.33293329
18. Lim WH Wong WM COVID-19: notes from the front line, Singapore’s primary health care perspective Ann Fam Med 2020 18 3 259 261 32393562
Lim WH, Wong WM. COVID-19: notes from the front line, Singapore’s primary health care perspective. Ann Fam Med. 2020;18(3):259–61.32393562
19. Li D Howe AC Astier-Peña MP Primary health care response in the management of pandemics: learnings from the COVID-19 pandemic Aten Primaria 2021 53 Suppl 1 Suppl 1 102226 34961573
Li D, Howe AC, Astier-Peña MP. Primary health care response in the management of pandemics: learnings from the COVID-19 pandemic. Aten Primaria. 2021;53 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):102226.34961573
20. Ng I Robins-Browne K Putland M Pascoe A Paul E Willis K Mental health symptoms in Australian general practitioners during the COVID-19 pandemic Aust J Prim Health 2022 28 5 387 398 35851466
Ng I, Robins-Browne K, Putland M, Pascoe A, Paul E, Willis K, et al. Mental health symptoms in Australian general practitioners during the COVID-19 pandemic. Aust J Prim Health. 2022;28(5):387–98.35851466
21. Apaydin EA Rose DE McClean MR Mohr DC Yano EM Shekelle PG Burnout, employee engagement, and changing organizational contexts in VA primary care during the early COVID-19 pandemic BMC Health Serv Res 2023 23 1 1306 38012726
Apaydin EA, Rose DE, McClean MR, Mohr DC, Yano EM, Shekelle PG, et al. Burnout, employee engagement, and changing organizational contexts in VA primary care during the early COVID-19 pandemic. BMC Health Serv Res. 2023;23(1):1306.38012726
22. Ching SM Cheong AT Yee A Thurasamy R Lim PY Zarina II Prevalence and factors associated with burnout among healthcare providers in Malaysia: a web-based cross-sectional study Ir J Med Sci 2024 193 2 851 863 37556104
Ching SM, Cheong AT, Yee A, Thurasamy R, Lim PY, Zarina II, et al. Prevalence and factors associated with burnout among healthcare providers in Malaysia: a web-based cross-sectional study. Ir J Med Sci. 2024;193(2):851–63.37556104
23. Ayaslıer AA Albayrak B Çelik E Özdemir Ö Özgür Ö Kırımlı E Burnout in primary healthcare physicians and nurses in Turkey during COVID-19 pandemic Prim Health Care Res Dev 2023 24 e4 36617850
Ayaslıer AA, Albayrak B, Çelik E, Özdemir Ö, Özgür Ö, Kırımlı E, et al. Burnout in primary healthcare physicians and nurses in Turkey during COVID-19 pandemic. Prim Health Care Res Dev. 2023;24:e4.36617850
24. Gu A Willis K Kay M Hutt K Smallwood N We are largely left out’: workplace and psychosocial experiences of Australian general practitioners during the initial months of the COVID-19 pandemic Aust J Prim Health 2022 29 1 47 55
Gu A, Willis K, Kay M, Hutt K, Smallwood N. We are largely left out’: workplace and psychosocial experiences of Australian general practitioners during the initial months of the COVID-19 pandemic. Aust J Prim Health. 2022;29(1):47–55.
25. Mandal A Purkey E Psychological impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on rural physicians in Ontario: a qualitative study Healthcare 2022 10 3 455 35326933
Mandal A, Purkey E. Psychological impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on rural physicians in Ontario: a qualitative study. Healthcare. 2022;10(3):455.35326933
26. Wang J, Zhao S, Tong X, Wang M, Wang Y. Work-family conflict among primary health workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: its mediating role in the relationship between workload and job burnout. J Clin Nurs. 2024. Available from: https://webofscience.clarivate.cn/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=DOISource&SrcApp=UA&KeyAID=10.1111%2Fjocn.17035&DestApp=DOI&SrcAppSID=USW2EC0E14gDQuBshiSy2FffKJxvR&SrcJTitle=JOURNAL+OF+CLINICAL+NURSING&DestDOIRegistrantName=Wiley+%28Blackwell+Publishing%29. Cited 2024 Jul 12.
27. Lo Destro C Gasparini C COVID-19 psychological impact during the Italian lockdown: a study on healthcare professional J Workplace Behav Health 2021 36 3 222 37
Lo Destro C, Gasparini C. COVID-19 psychological impact during the Italian lockdown: a study on healthcare professional. J Workplace Behav Health. 2021;36(3):222–37.
28. Rotenstein LS Torre M Ramos MA Rosales RC Guille C Sen S Prevalence of burnout among physicians: a systematic review JAMA 2018 320 11 1131 1150 30326495
Rotenstein LS, Torre M, Ramos MA, Rosales RC, Guille C, Sen S, et al. Prevalence of burnout among physicians: a systematic review. JAMA. 2018;320(11):1131–50.30326495
29. Maslach C Jackson SE Leiter MP Maslach burnout inventory manual 2018 4 San Francisco Mind Garden, Inc
Maslach C, Jackson SE, Leiter MP. Maslach burnout inventory manual. 4th ed. San Francisco: Mind Garden, Inc; 2018.
30. Zheng-xue L. An investigation on job burnout of doctor and nurse. Chin J Clin Psychol. 2003. Available from: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/An-Investigation-on-Job-Burnout-of-Doctor-and-Nurse-Zheng-xue/868714941d5d55ab6fb704007b9a6c664e2b61f0. Cited 2024 Feb 17.
31. Weiss DJ Dawis RV England GW Manual for the Minnesota satisfaction questionnaire Minn Stud Vocat Rehabilitation 1967 22 120 120
Weiss DJ, Dawis RV, England GW. Manual for the Minnesota satisfaction questionnaire. Minn Stud Vocat Rehabilitation. 1967;22:120–120.
32. Wang H Jin Y Wang D Zhao S Sang X Yuan B Job satisfaction, burnout, and turnover intention among primary care providers in rural China: results from structural equation modeling BMC Fam Pract 2020 21 1 12 31941455
Wang H, Jin Y, Wang D, Zhao S, Sang X, Yuan B. Job satisfaction, burnout, and turnover intention among primary care providers in rural China: results from structural equation modeling. BMC Fam Pract. 2020;21(1):12.31941455
33. Li H Yuan B Meng Q Kawachi I Contextual factors associated with burnout among Chinese primary care providers: a multilevel analysis Int J Environ Res Public Health 2019 16 19 3555 31547533
Li H, Yuan B, Meng Q, Kawachi I. Contextual factors associated with burnout among Chinese primary care providers: a multilevel analysis. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019;16(19):3555.31547533
34. Zuxun ZYFYMLYLY Prevalence and influencing factors for job burnout among general practitioners in China Chin Gen Pract 2019 22 7 764
Zuxun ZYFYMLYLY. Prevalence and influencing factors for job burnout among general practitioners in China. Chin Gen Pract. 2019;22(7):764.
35. Alameddine M Baroud M Kharroubi S Hamadeh R Ammar W Shoaib H Investigating the job satisfaction of healthcare providers at primary healthcare centres in Lebanon: a national cross-sectional study Health Soc Care Commun 2017 25 6 1805 1816
Alameddine M, Baroud M, Kharroubi S, Hamadeh R, Ammar W, Shoaib H, et al. Investigating the job satisfaction of healthcare providers at primary healthcare centres in Lebanon: a national cross-sectional study. Health Soc Care Commun. 2017;25(6):1805–16.
36. Pala AN Chuang JC Chien A Krauth DM Leitner SA Okoye NM Depression, anxiety, and burnout among hospital workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study PLoS One 2022 17 12 e0276861 36490248
Pala AN, Chuang JC, Chien A, Krauth DM, Leitner SA, Okoye NM, et al. Depression, anxiety, and burnout among hospital workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study. PLoS One. 2022;17(12):e0276861.36490248
37. Rotenstein LS Brown R Sinsky C Linzer M The association of work overload with burnout and intent to leave the job across the healthcare workforce during COVID-19 J Gen Intern Med 2023 38 8 1920 1927 36959522
Rotenstein LS, Brown R, Sinsky C, Linzer M. The association of work overload with burnout and intent to leave the job across the healthcare workforce during COVID-19. J Gen Intern Med. 2023;38(8):1920–7.36959522
38. Tung TH Yang YP Zhang MX Chen HX Pan SJ Evaluation of coronavirus disease 2019 burnout syndrome among healthcare workers in Taizhou, China Int J Public Health 2023 68 1605539 37089792
Tung TH, Yang YP, Zhang MX, Chen HX, Pan SJ. Evaluation of coronavirus disease 2019 burnout syndrome among healthcare workers in Taizhou, China. Int J Public Health. 2023;68:1605539.37089792
39. Teo I Chay J Cheung YB Sung SC Tewani KG Yeo LF Healthcare worker stress, anxiety and burnout during the COVID-19 pandemic in Singapore: a 6-month multi-centre prospective study PLoS One 2021 16 10 e0258866 34679110
Teo I, Chay J, Cheung YB, Sung SC, Tewani KG, Yeo LF, et al. Healthcare worker stress, anxiety and burnout during the COVID-19 pandemic in Singapore: a 6-month multi-centre prospective study. PLoS One. 2021;16(10):e0258866.34679110
40. Izdebski Z Kozakiewicz A Białorudzki M Dec-Pietrowska J Mazur J Occupational burnout in healthcare workers, stress and other symptoms of work overload during the covid-19 pandemic in Poland Int J Environ Res Public Health 2023 20 3 2428 36767797
Izdebski Z, Kozakiewicz A, Białorudzki M, Dec-Pietrowska J, Mazur J. Occupational burnout in healthcare workers, stress and other symptoms of work overload during the covid-19 pandemic in Poland. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023;20(3): 2428.36767797
41. Huo L Zhou Y Li S Ning Y Zeng L Liu Z Burnout and its relationship with depressive symptoms in medical staff during the COVID-19 epidemic in China Front Psychol 2021 12 616369 33746836
Huo L, Zhou Y, Li S, Ning Y, Zeng L, Liu Z, et al. Burnout and its relationship with depressive symptoms in medical staff during the COVID-19 epidemic in China. Front Psychol. 2021;12:616369.33746836
42. Gupta S Sahoo S Pandemic and mental health of the front-line healthcare workers: a review and implications in the Indian context amidst COVID-19 Gen Psychiatr 2020 33 5 e100284 34192235
Gupta S, Sahoo S. Pandemic and mental health of the front-line healthcare workers: a review and implications in the Indian context amidst COVID-19. Gen Psychiatr. 2020;33(5):e100284.34192235
43. Grace MK VanHeuvelen JS Occupational variation in burnout among medical staff: evidence for the stress of higher status Soc Sci Med 2019 232 199 208 31102930
Grace MK, VanHeuvelen JS. Occupational variation in burnout among medical staff: evidence for the stress of higher status. Soc Sci Med. 2019;232:199–208.31102930
44. Qian Y Huang J Zhao L Cheong IH Cao S Xiong L Which matters more in fighting COVID-19-government policy or community participation? Front Public Health 2022 10 927553 35903372
Qian Y, Huang J, Zhao L, Cheong IH, Cao S, Xiong L, et al. Which matters more in fighting COVID-19-government policy or community participation? Front Public Health. 2022;10:927553.35903372
45. Gan Y Jiang H Li L Yang Y Wang C Liu J Prevalence of burnout and associated factors among general practitioners in Hubei, China: a cross-sectional study BMC Public Health 2019 19 1 1607 31791282
Gan Y, Jiang H, Li L, Yang Y, Wang C, Liu J, et al. Prevalence of burnout and associated factors among general practitioners in Hubei, China: a cross-sectional study. BMC Public Health. 2019;19(1):1607.31791282
46. Hu HX Liu LT Zhao FJ Yao YY Gao YX Wang GR Factors related to job burnout among community nurses in Changchun, China J Nurs Res 2015 23 3 172 180 25700278
Hu HX, Liu LT, Zhao FJ, Yao YY, Gao YX, Wang GR. Factors related to job burnout among community nurses in Changchun, China. J Nurs Res. 2015;23(3):172–80.25700278
47. Huang CY The family system and family concepts in modern China – a summary of the 6th China Modern Intellectual History Seminar Yuan Dao. 2017 1 300 306
Huang CY. The family system and family concepts in modern China – a summary of the 6th China Modern Intellectual History Seminar. Yuan Dao. 2017;1:300–6.
48. Wu F Changes in family functions and the construction of family development capacity in China Popul Plann. 2017 9 35 37
Wu F. Changes in family functions and the construction of family development capacity in China. Popul Plann. 2017;9:35–7.
49. Li JP. The impact of family structure changes on family moral education in contemporary China and coping strategies. Master's thesis, China University of Mining and Technology; 2022. Available from: https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=Xlf5kQqXAOmnW5KQ4TKzRPtsiQj7bJ-6fcM-4lGMSF3Z5FvXdD2E88bExZe2df60PVwqnAhAr15siDv7FmWd-b-D34p1cA_I0S8F6XBpVBKIVZP2PAmNHB0yRpKG-FJFJFAST8BHeLOwit6tD4rZ6CaudwnFQtaF3HeaLogCVg8CzCXcP-QPP4RDRVo7jF-CLosmOuHgkjg=&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS. Cited 2024 Jul 15.
50. Koutsimani P Montgomery A Masoura E Panagopoulou E Burnout and cognitive performance Int J Environ Res Public Health 2021 18 4 2145 33671754
Koutsimani P, Montgomery A, Masoura E, Panagopoulou E. Burnout and cognitive performance. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(4):2145.33671754
51. Taku K Relationships among perceived psychological growth, resilience and burnout in physicians Pers Indiv Differ 2014 59 120 123
Taku K. Relationships among perceived psychological growth, resilience and burnout in physicians. Pers Indiv Differ. 2014;59:120–3.
52. Malagón-Aguilera MC Suñer-Soler R Bonmatí-Tomas A Bosch-Farré C Gelabert-Viella S Fontova-Almató A Dispositional optimism, burnout and their relationship with self-reported health status among nurses working in long-term healthcare centers Int J Environ Res Public Health 2020 17 14 4918 32650418
Malagón-Aguilera MC, Suñer-Soler R, Bonmatí-Tomas A, Bosch-Farré C, Gelabert-Viella S, Fontova-Almató A, et al. Dispositional optimism, burnout and their relationship with self-reported health status among nurses working in long-term healthcare centers. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(14):4918.32650418
53. Aloweni F Ayre TC Teo I Tan HK Lim SH A year after COVID-19: its impact on nurses’ psychological well-being J Nurs Manag 2022 30 7 2585 96 36150900
Aloweni F, Ayre TC, Teo I, Tan HK, Lim SH. A year after COVID-19: its impact on nurses’ psychological well-being. J Nurs Manag. 2022;30(7):2585–96.36150900
54. Chambers CNL Frampton CMA Barclay M McKee M Burnout prevalence in New Zealand’s public hospital senior medical workforce: a cross-sectional mixed methods study BMJ Open 2016 6 11 e013947 27881531
Chambers CNL, Frampton CMA, Barclay M, McKee M. Burnout prevalence in New Zealand’s public hospital senior medical workforce: a cross-sectional mixed methods study. BMJ Open. 2016;6(11):e013947.27881531
55. Qian Y Cao S Zhao L Yan Y Huang J Policy choices for Shanghai responding to challenges of Omicron Front Public Health 2022 10 927387 36016887
Qian Y, Cao S, Zhao L, Yan Y, Huang J. Policy choices for Shanghai responding to challenges of Omicron. Front Public Health. 2022;10:927387.36016887
56. Horwitz AV White HR Howell-White S Becoming married and mental health: a longitudinal study of a cohort of young adults J Marriage Fam 1996 58 4 895 907
Horwitz AV, White HR, Howell-White S. Becoming married and mental health: a longitudinal study of a cohort of young adults. J Marriage Fam. 1996;58(4):895–907.
