data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7e1e6/7e1e61f01d233b91960c61442e748a5609c80a7c" alt="Man ultramarathon runner in the mountains he trains at sunset"
94% of researchers rate our articles as excellent or good
Learn more about the work of our research integrity team to safeguard the quality of each article we publish.
Find out more
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW article
Front. Public Health
Sec. Occupational Health and Safety
Volume 13 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2025.1514706
This article is part of the Research Topic Patient and Medical Staff Safety and Healthy Work Environment in the 21st Century View all 31 articles
The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
Background: Physician burnout has become a public-health crisis. The need is dire for robust organizational solutions, focusing on reduction of specific stressors. The physician-specific Occupational Stressor Index (OSI) based on cognitive ergonomics can help. Individual-participant data (IPD) from different studies addressing physician burnout are lacking. Aims: To perform IPD analysis regarding job stressors and their relation to physician burnout and to utilize the IPD results to inform a systematic review of the stressors that show an association with physician burnout, focusing on intervention studies. Methods: PRISMA guidelines are followed for the IPD analysis and systematic review of intervention studies on the implicated stressors, taking the COVID-19 pandemic into consideration. The IPD analysis is performed on studies using the physician-specific OSI vis-à-vis burnout assessed by the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI). Odds ratios (OR) 95% confidence-intervals (CI) are reported, adjusting for age, gender and caring for patients with suspected COVID-19 infection. Results: Three studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria, providing complete IPD data for 95 physicians. Thirty-two (33.7%) physicians had total OSI scores > 88, for which intervention is urgently needed. Unit-change in the total stressor burden assessed via OSI yielded OR=1.11 (95%CI:1.03-1.18)(p=0.003) for personal burnout, OR=1.17 (95%CI:1.08-1.26)(p=0.0001) for work-related burnout and OR=1.07 (95%CI:1.01-1.15)(p=0.03) for patient-related burnout. Caring for patients with suspected COVID-19 infection showed significant multivariable results (p=0.04) only for personal burnout. Twenty distinct work stressors revealed multivariable associations with CBI. Systematic examination via PUBMED, CINAHL and OVID Medline yielded 33 publications mitigating those stressors among physicians. Adequate staffing was pivotal. Clerical staff off-loaded administrative burden. Information-technology staff helped diminish interruptions, enhancing workflow. Cross-coverage reduced time constraints, ensured separate periods for non-clinical tasks, and 1 work-free day/week. Several interventions impacted physician burnout, as did recognition of physicians' efforts/achievements. Other OSI-identified stressors were insufficiently examined in intervention studies: vacation; appropriately-timed, cross-covered restbreaks; and counter-measures for emotionally-disturbing aspects of MD's work, particularly during the pandemic. Conclusions: Further participatory-action research is needed in well-controlled intervention trials to alleviate physician burnout.
Keywords: Work conditions, Physicians, Occupational Health, burnout, Participatory Action Research
Received: 21 Oct 2024; Accepted: 26 Feb 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Belkic. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence:
Karen Belkic, Department of Oncology-Pathology, Karolinska Institutet (KI), Stockholm, Sweden
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Research integrity at Frontiers
Learn more about the work of our research integrity team to safeguard the quality of each article we publish.