Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35886721›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022

Exhaustion in Healthcare Workers after the First Three Waves of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Marina Ruxandra Oțelea, Agripina Rașcu, Cătălin Staicu, Lavinia Călugăreanu, Mădălina Ipate, Silvia Teodorescu, Ovidiu Persecă, Angelica Voinoiu, Andra Neamțu, Violeta Calotă and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Marina Ruxandra OțeleaClinical Department 5, University of Medicine and Pharmacy Carol Davila, 050474 Bucharest, Romania.ORCID 0000-0002-0829-0562
Agripina RașcuClinical Department 5, University of Medicine and Pharmacy Carol Davila, 050474 Bucharest, Romania.
Cătălin StaicuNational Center for Monitoring Community Risks, National Institute of Public Health, 050463 Bucharest, Romania.
Lavinia CălugăreanuNational Center for Monitoring Community Risks, National Institute of Public Health, 050463 Bucharest, Romania.
Mădălina IpateRegional Center of Public Health, National Institute of Public Health, 700465 Iași, Romania.
Silvia TeodorescuNational Center for Monitoring Community Risks, National Institute of Public Health, 050463 Bucharest, Romania.
Ovidiu PersecăRegional Center for Public Health, National Institute of Public Health, 400349 Cluj Napoca, Romania.
Angelica VoinoiuNational Center for Monitoring Community Risks, National Institute of Public Health, 050463 Bucharest, Romania.
Andra NeamțuNational Center for Monitoring Community Risks, National Institute of Public Health, 050463 Bucharest, Romania.
Violeta CalotăNational Center for Monitoring Community Risks, National Institute of Public Health, 050463 Bucharest, Romania.
Dana MateșNational Center for Monitoring Community Risks, National Institute of Public Health, 050463 Bucharest, Romania.
Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy · RO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study aims to identify the determinants of exhaustion of frontline and second-line healthcare workers (HCW) during the third wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. A case−control study was conducted based on an anonymously distributed questionnaire, which was completed by 1872 HCW. Exhaustion was assessed with a validated Romanian questionnaire. The Siegrist questionnaire was used to determine workload, reward and overcommitment. Frontline HCW reported significantly more frequent longer working hours (p = 0.0009) and a better perception of the management of the risk for infection (p = 0.0002) than second-line HCW. The effort and overcommitment scores were higher in frontline HCW (9.51 + 1.98 vs. 8.45 + 21, p < 0.001 and 16.34 ± 2.80 vs. 15.24 ± 2.94, p < 0.001, respectively) and the reward scores were lower (5.21 ± 1.522 vs. 5.99 ± 1.44, p < 0.001). In the fully adjusted regression model, age, imbalance between effort and reward, overcommitment and management of the risk of infection in the workplace were associated with the exhaustion score in each category of HCW. The number of working hours was correlated with exhaustion in frontline HCW and occupation in second-line HCW. There were more similarities than differences between frontline and second-line HCW. Even if frontline HCW had a higher risk of exhaustion, the risk was not negligible for all HCW.

Indexed as

COVID-19Case-Control StudiesHealth PersonnelHumansPandemicsWorkloadCOVID-19effort/reward scoreexhaustionhealthcare workersovercommitment

Identifiers

PMID35886721
PMCPMC9318340
OpenAlexW4286499304

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.