| Literature DB >> 33072379 |
Li Cheng1, Jiao Yang1, Mengyuan Li2, Wenru Wang3.
Abstract
Aim: This study aimed to investigate burnout, coping style and empathy among Chinese nurses working in medical and surgical wards and to examine the mediating effect of coping style between empathy and burnout among this group of nurses. Design: A cross-sectional questionnaire survey. Method: The study recruited a convenience sample of 363 nurses from three university-affiliated tertiary hospitals in Shiyan City, Hubei, China. A set of self-administered questionnaires was used to measure the variables of burnout, coping style and empathy. Structural equation modelling was performed using AMOS 20.0.Entities:
Keywords: Chinese nurses; burnout; coping; empathy; nursing
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33072379 PMCID: PMC7544859 DOI: 10.1002/nop2.584
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nurs Open ISSN: 2054-1058
Figure 1Hypothesized model
Social‐demographic characteristics of the participants (N = 363)
| Variable | Category |
| % | Variable | Category |
| % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | work unit | ||||||
| Male | 8 | 2.20 | medical unit | 181 | 49.86 | ||
| Female | 355 | 97.80 | surgical unit | 182 | 50.14 | ||
| Sibling status | professional title | ||||||
| Without sibling | 115 | 31.68 | junior RN | 287 | 79.06 | ||
| With sibling | 248 | 68.32 | middle RN | 59 | 16.25 | ||
| Marriage | senior RN | 17 | 4.68 | ||||
| Married | 216 | 59.50 | job title | ||||
| Unmarried | 147 | 40.50 | nurse | 341 | 93.94 | ||
| Children status | head nurse | 22 | 6.06 | ||||
| Have a child | 187 | 51.52 |
employment type | ||||
| Not have a child | 176 | 48.48 | permanent | 84 | 23.14 | ||
| Educational level | personnel agency | 98 | 27.00 | ||||
| Secondary | 2 | 0.55 | contract | 181 | 49.86 | ||
| Diploma | 44 | 12.12 | location | ||||
| Bachelor | 316 | 87.05 | countryside | 88 | 24.24 | ||
| Master | 1 | 0.28 | city | 275 | 75.76 | ||
Comparison of burnout, empathy ability and coping style in different social‐demographic subgroups
| Variable | Category | Burnout | Empathy ability | Positive coping style | Negative coping style | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean |
|
|
|
| Mean |
|
|
|
| Mean |
|
|
|
| Mean |
|
|
|
| ||
| Gender | 0.519 | .604 | −0.638 | .524 | 1.775 | .184 | 0.530 | .467 | |||||||||||||
| Male | 34.13 | 7.66 | 108.38 | 12.45 | 25.38 | 3.62 | 9.13 | 4.85 | |||||||||||||
| Female | 31.92 | 11.92 | 111.16 | 12.19 | 24.75 | 5.52 | 8.96 | 4.08 | |||||||||||||
| Sibling | 1.683 | .093 | 0.203 | .84 | 0.136 | .712 | 1.834 | .177 | |||||||||||||
| Without sibling | 33.50 | 10.75 | 111.29 | 12.85 | 24.65 | 5.60 | 9.33 | 4.27 | |||||||||||||
| With sibling | 31.26 | 12.27 | 111.01 | 11.88 | 24.82 | 5.43 | 8.79 | 4.00 | |||||||||||||
| Marriage | 2.408 | .017 | −0.051 | .959 | 0.165 | .684 | 2.101 | .148 | |||||||||||||
| Married | 33.20 | 11.87 | 111.07 | 11.97 | 24.44 | 5.57 | 9.20 | 3.91 | |||||||||||||
| Unmarried | 30.17 | 11.61 | 111.14 | 12.52 | 25.26 | 5.32 | 8.62 | 4.34 | |||||||||||||
| Children status | 1.575 | .116 | 0.336 | .737 | 2.042 | .154 | 2.558 | .111 | |||||||||||||
| Have children | 32.92 | 11.66 | 111.30 | 12.18 | 24.29 | 5.75 | 9.26 | 3.90 | |||||||||||||
| Not have a child | 30.97 | 11.98 | 110.88 | 12.22 | 25.27 | 5.14 | 8.65 | 4.27 | |||||||||||||
| Educational level | 0.098 | .961 | 0.235 | .872 | 0.599 | .616 | 0.705 | .550 | |||||||||||||
| Secondary | 34.50 | 14.85 | 104.50 | 0.71 | 20.00 | 2.83 | 11.50 | 0.71 | |||||||||||||
| Diploma | 31.45 | 11.06 | 111.66 | 13.06 | 24.39 | 6.24 | 8.59 | 4.33 | |||||||||||||
| Bachelor | 32.02 | 11.98 | 111.05 | 12.12 | 24.85 | 5.38 | 9.01 | 4.07 | |||||||||||||
| Work unit | 1.232 | .219 | −0.598 | .550 | 0.760 | .384 | 0.553 | .458 | |||||||||||||
| Medical unit | 32.74 | 13.03 | 110.71 | 13.04 | 24.35 | 5.22 | 8.87 | 4.21 | |||||||||||||
| Surgical unit | 31.21 | 10.51 | 111.48 | 11.28 | 25.19 | 5.71 | 9.06 | 3.97 | |||||||||||||
| Professional level | 2.163 | .116 | 4.387 | .013 | 4.142 | .017 | 1.875 | .155 | |||||||||||||
| Junior RN | 32.16 | 11.62 | 110.24 | 12.15 | 24.45 | 5.36 | 8.87 | 4.10 | |||||||||||||
| Middle RN | 33.58 | 10.93 | 113.34 | 10.85 | 25.32 | 5.84 | 9.76 | 3.72 | |||||||||||||
| Senior RN | 26.94 | 13.29 | 117.82 | 14.51 | 28.18 | 5.21 | 7.82 | 4.94 | |||||||||||||
| Job title | 1.236 | .217 | −2.176 | .030 | 0.001 | .982 | 0.274 | .601 | |||||||||||||
| Nurse | 32.34 | 11.59 | 110.74 | 12.06 | 24.56 | 5.44 | 8.99 | 4.06 | |||||||||||||
| Head nurse | 29.18 | 12.16 | 116.55 | 13.06 | 27.95 | 5.24 | 8.64 | 4.64 | |||||||||||||
| Employment type | 1.856 | .158 | 5.216 | .006** | 0.740 | .478 | 0.054 | .948 | |||||||||||||
| Permanent | 31.58 | 11.07 | 113.21 | 12.36 | 24.62 | 5.51 | 9.08 | 4.28 | |||||||||||||
| Personnel agency | 34.07 | 11.38 | 107.86 | 12.43 | 24.29 | 5.90 | 8.97 | 3.71 | |||||||||||||
| Contract | 31.36 | 11.96 | 111.87 | 11.67 | 25.10 | 5.23 | 8.91 | 4.22 | |||||||||||||
| Location | −1.432 | .153 | −0.246 | .806 | 1.164 | .281 | 3.643 | .057 | |||||||||||||
| Country | 37.75 | 11.58 | 110.82 | 11.78 | 25.10 | 4.86 | 8.37 | 3.62 | |||||||||||||
| City | 39.76 | 11.42 | 111.19 | 12.33 | 24.66 | 5.66 | 9.15 | 4.22 | |||||||||||||
p<0.05; **p<0.01.
Correlation among burnout, coping strategy and empathy ability according to Pearson correlation
| Variables | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Emotional exhaustion | 1.000 | |||||||
| 2. Depersonalization | 0.740** | 1.000 | ||||||
| 3. Personal accomplishment | −0.068 | 0.104 | 1.000 | |||||
| 4. Positive coping | −0.264** | −0.206** | −0.235** | 1.000 | ||||
| 5. Negative coping | 0.249** | 0.304** | 0.092 | 0.069 | 1.000 | |||
| 6. psychological cognition | −0.213** | −0.278** | −0.318** | 0.341** | −0.275** | 1.000 | ||
| 7. Emotional experience | −0.047 | −0.193** | −0.302** | 0.245** | −0.131 | 0.596** | 1.000 | |
| 8. Helping behaviour | −0.143** | −0.234** | −0.369** | 0.334** | −0.230** | 0.744** | 0.563** | 1.000 |
p < .05, **p < .01
Figure 2Final tested mode based on structure equation modelling