Marisa Sklar1, Mark G Ehrhart2, Gregory A Aarons1. 1. Department of Psychiatry, University of California San Diego. 2. Department of Psychology, University of Central Florida.
Abstract
Objective: The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has drastically impacted the provision of mental health services. Changes required of providers were substantial and could lead to increased burnout and, subsequently, increased turnover intentions. This study examined burnout experienced by mental health services providers in the context of COVID-19 and through the lens of the job demands-resources (JD-R) model. We examined the effects of work changes on burnout and subsequent turnover intentions, and how job and personal resources may have buffered the extent to which work changes due to COVID-19 impacted burnout. Methods: Service providers (n = 93) from six community mental health centers (CMHCs) in one Midwestern state in the United States completed surveys as part of service contracts to implement evidence-based practices. Path analysis tested the unconditional indirect relations between work changes and turnover intentions through burnout. Moderated mediation determined whether the indirect effect of work changes on turnover intentions via burnout varied in strength by job and personal resources. Results: Work changes had a significant indirect effect on turnover intentions through burnout ( β ^ = .140, 95% CI = .072, .217). This indirect effect varied as a function of two job resources, organizational trust and perceived organizational support. Conclusions and Implications for Practice: Burnout was relatively low only when work changes were low and job resources levels high. When work changes were high, burnout was similarly high across levels of job resources. To minimize burnout, organizations should limit task, setting, and team-related work changes to the extent possible. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).
Objective: The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has drastically impacted the provision of mental health services. Changes required of providers were substantial and could lead to increased burnout and, subsequently, increased turnover intentions. This study examined burnout experienced by mental health services providers in the context of COVID-19 and through the lens of the job demands-resources (JD-R) model. We examined the effects of work changes on burnout and subsequent turnover intentions, and how job and personal resources may have buffered the extent to which work changes due to COVID-19 impacted burnout. Methods: Service providers (n = 93) from six community mental health centers (CMHCs) in one Midwestern state in the United States completed surveys as part of service contracts to implement evidence-based practices. Path analysis tested the unconditional indirect relations between work changes and turnover intentions through burnout. Moderated mediation determined whether the indirect effect of work changes on turnover intentions via burnout varied in strength by job and personal resources. Results: Work changes had a significant indirect effect on turnover intentions through burnout ( β ^ = .140, 95% CI = .072, .217). This indirect effect varied as a function of two job resources, organizational trust and perceived organizational support. Conclusions and Implications for Practice: Burnout was relatively low only when work changes were low and job resources levels high. When work changes were high, burnout was similarly high across levels of job resources. To minimize burnout, organizations should limit task, setting, and team-related work changes to the extent possible. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).
Authors: Carmen Moreno; Til Wykes; Silvana Galderisi; Merete Nordentoft; Nicolas Crossley; Nev Jones; Mary Cannon; Christoph U Correll; Louise Byrne; Sarah Carr; Eric Y H Chen; Philip Gorwood; Sonia Johnson; Hilkka Kärkkäinen; John H Krystal; Jimmy Lee; Jeffrey Lieberman; Carlos López-Jaramillo; Miia Männikkö; Michael R Phillips; Hiroyuki Uchida; Eduard Vieta; Antonio Vita; Celso Arango Journal: Lancet Psychiatry Date: 2020-07-16 Impact factor: 27.083
Authors: Alejandra Del Carmen Dominguez-Espinosa; Sandra Irma Montes de Oca-Mayagoitia; Ana Paola Sáez-Jiménez; Javier de la Fuente-Zepeda; Lilia Monroy Ramírez de Arellano Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-09-16 Impact factor: 3.752
Authors: Filippo Rapisarda; Martine Vallarino; Camille Brousseau-Paradis; Luigi De Benedictis; Marc Corbière; Patrizia Villotti; Elena Cavallini; Catherine Briand; Lionel Cailhol; Alain Lesage Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-03-23 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Kara Zivin; Ming-Un Myron Chang; Tony Van; Katerine Osatuke; Matt Boden; Rebecca K Sripada; Kristen M Abraham; Paul N Pfeiffer; Hyungjin Myra Kim Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2022-03-15 Impact factor: 3.734
Authors: Martha L P MacLeod; Kelly L Penz; Davina Banner; Sharleen Jahner; Irene Koren; Alexandra Thomlinson; Pertice Moffitt; Mary Ellen Labrecque Journal: Int J Ment Health Nurs Date: 2021-10-19 Impact factor: 5.100
Authors: Rizal Angelo N Grande; Daniel Joseph E Berdida; Hazel N Villagracia; Sage Mesias Raguindin; Larry Terrence O Cornejo; Nashi Masnad Al Reshidi; Ahmad Tuaysan Alshammari; Bander Jarallah Aljebari; Asmaa Mohammed Ali AlAbd Journal: J Nurs Manag Date: 2022-08-08 Impact factor: 4.680
Authors: Yuan-Sheng Ryan Poon; Yongxing Patrick Lin; Peter Griffiths; Keng Kwang Yong; Betsy Seah; Sok Ying Liaw Journal: Hum Resour Health Date: 2022-09-24