BACKGROUND: It is essential to identify the factors that influence the work performance of health professionals working in health care facilities, especially in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, since these factors have an impact on the quality of medical care provided to the population. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to analyze the mediating role of work engagement in the relationship between job burnout, professional self-efficacy, life satisfaction, and job performance in Peruvian health care workers. METHODS: Cross-sectional explanatory study, with the voluntary participation of 508 health professionals (physicians and nurses) of both sexes (70.7% women, 29.3% men), and from different health facilities in the city of Lima. All participants were administered the Single Burnout Item questionnaire, the Professional Self-Efficacy Scale (AU-10), the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWL), the Individual Work Performance Questionnaire (IWPQ), and the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES-9). Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was used for data analysis. RESULTS: In the SEM analysis, it was found that for the mediation model the incremental goodness-of-fit indices were significant (χ2 = 2292.313, gl = 659, P < .001, χ2/gl = 2.788). Career self-efficacy (β = .557, P < .001) and life satisfaction (β = .289, P < .001) were positive predictors of work engagement. While burnout was a negative predictor (β = .878, P < .001). The consistent mediation of work engagement of professional self-efficacy, life satisfaction, and burnout had a positive predictor effect on job performance (β = .878, P < .001). CONCLUSION: Research provides evidence that professional self-efficacy, life satisfaction, and burnout could influence job performance through work engagement.
BACKGROUND: It is essential to identify the factors that influence the work performance of health professionals working in health care facilities, especially in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, since these factors have an impact on the quality of medical care provided to the population. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to analyze the mediating role of work engagement in the relationship between job burnout, professional self-efficacy, life satisfaction, and job performance in Peruvian health care workers. METHODS: Cross-sectional explanatory study, with the voluntary participation of 508 health professionals (physicians and nurses) of both sexes (70.7% women, 29.3% men), and from different health facilities in the city of Lima. All participants were administered the Single Burnout Item questionnaire, the Professional Self-Efficacy Scale (AU-10), the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWL), the Individual Work Performance Questionnaire (IWPQ), and the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES-9). Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was used for data analysis. RESULTS: In the SEM analysis, it was found that for the mediation model the incremental goodness-of-fit indices were significant (χ2 = 2292.313, gl = 659, P < .001, χ2/gl = 2.788). Career self-efficacy (β = .557, P < .001) and life satisfaction (β = .289, P < .001) were positive predictors of work engagement. While burnout was a negative predictor (β = .878, P < .001). The consistent mediation of work engagement of professional self-efficacy, life satisfaction, and burnout had a positive predictor effect on job performance (β = .878, P < .001). CONCLUSION: Research provides evidence that professional self-efficacy, life satisfaction, and burnout could influence job performance through work engagement.
Entities:
Keywords:
burnout; health care workers; job performance; life satisfaction; professional self-efficacy; work engagement
According to the World Health Organization (WHO), Human Resources for Health (HRH) is
a set of people from different professions and occupations who work to improve the
health of the population.
Under this concept, they have been recognized as the fundamental component
for guaranteeing quality health care to the population. On the other hand, the
identification of the factors that influence the work performance of health
professionals in health facilities is essential.
In fact, the performance of healthcare workers is closely associated with the
performance of hospitals.
Therefore, it is important to address the factors associated with work
performance in health personnel and may be limiting the progress of the development
of HRH, generating a negative impact on the quality of care of the population.Burnout is defined as the condition of a person being physically and emotionally
tired after having performed a difficult job for a long time.
Among the main manifestations of burnout are fatigue, tiredness, prostration,
lassitude, among others.
Previous findings have shown that burnout not only triggers problems in the
mental and physical health of workers but also has an impact on individual and
organizational performance.[5,6]
A study found that burnout is a common condition among healthcare professionals,
precisely among physicians and nurses, with a prevalence ranging between 40% and 60%.
Healthcare workers experience high rates of job burnout.[8-13] In fact, healthcare workers,
especially those working in hospital settings, appear to be at particular risk of
burnout, which in turn, can impact the quality of care and patient
satisfaction.[14,15]Professional self-efficacy is another factor that can have a direct impact on health
professionals’ job performance and has an effect on both workplace and psychosocial well-being.
Self-efficacy represents people’s beliefs about the likelihood that they will
perform a particular job and acts as a buffer against the negative impacts of job stressors.
One study found that self-efficacy was positively related to nurse performance.
Similarly, in physicians, another study found that self-efficacy was
associated with a low risk of burnout.
Healthcare professionals with high levels of self-efficacy cope more
effectively with difficulties and strive to increase their productivity,
satisfaction, motivation, and adaptability, which contributes to positive work outcomes.On the other hand, life satisfaction is an important factor that can be influenced by
job responsibility, triggering a series of positive or negative results in the organization.
Satisfied employees are more likely to be more productive and feel more
attached to their workplace.
Particularly, health care worker satisfaction influences productivity,
quality, efficiency, and commitment to work and, at the same time, health care costs.
Findings from a study conducted in the general population and those working
in various economic sectors found that life satisfaction is a predictor of job performance.Work engagement is a factor closely related to job performance.
Likewise, workers with high job commitment may be willing to take on
additional job roles, which reflect on job self-efficacy and performance in task
accomplishment, creativity, and quality.
In fact, engaged employees have an energetically effective connection to the
work context. Therefore, they consider their work as challenging rather than
stressful and demanding. This, on the one hand, leads to increased levels of job
performance.[22,24] and on the other hand, it could favor buffering benefits
against the negative effects of stressors and job burnout. In addition, work
engagement is linked to life satisfaction. People who are satisfied with life
generally demonstrate high organizational commitment, job, and career satisfaction,
which, in turn, have a direct impact on work efficiency and performance.Identifying and understanding the factors associated with the job performance of
healthcare professionals in healthcare facilities is very important because it will
benefit both the healthcare professional as well as the patients who benefit from
the quality of medical care. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to analyze the
mediating role of work engagement in the relationship between job burnout,
professional self-efficacy, life satisfaction, and job performance in health care
workers.
Materials and Methods
Study Design and Population
A cross-sectional and explanatory study was designed considering latent variables
represented by a system of structural equations.
For the sample size, the effect size was analyzed by means of the Soper
electronic calculator, which considers the number of observed and latent
variables in the model, the anticipated effect size (λ = .3), the desired
statistical significance (α = .05) and the level of statistical power
(1−β = .95), considering a minimum sample of 207 participants. We surveyed 508
health professionals, both doctors (17.5%) and nurses (82.5%) in the city of
Lima, Peru, with an average age of 39.75 years (SD = 10.08). The majority were
female (70.7%), contracted (65.4%), of the assistance group that participates in
the processes of promotion, recovery, and rehabilitation of health through the
care and well-being of the person (74.8%). In addition, those working full and
part time in the first level of care health facilities of the health network of
a district in the Callao area were included (Table 1).
Table 1.
Distribution of sociodemographic variables.
Characteristics
N (%)
Age groups (years)
20-31
95 (18.7)
32-42
233 (45.9)
43-54
120 (23.6)
55-65
60 (11.8)
Staff
Medical
89 (17.5)
Nurse
419 (82.5)
Gender
Female
359 (70.7)
Male
149 (29.3)
Employment status
Outsourced
12 (2.4)
Hired
332 (65.4)
Monthly contract
25 (4.9)
Employee
139 (27.4)
Occupational group
Assistance
380 (74.8)
Administrative
128 (25.2)
Distribution of sociodemographic variables.The study was conducted during the months of October and November 2021.
Participants were selected by non-probability convenience sampling, excluding
those at highest risk of severe disease by COVID-19.
This is due to an approved regulation (RD N° 076-2021/GDR/DIRESA/DG) that
refers to the “Health surveillance and control plan for workers at risk of
exposure to COVID-19 in DIRESA CALLAO 2021,” which stipulates that health
workers at very high risk of exposure to COVID-19 should not participate in
meetings, training, and other activities as a protective measure.
Ethical Considerations
Prior to data collection, the personnel of the first-level health care facilities
were contacted. Subsequently, the participants were informed of the objective of
the study; they were also informed that their participation was voluntary; and
informed consent was obtained from all participants. In addition, the privacy
and confidentiality of the data collected was guaranteed. The protocol was
approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the Graduate School of the
Universidad Peruana Unión (Number: 2021-CE-EPG-000036) and by the Ethics and
Research Committee of the Regional Health Directorate of Callao according to
certificate N° 019-2021-COMITÉDEÉTICA/UI/DIRESACALLAO and the data
collection instruments were applied considering the guidelines stipulated in the
Declaration of Helsinki.
Variable Measurements
Burnout: The evaluation of job burnout was carried out
considering the Burnout Unique Item (IUB) tool validated in the Peruvian
population by Merino-Soto et al.
This instrument measures the degree of mental and physical exhaustion, as
if the person were “burned out” by work; it consists of an instruction to guide
the examinee’s response and consists of 5 descriptive categories ordered
according to their descriptive magnitude on the experience of burnout. The
analysis of the rating of the intensity of the response options consists of
obtaining the median of the ratings and assigning them a rating from 1 (minimum
perceived intensity) to 5 (maximum perceived intensity).Professional self-efficacy: The Professional Self-Efficacy
Questionnaire was used.
The AU-10 is a self-report instrument and assesses the beliefs that
workers hold about their own abilities to successfully perform activities
associated with their profession. It consists of 10 Likert-type items:
Never = 0; almost never = 1; rarely = 2; occasionally = 3; frequently = 4; very
frequently = 5; always = 6. In a population of Peruvian workers, internal
consistency was obtained using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient (.84).Satisfaction with life: It was evaluated through the
Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS) in its version for the Peruvian population.
This instrument evaluates the degree of overall life satisfaction and is
composed of 5 Likert-type items: strongly disagree = 1; slightly disagree = 2;
neither agree nor disagree = 3; slightly disagree = 4; strongly agree = 5. The
internal consistency of the instrument was through a coefficient ω = 0.90 and
H = 0.92.Work performance: The Individual Work Performance Questionnaire
(IWPQ) was used in its Spanish version.
This scale evaluates the level of job performance based on employees’ own
assessment of their task performance, context, and counterproductive behaviors.
The scale is composed of 13 Likert-type items: Never = 1; almost never = 2;
sometimes = 3; almost always = 4; always = 5It is made up of 3 dimensions: Task
Performance (Items: 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5), Counterproductive Behaviors (Items: 6,
7, 8, and 9), and Context Performance (Items: 10, 11, 12, and 13). On the other
hand, the reliability of the instrument was determined by means of Cronbach’s
Alpha statistic. The ordinal alpha coefficients for each of the 3 dimensions
were adequate (on-task performance: α = .76; counterproductive behaviors:
α = .76, and in-context performance: α = .72). The total scale reached a value
of .70.Work engagement. The 9-item Utrecht Work Engagement Scale
(UWES-9) was used in its version for the Peruvian population.
The same scale is used to measure the level of work commitment. This
scale is composed of 9 Likert-type items: Never = 0; Almost never = 1;
Sometimes = 2; Regularly = 3; Many times = 4; Always = 5. It is made up of the
following dimensions: vigor (Items: 1, 2, and 3), dedication (Items: 4, 5, and
6), and absorption (Items: 7, 8, and 9). The reliability of the instrument was
determined by Cronbach’s alpha statistic.
The coefficients for the total scale (α = .85) and each of the 3
dimensions were adequate (vigor: α = .79; dedication: α = .82, and absorption:
α = .81) demonstrating adequate and relevant reliability.
Statistical Analysis
Statistical analyses were performed using the R 4.1.2 program. Descriptive
statistics were calculated: mean (M), standard deviation (SD), skewness
(g1 < 3), and kurtosis (g
< 10) according to Kline’s
criteria. The assumptions of normality and multivariate estimation of
Mardia, in which values less than 5 indicate normal distribution, were verified,
and a bivariate analysis was performed, verified by correlations between
variables.To test the hypotheses, structural equation modeling (SEM) was performed to
evaluate the direct and mediated effects of the latent predictor variables on
the outcome variables.
Kline’s
proposal was followed for statistical analysis and testing of structural
equation models and the weighted least squares mean adjusted (WLSM) was used.
The goodness-of-fit indices of the model were evaluated in accordance with the
proposals of Rex
and Escobedo et al.
The comparative fit index (CFI) and Tucker-Lewis fit index (TLI) ranging
between .90 and .95, respectively, would indicate an acceptable fit and values
above .95 would indicate an adequate fit. Root mean square error of
approximation (RMSEA) and standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) indices
with values between .05 and .08, respectively, would indicate an acceptable fit
and values below .05 would indicate an adequate fit.Mediation was carried out in R using the mediation function of the psych package.
According to the established guidelines, mediation is a mechanism through
which a given variable accounts for the relationship between the predictor and
the criterion.
That is, the variable M is mediated between an independent variable X and
a dependent variable, and M is causally located between X and Y; therefore, the
mediating variable M is affected by X and, in turn, M affects Y,
so that it accounts for the indirect effect of X on Y through M. The
model proposed in Figure
1 comprises a set of 3 parallel models with a mediator. In the first
model, the independent variable is professional self-efficacy, the second model
presents life satisfaction, and the third model presents burnout. Each of these
models includes work engagement as a parallel mediator and the dependent
variable in each model is job performance. The direct effect of each predictor
variable on the criterion variable was determined using the mediator.
Figure 1.
Proposed model.
Proposed model.
Results
Preliminary Analysis
Descriptive statistics and correlations of the study variables are presented in
Table 2. The
analyses between the variables studied yielded highly significant correlation
coefficients (P < .01). Bivariate analysis shows that job
performance correlates positively with work engagement
(r = .53, P < .01), life satisfaction
(r = .48, P < .01), professional
self-efficacy (r = .59, P < .01), and a
negative correlation with burnout (r = −.34,
P < .01). Moreover, positive correlations of work engagement
with life satisfaction (r = .64, P < .01),
professional self-efficacy (r = .71,
P < .01), and negatively with burnout
(r = −.53, P < .01) were observed. Life
satisfaction was positively correlated with professional self-efficacy
(r = .64, P < .01) and negatively
correlated with burnout (r = −.54,
P < .01). Professional self-efficacy was negatively
correlated with burnout (r = −.55,
P < .01). These relationships provide the basis for
examining the hypothesized mediation model. However, the data revealed a
multivariate kurtosis, as the normalized estimate of Mardia was 35.35.
Therefore, the WLSM estimator was applied, which is robust to analyze non-normal
data.
Table 2.
Descriptive Statistics and Correlation Matrix of the Study Variables.
Variable
1
2
3
4
5
Mean
SD
g1
g2
JoPe
-
45.82
4.83
–0.98
3.33
WoEn
.53**
-
46.18
8.11
–2.42
7.52
SaLi
.48**
.64**
-
20.97
3.76
–1.65
2.96
PrSe
.59**
.71**
.64**
-
51.25
8.63
–2.2
6.39
Burn
–.34**
–.53**
–.54**
–.55**
-
1.57
0.72
1.53
3.43
Abbreviations: JoPe, job performance (1); WoEn, work engagement (2);
SaLi, satisfaction with life (3); PrSe, professional self-efficacy
(4); Burn, burnout (5); SD, standard deviation. g1 =
skewness; g2 = kurtosis.
P < .01.
Descriptive Statistics and Correlation Matrix of the Study Variables.Abbreviations: JoPe, job performance (1); WoEn, work engagement (2);
SaLi, satisfaction with life (3); PrSe, professional self-efficacy
(4); Burn, burnout (5); SD, standard deviation. g1 =
skewness; g2 = kurtosis.P < .01.
Hypothesis Test
A predictive model using structural equation modeling was evaluated with the
variables that presented significant correlations (Figure 2). In the SEM analysis,
incremental goodness-of-fit indices
were found to be significant for the mediation model
(χ2 = 2292.313, gl = 659, P < .001,
χ2/gl = 2.788) and for the comparative indices (CFI = 0.981,
TLI = 0.980, RMSEA = 0.032, and SRMR = 0.056).
Figure 2.
Predictive model of job performance, considering the variables
professional self-efficacy, life satisfaction and burnout, and job
commitment as a mediator.
Predictive model of job performance, considering the variables
professional self-efficacy, life satisfaction and burnout, and job
commitment as a mediator.Specifically, career self-efficacy (β = .557, P < .001) and
life satisfaction (β = .289, P < .001) were positive
predictors of work engagement. Whereas burnout was a negative predictor of work
engagement (β = −.119, P < .001). The consequent mediation
by work engagement of professional self-efficacy, life satisfaction, and burnout
had a positive predictor effect on job performance (β = .878,
P < .001).
Test of Measurement Effects
To test for measurement effects, the R package “mediation” was used and 10 000
randomly calculated samples were requested.
The direct relationship was examined separately by simple measurement
between the predictors: professional self-efficacy (β = .24, se = 0.03,
t = 8.66, P < .001), life satisfaction
(β = .31, se = 0.06, t = 5.03, P < .001),
burnout (β = −.61, se = 0.30, t = −2.05,
P < .001), and that of criterion (job performance), remained
significant after adding the mediator (work engagement). Likewise, multiple
mediation analysis indicated that work engagement mediates the association
between professional self-efficacy, life satisfaction, and burnout (β = .11,
se = 0.03, t = 3.55, P < .001).
Discussion
Work engagement in healthcare workers has been challenged and affected by the
COVID-19 pandemic.
The findings of the present study, conducted during the pandemic health
emergency, support the hypothesized model that proposed that work engagement plays a
mediating role in the relationship between job burnout, professional self-efficacy,
life satisfaction, and job performance in health care workers. In addition, it was
evidenced that professional self-efficacy was positively related to work engagement
and life satisfaction, however, there was a negative relationship with burnout.In the current study, there was evidence of a positive relationship between
professional self-efficacy and work engagement. This result is consistent with
previous research findings in health personnel and other professionals were high
professional self-efficacy influences work engagement. In Taiwanese, Italian, and
Jordanian nurses, they found that professional self-efficacy and work engagement
were significantly positively correlated.[10-13] These findings are also
similar to those reported in other professionals where professional self-efficacy
was found to be associated with work engagement.
These results could be due to the fact that respondents have higher
performance and self-dedication.
In fact, increased confidence in the professional’s capabilities increases
the achievement of challenges on the job and compliance with the organization’s standards.
On the other hand, despite the concern about COVID-19 infection, job
self-efficacy in healthcare personnel was little impacted.
Therefore, health personnel who have a level of professional self-efficacy
translate as a higher level of commitment to care in hospitals.Another relevant finding of this study is that work engagement is related to life
satisfaction. This result is consistent with that reported in another study
suggesting a significant relationship between life satisfaction and work engagement.
Life satisfaction is an important factor in stronger social relationships,
favors better job performance, and, as a result, promotes greater work engagement.
Healthcare worker satisfaction impacts productivity, quality, efficiency, and
work engagement.
Health professionals need a greater commitment for a better job performance,
since the care of patients in various stages of the disease, emotional implications,
and shift work can be physically and mentally exhausting. Therefore, adequate
working hours, efficient infrastructure, equipment, and materials, as well as an
increase in personnel would improve the performance of the professional and decrease
risk factors such as burnout syndrome.[49,50]During the COVID-19 pandemic, burnout was found to be higher in physicians and nurses
than in other health care workers.[51-54] The findings of the present
study showed that burnout is negatively related to work engagement. Findings from a
survey of 212 health care workers in a Norwegian hospital found that emotional
exhaustion had direct effects on job attitudes (job satisfaction and organizational engagement).
Previous studies have documented that burnout triggers problems in the mental
and physical health of workers, which, in turn, can have an impact on work
engagement.[5,6]
A study examining associations between burnout and work engagement among physicians
and nurses found that emotional job demands correlated with work engagement scores
in physicians.
On the other hand, findings from a study conducted with 373 nurses in a
public hospital found that overall health levels were negatively correlated with
work engagement.
The deterioration of health caused by burnout can lead to a negative
relationship with work engagement.[58,59] Burnout syndrome affects the
health status of health care workers, impacting work commitment and patient
safety.[56,60,61] Consequently, it is imperative that organizations make
interventions to prevent the deterioration of the health status of health personnel,
which have been magnified by the health emergency. Burnout management should be a
means for work engagement, as workers who do not have clear objectives are hesitant
to complete tasks and incur less effort and less effective performance from
healthcare professionals.On the other hand, the results of the current study reported that work engagement
mediated the effect of professional self-efficacy and job performance. Previous
studies indicate that self-efficacy moderates the positive effects of professional
commitment on job performance; in fact, self-efficacy equips staff with capabilities
and resources to improve their achievements.
Likewise, others studies indicated that work engagement mediated life
satisfaction and job performance.
Work engagement is influenced by life satisfaction and is associated with
higher job performance.
Satisfaction with life in employees allows them to be involved with the
objectives and an increase in social communication networks, thus generating a
higher job performance guaranteeing a subsequent job performance.
On the other hand, studies show the mediation of engagement between burnout
and job performance.
Burnout is due to inability to meet the requirements of the job, lack of
resources, and imbalance of individual effort.
Relevance to Clinical Practice
The findings of this study have relevant implications for the clinical practice
of health care workers, especially in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Health care facilities should be aware of the negative impact of burnout on
professional self-efficacy, satisfaction with life, and job performance in
health care workers, particularly physicians and nurses. The evidence provided
by the current study could favor the implementation of policies and intervention
strategies to prevent diseases and improve the motivation of health personnel,
who provide services to patients, and the general population; considering that
adequate medical care by health professionals depends on their levels of
emotional and physical health, professional self-efficacy, life satisfaction,
and performance. Understanding the relationship of these constructs is important
for the prevention of job burnout and improved quality of patient care.
Limitations
The most relevant limitation of this study is that a subjective measure was used
as an indicator of job performance. However, self-assessment of performance is
also frequently used in the literature, and we should not underestimate the
importance of this variable. Another possible limitation of the study refers to
the type of information analyzed, since all measurements were self-reported,
which suggests a possible bias in the method. However, it is important to note
that, due to the nature of the study variables, we have to measure them with
self-assessment measures, as we are interested in workers’ perceptions of
emotional exhaustion, professional self-efficacy, and life satisfaction they
feel they have. We also want to know about their perception of how much
engagement they have experienced at work. No one better than themselves to
report this type of information. On the other hand, there is an
overrepresentation of young people (32-42 years old) and women. Finally, the
cross-sectional design precludes establishing causality, so the effects should
be interpreted with caution and future research should employ longitudinal
designs to capture the temporal dimension of the model.
Conclusion
Work engagement plays a mediating role in the relationship between job burnout,
professional self-efficacy, life satisfaction, and job performance in health care
workers. It was found that professional self-efficacy was positively related to work
engagement and life satisfaction, while there was a negative relationship with job
burnout. Although the results should be interpreted with caution due to sampling
bias, confirmation of these findings will allow the development of interventions to
improve professional performance.
Authors: Jesem Douglas Yamall Orellana; Marizélia Rodrigues Costa Ribeiro; Marco Antonio Barbieri; Maria da Conceição Saraiva; Viviane Cunha Cardoso; Heloísa Bettiol; Antonio Augusto Moura da Silva; Fernando C Barros; Helen Gonçalves; Fernando C Wehrmeister; Ana Maria Baptista Menezes; Cristina Marta Del-Ben; Bernardo Lessa Horta Journal: Cad Saude Publica Date: 2020-01-31 Impact factor: 1.632
Authors: Joshua Belfer; Lance Feld; Sophia Jan; Joanna Fishbein; John Q Young; Stephen Barone Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-03-21 Impact factor: 3.390