Abstract
Background
Nurses face a high level of mental workload while performing their duties. High levels of mental workload can negatively impact nurses.
Aim
The aim of this research was to determine the relationship between mental workload and burnout levels of intensive care nurses.
Study design
Descriptive‐correlational design has been adopted in this research. The sample consisted of 156 nurses working in the intensive care units of a hospital in the south of Turkey between September and December 2023. Research data were collected with the ‘Participant Information Form’, which includes socio‐demographic characteristics, ‘Mental Workload Scale’ and ‘Maslach Burnout Scale’.
Results
Almost all (95.5%) of the nurses participating in the study reported that their mental workload was high. It has been determined that there is a strong positive relationship between mental workload and burnout. According to the regression model obtained from the research, being a woman (β = .165, p = .008) and emotional workload (β = −695, p < .001) are determinants of emotional exhaustion. These variables explain emotional exhaustion at a rate of 50.1% (adjusted R 2 = .501). Emotional workload (β = .399, p = .003) is the most important determinant of personal accomplishment. This variable explains 19.0% (adjusted R 2 = .190) of personal accomplishment. The most important determinant of depersonalization is emotional workload (β = .324, p < .001). It was determined that this variable explained 24.4% (adjusted R 2 = .244) of depersonalization.
Conclusions
This research revealed that there is a strong positive relationship between mental workload and burnout and that increasing mental workload can increase burnout.
Relevance to Clinical Practice
Nurses' risk of emotional exhaustion increases as mental workload increases. Reducing cognitive workload, temporary workload and emotional workload increases the personal accomplishment experienced by nurses. In addition, as temporary workload, emotional workload and performance‐related workload increase, the depersonalization experienced by nurses also increases.
Keywords: burnout, critical care nursing, mental workload, nurses
What is known about the topic
Intensive care nurses have a high workload and burnout rate.
Research has focused on general workload, but nurses' mental workload has not been examined in detail.
It is also important to reveal the relationship between mental workload and burnout.
What this paper adds
Mental workload of intensive care nurses is high.
High mental workload increases the burnout of intensive care nurses.
It is important to develop strategies to reduce mental workload in order to reduce burnout of intensive care nurses.
Especially emotional workload can play a key role in preventive strategies to be developed at individual and institutional levels.
1. INTRODUCTION
Burnout is used to describe employees' negative behaviours and attitudes towards work in response to work stress, such as frustration, powerlessness and inability to achieve work goals. 1 Maslach and his team began studying burnout in the 1970s. 2 Maslach and Jackson identified burnout as a psychological condition marked by emotional exhaustion, depersonalization and a diminished perception of professional proficiency, commonly experienced among caregivers. 3 Emotional exhaustion manifests as a depletion of emotional resources, while depersonalization entails negative and distant responses towards others, coupled with a loss of idealism. 3 Personal accomplishment correlates with reduced feelings of competence and effectiveness in the workplace. 4
2. BACKGROUND
Because of the many expectations that come with the job, health care professionals, especially nurses often view it as a difficult one. 5 The frontline care role that nurses play with patients at their most vulnerable moments makes them particularly susceptible to burnout because of the unrelenting physical and psychological stress that results from holistic patient care. 6 It was revealed in a study that half of the nurses experienced burnout, 33.8% scored high in emotional exhaustion, 66.6% scored high in depersonalization and 93.5% scored low in personal accomplishment. 7 In a systematic review, it was found that 12.6% of nurses experienced depersonalization, 34.1% experienced emotional exhaustion and 15.2% experienced a diminished sense of personal accomplishment. 8
Nurses who work longer hours tend to experience higher degrees of burnout. 9 High workload, value incongruence, little control over work, low decision‐making flexibility, poor social climate/social support and low rewards were all identified as predictors of burnout in a theoretical review. 8 According to a meta‐analysis, working in high‐risk environments, retiring early, having less social support, spending more time in quarantine, working in hospitals with insufficient supplies and staff and having a heavier workload are the key risk factors that lead to burnout among nurses. 8 The health care system faces an increase in demand for nursing care while managing human resources to optimize quality and control expenses. 10 Unreasonable workloads are imposed on nurses in hospital settings as a result of the growing shortage of nurses. 9 As the demand for nursing care rises within the health care system, balancing human resources becomes crucial for enhancing quality and cost control. 10 With the escalating shortage of nurses, hospitals often impose impractical workloads on nurses. 9
The nursing workload, crucial for patient safety and the quality of care in hospitals, 11 , 12 can be explored through three interconnected dimensions: physical, emotional and mental demands. 11 , 13 , 14 Physical workload is assessed based on tasks requiring physical abilities like patient manipulation and administering medication. Emotional workload arises from emotionally demanding interactions with patients or challenging work scenarios. 14 Mental workload includes receiving, understanding and interpreting information, making decisions, concentrating and interacting with patients and their families. 11 Mental workload refers to the level of cognitive effort required by an individual within a specific time frame. Put differently, mental workload is the contrast between the resources available to the individual and those demanded by the task, defining their mental workload. 15 Nurses face a high level of mental workload while performing their duties. 16
The intensive care unit (ICU) is a specialized facility equipped with sophisticated equipment and a wide range of services to treat patients with life‐threatening illnesses. 11 Patients may require monitoring in intensive care for a number of reasons, including surgical procedures, pain following surgery, bleeding, tissue damage, metabolic disturbances, fluid changes, inflammatory response and changed respiratory mechanics, in addition to acute medical disorders. 17 When there are no ICUs specialized for palliative care and treatment, patients in need of palliative care are also monitored in intensive care. 18 In order to prevent or discover postoperative problems, patients who are at high risk of morbidity and death after planned surgery may also need to be admitted to intensive care or undergo further monitoring for respiratory and cardiovascular support. 17 One of the biggest issues in health care is the growing workload, particularly in ICUs where it can negatively affect both patients and nurses. 11 A limited number of studies have been found in the literature investigating the mental workload and burnout levels of intensive care nurses. 9 , 11 , 19
3. AIM
This research aimed to determine the relationship between mental workload and burnout levels of intensive care nurses. It is anticipated that the data obtained from this research will make significant contributions to the limited literature.
3.1. Research questions
What are the mental workload and burnout levels of intensive care nurses?
Is there a relationship between mental workload and burnout levels of intensive care nurses?
What are the factors that determine the burnout level of intensive care nurses?
4. DESIGN AND METHODS
The research adopted a descriptive‐correlational design. The participants of the research consisted of nurses (N = 170) working in the ICU of a hospital selected by lot in the south of Turkey between September and December 2023. There was no sample selection in the research. All nurses working in ICU were included in the study. The inclusion criterion for the study was being an intensive care nurse in the Antalya Training and Research Hospital. The study did not have any exclusion criteria. After being informed about the research, data collection forms were given to the nurses who accepted. The sample of the research consisted of 156 nurses. The participation rate of intensive care nurses in the research was 91.76. Six nurses declined to participate because of personal reasons, and eight nurses were unreachable as they were on maternity leave. The dependent variables of the study were the Burnout Scale mean scores, and the independent variables were demographic characteristics and Mental Workload Scale mean scores.
4.1. Data collection tools
The data collection tools of the research are the ‘Participant Information Form’, which includes socio‐demographic characteristics, ‘Mental Workload Scale’ and ‘Maslach Burnout Scale’.
4.1.1. Participant information form
The form was prepared by the researchers by using the current literature data. 9 , 20 , 21 This is the form that contains information such as the participant's age, gender, marital status, education level and total work experience.
4.1.2. Mental Workload Scale
The Turkish validity and reliability of the scale developed by Rubio‐Valdehita et al. 22 was conducted by Akca et al. 23 The scale consists of 25 items: cognitive workload (items 1 to 9), temporary workload (items 10 to 13), emotional workload (items 19 to 25) and performance‐related workload It has four subscales: (items 14 to 18). The scale is a 5‐point Likert type, including ‘I strongly disagree’ and ‘I strongly agree’. There are no reverse scored items in the scale. A score of 2.5 or less from the scale is considered low, 2.5–3 points is considered average and a score above 3 is considered high mental workload. Scale and subscale scores are calculated by dividing the sum of the items covering the subscale by the number of items. In the Turkish validity and reliability study of the scale, the Cronbach's alpha value was .90. 23 , 24 In this study, the Cronbach's alpha value was found to be .93, indicating excellent internal consistency and suggesting that the measurement tool used is highly reliable.
4.1.3. Maslach Burnout Scale (MBS)
MBS is a 5‐point Likert‐type scale with a score ranging from 0 to 4, developed by Maslach and Jackson 25 to determine the level of burnout. The validity and reliability study in Turkey was conducted by Ergin. 26 The scale has 22 items with five‐step response alternatives for each topic, along with sub‐dimensions for depersonalization, personal accomplishment and emotional tiredness. There are positive responses in the personal accomplishment dimension and negative responses in the emotional tiredness and depersonalization dimensions. The results of the subscales cannot be construed as indicating whether or not burnout exists because there is no cut‐off value (Can, & Hisar, 2019).
There are nine questions about emotional exhaustion (questions 1, 2, 3, 6, 8, 13, 14, 16, 20), five questions about depersonalization (questions 5, 10, 11, 15, 22) and eight questions about personal accomplishment (questions 4, 7, 9, 12, 17, 18, 19, 21). A minimum of 0 and a maximum of 36 points can be obtained for emotional exhaustion, 0 to 20 points for depersonalization and 0 to 32 points for personal accomplishment. It is stated that high emotional exhaustion and depersonalization score averages and low personal accomplishment score averages indicate that individuals are experiencing burnout. 26 , 27
In the Turkish version of the scale, Cronbach's alpha coefficients are emotional exhaustion = 0.83, depersonalization = 0.65, personal accomplishment = 0.72, respectively. In this study, emotional exhaustion Cronbach's alpha value was .88; depersonalization Cronbach's alpha value was .75; personal accomplishment Cronbach's alpha value was found to be .76.
4.2. Data collection
Research data were collected by researchers using the survey method between September and December 2023. Internal medicine and surgical ICUs were included in the study. Although the number of beds in the units varies, the number of patients per nurse is 2–3 per shift. The participants were informed beforehand about the aim of the study and the confidentiality of the data. Instructions were given not to write personal identification information on data collection tools. All nurses who agreed to participate in the study were given data collection tools outside working hours (day/night) and care hours. They were asked to fill it out completely on the day they were available. All completed surveys were received at the end of business hours.
4.3. Data analysis
IBM SPSS 25 package program was used to analyse the research data. Number, percentage, mean and standard deviation values were calculated for descriptive statistics. The normal distribution of the variables was examined with the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test. Normally distributed data were evaluated using t‐test and one‐way analysis of variance. Pearson correlation coefficient was used to determine the degree and direction of the relationship between variables. Simple linear regression analysis was applied to determine the variables that determine the MBS mean scores. In the analysis, groups with risk factors for categorical variables were coded as 1. Risk group coding was decided according to the literature and test significance values. A value of p < .05 was considered significant.
5. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
Before the research, ethics committee approval (Protocol no: 2023‐080) and research permission were obtained from the Non‐Interventional Clinical Research Ethics Committee of Antalya Training and Research Hospital. The Informed Voluntary Consent Form was added to the beginning of the survey form, participants were asked to read it, and written consent was obtained from those who wanted to participate in the research. Permission was obtained from the authors for the scales to be used in the research. The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. The research was conducted according to STROBE guidelines.
6. RESULTS
It was determined that the average age of 156 intensive care nurses participating in the research was 37.60 ± 8.16 years, the average working experience was 15.09 ± 8.86 years and the average working experience in intensive care was 9.71 ± 6.28. It was determined that 43.6% of the participants were 34–44 years old, 76.3% were women, 71.2% were married, 82.1% had a bachelor's degree and 91.0% were permanent employees (Table 1).
TABLE 1.
Participant characteristics (n = 156).
| Averages | Standard deviation | Min | Max |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average age | 37.60 ± 8.16 | 23 | 56 |
| Average total work experience | 15.09 ± 8.86 | 4 month | 37 years |
| Average experience in intensive care | 9.71 ± 6.28 | 2 month | 29 years |
| Variables | n | % | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 23–33 | 54 | 34.6 |
| 34–44 | 68 | 43.6 | |
| 45–56 | 34 | 21.8 | |
| Gender | Female | 119 | 76.3 |
| Male | 37 | 23.7 | |
| Marital status | Married | 111 | 71.2 |
| Single | 45 | 28.8 | |
| Education | High school | 5 | 3.2 |
| Associate's degree | 7 | 4.5 | |
| Bachelor's degree | 128 | 82.1 | |
| Master's degree | 16 | 10.3 | |
| Total work experience | 0–3 years | 18 | 11.5 |
| 4–8 years | 25 | 16.0 | |
| 9–13 years | 33 | 21.2 | |
| ≥14 | 80 | 51.3 | |
| Intensive care experience | 0–3 years | 27 | 17.3 |
| 4–8 years | 45 | 28.8 | |
| 9–13 years | 52 | 33.3 | |
| ≥14 | 32 | 20.5 | |
| Service status | On staff | 142 | 91.0 |
| Contracted | 14 | 9.0 | |
In this study, 95.5% of nurses reported that their mental workload was high. When the average scores of the nurses on the Mental Workload Scale were examined, it was determined that the cognitive workload was 3.93 ± 0.60, the temporary workload was 3.90 ± 0.71, the emotional workload was 4.48 ± 0.62, the performance‐related workload was 3.65 ± 0.77 and the total score average on the Mental Workload Scale was 3.96 ± 0.54 (Table 2).
TABLE 2.
Nurses' Mental Workload Scale and Maslach Burnout Scale average scores.
| Scales | n | % |
|---|---|---|
| Mental workload level | ||
| Low (less than 2.5) | 3 | 1.9 |
| Average (2.5–3) | 4 | 2.6 |
| High (3 or more) | 149 | 95.5 |
| Scales | Mean ± SD | Min.–Max. |
|---|---|---|
| Mental Workload Scale | 3.96 ± 0.54 | 2.04–5.00 |
| Cognitive workload | 3.93 ± 0.60 | 2.00–5.00 |
| Temporary workload | 3.90 ± 0.71 | 1.00–5.00 |
| Emotional workload | 4.48 ± 0.62 | 1.80–5.00 |
| Performance‐related workload | 3.65 ± 0.77 | 1.86–5.00 |
| Maslach Burnout Scale | ||
| Emotional exhaustion | 17.41 ± 6.57 | 0.00–36.00 |
| Personal accomplishment | 10.26 ± 4.00 | 2.00–22.00 |
| Depersonalization | 6.35 ± 3.86 | 0.00–19.00 |
When the nurses' MBS mean scores are examined, the emotional exhaustion mean score was 17.41 ± 6.57, the personal accomplishment mean score was 10.26 ± 4.00 and the depersonalization score mean was 6.35 ± 3.86 (Table 2).
In this study, a strong correlation was found between emotional burnout (r = .528, p < .001), personal accomplishment (r = −.246, p < .001), depersonalization (r = .267, p < .001) and Mental Workload Scale total score (Table 3).
TABLE 3.
Correlation between the mental workload and burnout levels of nurses.
| Variables | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Cognitive workload | 1 | |||||||
| 2. Temporary workload | .609** | 1 | ||||||
| 3. Emotional workload | .499** | .561** | 1 | |||||
| 4. Performance‐related workload | .450** | .475** | .574** | 1 | ||||
| 5. Total Mental Workload | .757** | .848** | .778** | .812** | 1 | |||
| 6. Emotional exhaustion | .221** | .287** | .413** | .694** | .528** | 1 | ||
| 7. Personal accomplishment | −.389** | −.188* | −.188* | −.105 | −.246** | .114 | 1 | |
| 8. Depersonalization | .132 | .224** | .266** | .387** | .330** | .618** | .267** | 1 |
Note: The values stated in the table show the correlation coefficient (r).
p < .05;
p < .01.
There was found to be an important association between mental workload and the MBS subscales when the relationship between them was investigated (Figure 1). A strong positive relationship was determined between emotional exhaustion and cognitive workload (r = .221, p < .001), temporary workload (r = .287, p < .001), emotional workload (r = .413, p < .001) and performance‐related workload (Table 3).
FIGURE 1.
The relationship between mental workload and burnout levels of nurses.
A strong negative relationship was determined between the personal accomplishment sub‐dimension and cognitive workload (r = −.389, p < .001), temporary workload (r = − .188, p < .005) and emotional workload (r = − .188, p < .005) (Table 3).
There was a strong positive relationship between the depersonalization sub‐dimension and temporary workload (r = .224, p < .001), emotional workload (r = .266, p < .001) and performance‐related workload (r = .387, p < .001) (Table 3).
This research showed that being female (β = .165, p = .008) and emotional workload (β = − .695, p < .001) were determinants of emotional exhaustion. It was determined that these variables explained 50.1% (adjusted R 2 = .501) of emotional exhaustion (Table 4).
TABLE 4.
Determinants of nurses' burnout levels.
| Emotional exhaustion | Non‐Std.B | S.E. | Std.β | t | p | Tolerance | VIF | F | P | Adjusted R 2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constant | −.052 | 2.979 | −.017 | .986 | 20.453 | .000 | .501 | |||
| Gender (1 = Woman) | −2.548 | .955 | −.165 | −2.669 | .008 | .838 | 1.193 | |||
| Emotional Workload | 5.898 | .616 | .695 | 9.568 | .000 | .611 | 1.638 |
| Personal Accomplishment | Non‐ Std.B | S.E. | Std.β | T | p | Tolerance | VIF | F | P | Adjusted R 2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constant | 21.950 | 2.316 | 9.477 | .000 | 5.535 | .000 | .190 | |||
| Emotional workload | −2.566 | .864 | −.399 | −2.971 | .003 | .290 | 3.451 |
| Depersonalization | β | t | p | Tolerance | VIF | F | p | Adjusted R 2 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constant | 4.516 | 3.081 | 1.466 | .145 | 8.156 | .000 | .244 | |||
| Emotional workload | .231 | .064 | .324 | 3.623 | .000 | .609 | 1.642 |
Note: *p < 0.005, **p < 0.001; t = independent sample t‐test; F = one‐way ANOVA.
It has been revealed that emotional workload (β = .399, p = .003) is a determinant of personal accomplishment. It was determined that these variables explained 19.0% (adjusted R 2 = .190) of personal accomplishment. The most important determinant of depersonalization was emotional workload (β = .324, p < .001). These variables explained 24.4% (adjusted R 2 = .244) of depersonalization (Table 4).
7. DISCUSSION
This study aimed to define the relationship between mental workload and burnout. Research findings have shown that nurses experience high levels of mental workload. Additionally, this research revealed a strong relationship between mental workload and burnout.
Intensive care nurses have a heavy mental burden because they are constantly making decisions that affect patients' lives and health. 28 Almost all of the nurses participating in the study reported experiencing high levels of mental workload. In a study comparing different clinics in Iran, the highest mental workload was found in nurses working in the ICU. 21 In other studies conducted in Iran by Mohammadi et al. 29 and Momennasab et al., 30 the average mental workload rate of intensive care nurses was reported to be approximately 80%. In studies examining Korean and Iranian nurses, the mental workload was found to be over 70%. 11 , 16 , 21 , 31 In contrast, Aprilia et al.'s 20 study in Indonesia reported a moderate level of mental workload, while Ceballos‐Vásquez et al.'s 32 study in Spain indicated a moderate to high level of mental workload. When designing occupational activities, it is crucial to accurately estimate mental workload because excessive levels have been linked to musculoskeletal ailments, accidents, occupational diseases and poor overall job performance. 33 In addition, high mental workload is also related to patient safety as it is reflected in patient care. 13 When the results of this research are compared with the results of other researches, it is seen that the nurses participating in this research experience a higher level of mental workload. Considering that the number of patients per nurse is similar to other studies, this result is worrying in terms of the reflections of high mental workload on nurses, patients and the institution.
It is stated that nurses experience higher levels of burnout among all professions. 9 In a systematic review and meta‐analysis study, the prevalence of high emotional exhaustion among intensive care nurses was reported as 31%, high depersonalization as 18% and low personal accomplishment as 46%. 34 A study conducted in China found that half of the nurses experienced burnout, 33.8% reported emotional exhaustion, 66.6% experienced depersonalization and 93.5% had low scores in personal accomplishment. 7 Another study in the United States reported that 41% of nurses felt high levels of emotional exhaustion, and 59% felt high levels of depersonalization and personal accomplishment. 9 The MBS indicates that low personal accomplishment scores and high mental exhaustion and depersonalization scores are related to high degrees of burnout. 26 In this study, the fact that the emotional exhaustion score is higher than the depersonalization and personal accomplishment scores can be interpreted as nurses facing the risk of burnout. On the other hand, the fact that depersonalization scores are lower than personal accomplishment scores reveals the importance nurses attach to their work and the sense of success they feel, despite their emotional difficulties.
In this study, a strong relationship was found between emotional exhaustion, personal accomplishment, depersonalization and mental workload total score. As mental workload increases, the level of burnout also increases. Similarly, a study conducted in Indonesia reported that there is a positive significant relationship between mental workload and burnout, and as mental workload increases, the level of burnout also increases. 35 Studies show that the higher nurses' perception of workload, the higher the likelihood of negative nurse outcomes (e.g., job dissatisfaction, burnout, turnover) and negative patient outcomes (e.g., patient falls, medication errors, increased incidence of infection). 16 , 28 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 This result, which supports the literature, emphasizes that mental workload is an important factor in preventing burnout.
According to the regression model obtained from this research, it was shown that female nurses and emotional workload were the most important determinants of emotional exhaustion and explained 50.1% of it. This result supports Spain, Gana and China studies reporting that emotional exhaustion is higher in women. 40 , 41 , 42 According to this result, the social responsibilities placed on women and some of the burdens imposed by marriage on the participants, most of whom were married, may have contributed to the increase in mental workload. The research revealed that emotional workload is a determinant of personal accomplishment and negatively affects it. It is stated in the literature that as emotional workload increases, the sense of personal accomplishment decreases and nurses become prone to burnout. 9 High emotional workload may reduce job satisfaction. When nurses begin to dislike their work, their overall sense of personal accomplishment may decrease. 5 This can impact personal success because individuals' ability to achieve their career goals is often based on successful professional performance. As a result, nurses' high emotional workload may negatively affect their personal accomplishment, including factors such as emotional fatigue, decrease in job satisfaction, decrease in professional performance and communication difficulties. 9 Therefore, coping with these challenges and having support systems may be important in increasing nurses' personal success and preventing burnout.
Another result that stands out in the regression model is that the most important determinant of depersonalization is emotional workload. As emotional workload increases, depersonalization increases, which can significantly contribute to burnout. Depersonalization, defined as a lack of love for others, being emotionally detached, indifferent, unsympathetic and uncaring and detachment from work, 43 can lead to lack of success and inefficiency in nurses. According to some theories, mental detachment serves as a self‐defence mechanism to stop additional mental energy depletion and is a motivating aspect of burnout. 44 These effects can negatively impact patient care as well as the general health of nurses. 45 Being aware of emotional workload and strategies to reduce emotional workload at individual and institutional levels will make a significant contribution to reducing depersonalization.
8. LIMITATIONS AND STRENGTHS OF THE RESEARCH
Because only one hospital was included in this study, the results cannot be generalized to other nurses. This research is the first national study to reveal the relationship between the mental workload and burnout levels of intensive care nurses. Additionally, its contribution to the limited international literature can be considered a strength of this study.
9. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE AND FURTHER RESEARCH
Based on the study's findings, mental workload is identified as a significant determinant of burnout experienced by intensive care nurses, with emotional workload, in particular, playing a critical role. Preventive strategies at both individual and institutional levels should prioritize addressing this emotional burden. Future research should focus on developing strategies to reduce mental workload and burnout among intensive care nurses. Specifically, studies could explore the effectiveness of interventions targeting emotional workload management, the role of technological solutions and the impact of institutional support in mitigating these challenges. Additionally, examining educational programmes aimed at enhancing nurses' resilience, conducting comparative studies across different cultural and geographical contexts and evaluating the influence of professional development opportunities are essential. These efforts will contribute to the development of effective strategies to reduce nurses' workload and prevent burnout in intensive care settings.
10. CONCLUSION
Burnout is a significant risk factor for nurses working in ICU, where critical care is provided to patients with life‐threatening conditions, leading to an increased mental workload. This increased mental workload, which includes receiving, understanding and interpreting information, making decisions, concentrating and interacting with patients and their families, can result in negative patient outcomes such as falls, medication errors and increased infection rates. Additionally, it can lead to negative nursing outcomes, including job dissatisfaction, decreased professional performance, burnout and even turnover.
This research revealed that there is a strong positive relationship between mental workload and burnout and that increasing mental workload can increase burnout. Nurses' risk of emotional exhaustion increases as mental workload increases. Reducing cognitive workload, temporary workload and emotional workload increases the personal accomplishment experienced by nurses. In addition, as temporary workload, emotional workload and performance‐related workload increase, the depersonalization experienced by nurses also increases.
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
Study Design: ESG, NKÖ. Data Collection: ESG, NKÖ. Data Analysis: ESG, NKÖ. Study Supervision: ESG, NKÖ. Manuscript Writing: ESG, NKÖ. Critical revisions for important intellectual content: ESG, NKÖ.
FUNDING INFORMATION
The research has no funding.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT
There is no conflict of interest.
ETHICS STATEMENT
The authors state that this research has been carried out in accordance with The Code of Ethics of the World Medical Association (Declaration of Helsinki) for experiments involving humans.
Gündüz ES, Öztürk NK. Mental workload as a predictor of burnout in intensive care nurses. Nurs Crit Care. 2025;30(2):e13173. doi: 10.1111/nicc.13173
DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy or ethical restrictions.
REFERENCES
- 1. Epstein EG, Haizlip J, Liaschenko J, Zhao D, Bennett R, Marshall MF. Moral distress, mattering, and secondary traumatic stress in provider burnout: a call for moral community. AACN Adv Crit Care. 2020;31(2):146‐157. doi: 10.4037/aacnacc2020285 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2. Tavella G, Parker G. A qualitative reexamination of the key features of burnout. J Nerv Ment Dis. 2020;208(6):452‐458. doi: 10.1097/NMD.0000000000001155 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. Edú‐Valsania S, Laguía A, Moriano JA. Burnout: a review of theory and measurement. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(3):1780. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19031780 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. Dall'Ora C, Ball J, Reinius M, Griffiths P. Burnout in nursing: a theoretical review. Hum Resour Health. 2020;18:1‐17. doi: 10.1186/s12960-020-00469-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. Hetzel‐Riggin MD, Swords BA, Tuang HL, Deck JM, Spurgeon NS. Work engagement and resiliency impact the relationship between nursing stress and burnout. Psychol Rep. 2020;123(5):1835‐1853. doi: 10.1177/0033294119876076 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6. Acea‐López L, Pastor‐Bravo MDM, Rubinat‐Arnaldo E, et al. Burnout and job satisfaction among nurses in three Spanish regions. J Nurs Manag. 2021;29(7):2208‐2215. doi: 10.1111/jonm.13376 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. Zhang W, Miao R, Tang J, et al. Burnout in nurses working in China: a national questionnaire survey. Int J Nurs Pract. 2021;27(6):e12908. doi: 10.1111/ijn.12908 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8. Galanis P, Vraka I, Fragkou D, Bilali A, Kaitelidou D. Nurses' burnout and associated risk factors during the COVID‐19 pandemic: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. J Adv Nurs. 2021;77(8):3286‐3302. doi: 10.1111/jan.14839 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9. Phillips C. Relationships between workload perception, burnout, and intent to leave among medical–surgical nurses. JBI Evidence Implementation. 2020;18(2):265‐273. doi: 10.1097/XEB.0000000000000220 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10. He H, Wang J, Yuan Z, Teng M, Wang S. Nurses' mental workload and public health emergency response capacity in COVID‐19 pandemic: a cross‐sectional study. J Adv Nurs. 2023;80:1429‐1439. doi: 10.1111/jan.15929. Advance online publication. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11. Nasirizad Moghadam K, Chehrzad MM, Reza Masouleh S, et al. Nursing physical workload and mental workload in intensive care units: are they related? Nurs Open. 2021;8(4):1625‐1633. doi: 10.1002/nop2.785 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12. Sardo PMG, Macedo RPA, Alvarelhão JJM, et al. Nursing workload assessment in an intensive care unit: a retrospective observational study using the nursing activities score. Nurs Crit Care. 2023;28(2):288‐297. doi: 10.1111/nicc.12854 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13. Destiani W, Mediawati AS, Permana RH. The mental workload of nurses in the role of nursing care providers. J Nurs Care. 2020;3(1):11‐18. doi: 10.24198/jnc.v3i1.22938 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 14. Ivziku D, de Maria M, Ferramosca FMP, Greco A, Tartaglini D, Gualandi R. What determines physical, mental and emotional workloads on nurses? A cross‐sectional study. J Nurs Manag. 2022;30(8):4387‐4397. doi: 10.1111/jonm.13862 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15. Dehais F, Lafont A, Roy R, Fairclough S. A neuroergonomics approach to mental workload, engagement and human performance. Front Neurosci. 2020;14:268. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2020.00268 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16. Pourteimour S, Yaghmaei S, Babamohamadi H. The relationship between mental workload and job performance among Iranian nurses providing care to Covid‐19 patients: a cross‐sectional study. J Nurs Manag. 2021;1–10:1723‐1732. doi: 10.1111/jonm.13305 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17. Stretch B, Shepherd SJ. Criteria for intensive care unit admission and severity of illness. Surgery (Oxford). 2021;39(1):22‐28. doi: 10.1016/j.mpsur.2020.11.004 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 18. Pan H, Shi W, Zhou Q, Chen G, Pan P. Palliative care in the intensive care unit: not just end‐of‐life care. Intensive Care Research. 2023;3(1):77‐82. doi: 10.1007/s44231-022-00009-0 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 19. Li N, Zhang L, Li X, Lu Q. The influence of operating room nurses' job stress on burnout and organizational commitment: the moderating effect of over‐commitment. J Adv Nurs. 2021;77(4):1772‐1782. doi: 10.1111/jan.14725 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20. Aprilia TD, Somantri I, Mirwanti R. Nurses' mental workload in critical care rooms and emergency department. J Nurs Care. 2019;2(3):11‐18. doi: 10.24198/jnc.v3i1.22938 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 21. Bakhshi E, Mazloumi A, Hoseini SM. Relationship between mental fatigue and mental workload among nurses. Zahedan Journal of Research in Medical Sciences. 2019;21(1):e83082. doi: 10.5812/zjrms.83082 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 22. Rubio‐Valdehita S, López‐Núñez MI, López‐Higes R, Díaz‐Ramiro EM. Development of the CarMen – Q Questionnaire for mental workload assessment. Psicothema. 2017;29(4):570‐576. doi: 10.7334/psicothema2017.151 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23. Akca M, Yavuz M, Küçükoğlu MT. Zihinsel iş yükünün ölçümü: CarMen‐Q ölçeğinin Türkçe’ye uyarlaması. Yaşar Üniversitesi E‐Dergisi. 2020;15(60):675‐691. doi: 10.19168/jyasar.708357 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 24. Can R, Hisar KM. Hemşirelerin profesyonellik davranışları ve tükenmişlik düzeyleri. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Hemşirelik Fakültesi Dergisi. 2019;6(1):1‐9. doi: 10.31125/hunhemsire.544096 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 25. Maslach C, Jackson SE. The measurement of experienced burnout. Journal of Occupational Behaviour. 1981;2(2):99‐113. doi: 10.1002/job.4030020205 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 26. Ergin C. Doktor ve hemşirelerde tükenmişlik ve Maslach tükenmişlik ölçeğinin uyarlanması. VII. Ulusal Psikoloji Kongresi. 22‐25 Eylül 1992:143‐154.
- 27. Merino‐Soto C, Calderon‐De la Cruz G, Fernandez‐Arata M. Maslach burnout inventory‐general Survey's abbreviated measurement: validation in Peruvian teachers. Occup. Health Sci. 2023;7:631‐644. doi: 10.1007/s41542-023-00149-9 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 28. Zahednezhad H, Shokrollahi N, Gheshlagh RG, Afshar PF. Does heavy mental workload affect moral sensitivity among critical care unit nursing professionals? A cross‐sectional study. BMC Nurs. 2021;20(1):140. doi: 10.1186/s12912-021-00662-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29. Mohammadi F, Hanifi N, Bahraminegad N. Investigating the relationship between Nurses' mental workload and the quality of Care Services in Intensive Care Unit. Journal of Critical Care Nursing. 2021;14(2):38‐47. [Google Scholar]
- 30. Momennasab M, Karimi F, Dehghanrad F, Zarshenas L. Evaluation of nursing workload and efficiency of staff allocation in a trauma intensive care unit. Trauma Mon. 2018;23(1):e58161. doi: 10.5812/traumamon.58161 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 31. Seok Y, Cho Y, Kim N, Suh EE. Degree of alarm fatigue and mental workload of hospital nurses in intensive care units. Nurs Rep. 2023;13(3):946‐955. doi: 10.3390/nursrep13030083 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32. Ceballos‐Vásquez P, Rolo‐González G, Hérnandez‐Fernaud E, Díaz‐Cabrera D, Paravic‐Klijn T, Burgos‐Moreno M. Psychosocial factors and mental work load: a reality perceived by nurses in intensive care units. Rev Lat Am Enfermagem. 2015;23:315‐322. doi: 10.1590/0104-1169.0044.2557 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33. Nino L, Marchak F, Claudio D. Physical and mental workload interactions in a sterile processing department. Int J Ind Ergon. 2020;76:102902. doi: 10.1016/j.ergon.2019.102902 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 34. Ramírez‐Elvira S, Romero‐Béjar JL, Suleiman‐Martos N, et al. Prevalence, risk factors and burnout levels in intensive care unit nurses: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(21):11432. doi: 10.3390/ijerph182111432 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35. Pamungkas RA, Ruga FBP, Kusumapradja R. Impact of physical workload and mental workload on nurse performance: a path analysis. International Journal of Nursing and Health Services (IJNHS). 2022;5(2):219‐225. doi: 10.35654/ijnhs.v5i2.604 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 36. Aiken LH, Sloane D, Griffiths P, et al. Nursing skill mix in European hospitals: cross‐sectional study of the association with mortality, patient ratings, and quality of care. BMJ Qual Saf. 2017;26(7):559‐568. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2016-005567 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37. MacPhee M, Dahinten VS, Havaei F. The impact of heavy perceived nurse workloads on patient and nurse outcomes. Administrative Sciences. 2017;7(1):7. doi: 10.3390/admsci7010007 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 38. van Bogaert P, Peremans L, van Heusden D, et al. Predictors of burnout, work engagement and nurse reported job outcomes and quality of care: a mixed method study. BMC Nurs. 2017;16:1‐14. doi: 10.1186/s12912-016-0200-4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39. Weigl M, Müller A, Holland S, Wedel S, Woloshynowych M. Work conditions, mental workload and patient care quality: a multisource study in the emergency department. BMJ Qual Saf. 2016;25(7):499‐508. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2014-003744 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40. Odonkor ST, Frimpong K. Burnout among healthcare professionals in Ghana: a critical assessment. Biomed Res Int. 2020;2020:1614968. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41. Redondo‐Flórez L, Tornero‐Aguilera JF, Ramos‐Campo DJ, Clemente‐Suárez VJ. Gender differences in stress‐and burnout‐related factors of university professors. Biomed Res Int. 2020;2020:6687358‐6687359. doi: 10.1155/2020/6687358 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42. Wang L, Wang H, Shao S, Jia G, Xiang J. Job burnout on subjective well‐being among Chinese female doctors: the moderating role of perceived social support. Front Psychol. 2020;11:435. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00435 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43. Harvey C, Thompson S, Otis E, Willis E. Nurses' views on workload, care rationing and work environments. J Nurs Manag. 2020;28(4):912‐918. doi: 10.1111/jonm.13019 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44. Goussinsky R. The moderating role of rumination and social sharing in the relationship between mistreatment and service sabotage and depersonalization: a cross‐sectional study of hospital nurses. Int J Nurs Stud. 2020;110:103705. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2020.103705 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45. Belji Kangarlou M, Fatemi F, Paknazar F, Dehdashti A. Occupational burnout symptoms and its relationship with workload and fear of the SARS‐CoV‐2 pandemic among hospital nurses. Front Public Health. 2022;10:852629. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.852629 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Data Availability Statement
The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy or ethical restrictions.