Table 4. Main findings of longitudinal studies of professional consequences of burnout.
AUTHORS, YEAR | N (FINAL SAMPLE) | DEPENDENT VARIABLE | MAIN FINDINGS | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
NOT SIGNIFICANT | SIGNIFICANT | CONTROL VARIABLES | |||
Figueiredo-Ferraz et al., 2012 [47] | 316 | Job satisfaction | Professional efficacy β = 0.02 | Emotional exhaustion β = - 0.15** Depersonalization β = - 0.14** | Age, sex, work contract and job satisfaction in T1 |
Lizano, Barak, 2015 [62] | 133 | Job satisfaction | Depersonalization did not predict job satisfaction in low (β = 0.04) and high (β = 0.08) supervisory support groups | Higher levels of emotional exhaustion predicted lower levels of job satisfaction in both the low (β = -0.46)** and high (β = -0.48)** supervisory support groups | Age, race, tenure, position in the organization, role conflict, role ambiguity and work family |
Borritz et al., 2006 [39] | 824 | Sickness absence days Sickness absence spells |
- | Sickness absence days RR = 1.21 (1.11–1.32)** Sickness absence spells RR = 1.09 (1.02–1.17)** | Age, gender, organization status, socioeconomic status, BMI, smoking, alcohol consumption, leisure time physical activity, family status, having children below the age of 7, and diseases (diabetes, high blood pressure, chronic bronchitis, asthma, coronary thrombosis, cardiovascular spasm, cerebral hemorrhage, cerebral thrombosis, cancer, gastric ulcer, cystitis, menstruation-related pain, mental disorder, allergy, skin diseases, and backache) |
Schaufeli et al., 2009 [71] | 201 | Absence duration | - | T1 burnout predicts T1–T2 absence duration (β = 0.26) | Age was not controlled for, but the authors reported that no significant correlations were observed between age and any of the study variables |
Borritz et al., 2010 [40] | 1,734 | Long‑term sickness absence (>2 weeks) | - | Highest level of work burnout Model 1: RR = 2.93 (1.89–3.96) Model 2: RR = 2.67 (1.79–3.55) Model 3: RR = 2.67 (1.80–3.55) Model 4: RR = 2.81 (1.89–3.72) Model 5: RR = 2.72 (1.83–3.60) Model 6: RR = 2.77 (1.87–3.67) Medium level of work burnout Model 1: RR = 1.70 (1.11–2.29) Model 2: RR = 1.57 (1.06–2.08) Model 3: RR = 1.54 (1.05–2.04) Model 4: RR = 1.58 (1.07–2.09) Model 5: RR = 1.56 (1.06–2.07) Model 6: RR = 1.57 (1.06–2.07) | Model 1: age, gender, socioeconomic status, family status, health-related lifestyle (smoking habits, alcohol consumption, sedentary lifestyle, overweight, underweight, and presence of chronic physical disease) Model 2: Model 1 plus emotional demands Model 3: Model 1 plus role conflicts Model 4: Model 1 plus role clarity Model 5: Model 1 plus predictability Model 6: Model 1 plus quality of leadership |
Hallsten et al., 2011 [51] | 4,109 | Long‑term sickness absence (>60 consecutive days) | - | OR = 2.05 (1.13–3.70) | Gender, age group, level of occupational skill, family status, chronic disorders, daily smoking and previous sickness absence |
Roelen et al., 2015 [68] | 4,894 | Long‑term sickness absence(≥42 consecutive days) | Musculoskeletal long-term sickness absence OR = 1.38 (0.74–2.58) | Mental long-term sickness absence OR = 1.55 (1.07–2.25)* | Age, gender, marital status, children at home, employment, work hours/week, tenure in work, BMI, physical activity, smoking habits, alcohol consumption and the use of drugs and sedatives |
Toppinen-Tanner et al., 2005 [79] | 3,895 | Sick-Leave absences (≥3 days absence episodes, medically certified) |
HIGH BURNOUT Sick-leave absences due to diseases of the digestive system RR = 1.65 (0.86–3.18) | HIGH BURNOUT Sick-leave absences due to mental and behavioral disorders RR = 3.15 (1.38–7.19) Sick-leave absences due to diseases of the circulatory system RR = 1.89 (1.00–3.60) Sick-leave absences due to diseases of the respiratory system RR = 1.29 (1.04–1.61) Sick-leave absences due to diseases of the musculoskeletal system RR = 1.26 (1.04–1.52) | Age, gender and employee group |
Ahola et al., 2009 [28] | 3,125 | New disability pension | - | OR = 1.49 (1.24–1.80) | Gender, age, marital status, occupational status, occupational sector, mental disorders, and physical illnesses |
Ahola et al., 2009 [29] | 7,810 | New disability pension | Mild burnout HR = 1.16 (0.96–1.39) | Severe burnout HR = 1.57 (1.09–2.26) | Gender, age, marital status, socioeconomic status, registered medication use and self-reported chronic illness |
Wang et al., 2016 [83] | 263 | Job demands and job resources | T1 job burnout did not affect T2 job demands (r = -0.11) | T1 job burnout affected T2 job resources (r = 0.09)* T2 job burnout affected job resources (r = -0.14)* and job demands at T3 (r = 0.15)* | Age, organizational tenure, marital status, gender, level of education, and managerial status |
Demerouti et al., 2009 [45] | 258 | Job demands and presenteeism | T1 depersonalization did not lead to more presenteeism | T1 emotional exhaustion had effects on both T2 and T3 presenteeism. T1 emotional exhaustion and depersonalization had significant effects on T2 job demands. T1 depersonalization had an additional effect on T3 job demands | Gender and general heath in T1 |
*p<0.05
**p<0.01
HR = hazard ratios OR = odds ratio RR = risk ratio r = synchronous correlations (within-wave correlations between the errors) β = standardized partial regression coefficients