Skip to main content
Elsevier - PMC COVID-19 Collection logoLink to Elsevier - PMC COVID-19 Collection
. 2020 May 27;290:113129. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113129

Burnout and somatic symptoms among frontline healthcare professionals at the peak of the Italian COVID-19 pandemic.

Serena Barello 1,, Lorenzo Palamenghi 1, Guendalina Graffigna 1
PMCID: PMC7255285  PMID: 32485487

Highlights

  • We provide a first account of the psychological and physical symptoms experienced by healthcare workers during the Italian COVID-19 peak. It is of pressing urgency that national and international healthcare institutions develop a strategic plan to strengthen the clinicians’ psychological resilience to prevent them to become “second victims” in this scenario.

Abstract

Italy is among the most severely hit nations in terms of hospital patients’ overload, and its healthcare workforce is struggling to cope with challenges that could threaten their own wellbeing. In this scenario, understanding the health-related consequences of COVID-19 outbreak on Italian frontline healthcare professionals is urgent. Our study provides a first account of the huge psycho-physical impact of COVID-19 outbreak for healthcare workers in Italy. Italian healthcare professionals reported relevant work-related psychological pressure, emotional burnout and somatic symptoms. This result requires attention as previous studies showed that emotional distress is associated with long-lasting effect on professionals’ health, including risk of post-traumatic stress disorder.

1. Background

The COVID-19 outbreak has placed extraordinary demands upon healthcare systems worldwide. While we are writing (April 26, 2020), the World Health Organization (WHO) reported 2,626,321 confirmed cases including 181,938 deaths in 213 Countries. Italy is grappling with the worst outbreak, with over 106,527 confirmed cases and around 25,969 deaths (WHO, 2020). Therefore, health professionals dealing with COVID-19 are under increased psychological and physical pressure, resembling previous epidemics conditions (Styra et al., 2008). Italy is among the most severely hit nations in terms of hospital patients’ overload, and its healthcare workforce struggles to cope with challenges which could threaten their wellbeing. In this scenario, understanding the health-related consequences of COVID-19 outbreak on frontline Italian healthcare workers is today urgent to provide timely interventions to protect their health (The Lancet, 2020).

Objective: This study described the levels of professionals’ burnout and physical symptoms of Italian frontline healthcare workers directly involved in the care of patients with COVID-19 at the peak of the pandemics in this country, comparing them across genders and occupational role. It also investigated the relationship between professionals’ burnout and negative health symptoms.

2. Methods and findings

A convenience sample of 1,153 Italian healthcare professionals was invited to fill an online questionnaire including the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) (Maslach et al., 1997) and ad-hoc items to assess psycho-somatic symptoms and self-perceived general health status. For the MBI inventory, cut-off criteria for Italian healthcare workers have been adopted (Sirigatti and Stefanile, 1993). Of the 1,153 professionals involved, 376 participants reported to have directly assisted COVID-19 infected patients. They have been selected for the present study as they are the ones more at risk to develop COVID-related health consequences, according to other studies (Lai et al., 2020; Styra et al., 2008). Table 1 describes participants’ characteristics.

Table 1.

Sample characteristics

Socio-demographics Professional characteristics
Gender n % Length of work experience
Male 99 26.3 Min <1
Female 277 73.7 Max 42
Average (SD) 15 (11)
Age
Min 23 Occupational role N %
Max 69 Nurse 271 72.1
Average (SD) 40 (11) Physician 67 17.8
Other professionals 38 10.1
Marital status n %
Married/living together 228 60.6 Main work setting n %
Single 120 31.9 Hospital unit 307 81.6
Divorced/separated 23 6.4 Rehabilitation center 6 1.6
Widow(er) 3 0.8 Ambulatory 3 0.8
Other 2 0.5 Private study 1 0.3
Other 55 14.8
Missing 4 1.1
Personal experience with COVID-19 Professional experience with COVID-19
Have you been tested for COVID-19? n % Do you work in an hospital with COVID-19 patients? n %
No 242 64.4 No 49 13
Yes 126 33.5 Yes 327 87
I'd rather not answer 3 0.8
Missing 5 1.3 During your interaction with COVID-19 patients, were you wearing adequate PPEs (Personal Protective Equipment)? n %
No 35 9.3
Have you been quarantined? n % Yes 328 87.2
No 335 89.1 I'd rather not answer 12 3.2
Yes 32 8.5 Missing 1 0.3
I'd rather not answer 5 1.3
Missing 4 1.1
One of your familiars has been found positive to COVID-19? n %
No 347 92.3
Yes 19 5.1
I'd rather not answer 6 1.6
Missing 4 1.1
Psychological characteristics Perceived impact on psychological and physical health
Emotional exhaustion (MBI) n % Experienced symptoms in the last month (at least sometimes) n %
High (≥24) 139 37.0 Increased irritability 221 58.8
Moderate (15-23) 86 22.9 Change in food habits 209 55.6
Low (≤14) 96 25.5 Difficulty falling asleep 208 55.3
Missing 55 14.6 Muscle tension 182 48.4
Average score (SD) 22.7 (12.1) Exaggerated reactions to situations 150 39.9
Min score 0 Nightmares 150 39.9
Max score 53 Nervous breakdown 142 37.8
Increased sweating 140 37.2
Depersonalization (MBI) n % Upset stomach 140 37.2
High (≥9) 93 24.7 Gastro-intestinal problems 139 37.0
Moderate (4-8) 102 27.1 Palpitation 112 29.8
Low (≤3) 126 33.5 Experienced inexplicable physical sensations 101 26.9
Missing 55 14.6 Shortness of breath 87 23.1
Average score (SD) 6.1 (5.7) Chest pain 54 14.4
Min score 0 Vertigo 43 11.4
Max score 28
In general, would you say your health is: n %
Personal Gratification (MBI) n % Poor 2 0.5
High (≥37) 200 53.2 Fair 24 6.4
Moderate (30-36) 72 19.1 Good 100 26.6
Low (≤29) 49 15.3 Very good 144 38.3
Missing 55 14.6 Excellent 47 12.5
Average score (SD) 37.5 (7.6) Missing 59 15.7
Min score 13 Average score (SD) 3.66
Max score 48 Min score 1
Max score 5
How much are you concerned for the ongoing COVID-19 emergency situation?
(1=Not at all; 10=A lot)
Average score (SD) 8.17 (1.53)
Min score 3
Max score 10
How much do you feel at risk of being infected by the new Coronavirus (COVID-19)?
(1=Not at all; 5 =A lot)
Average score (SD) 4.04 (0.88)
Min score 2
Max score 5

MBI = Maslach Burnout Inventory: a validated 22-item questionnaire considered the gold standard tool for measuring burnout. Emotional Exhaustion (EE, 9 items) captures the experience of having one's emotional resources depleted and having no source of replenishment. Depersonalization (DP, 5 items) describes the experience of becoming cold and indifferent to other's needs. Personal Gratification (PG, 8 items) is the sense of professional recognition and self-efficacy. Respondents rated each item on a seven-point Likert-type scale for how frequently they experience the feeling(0 =“Never”,6=“Every day”). Respondents are classified as high, moderate or low burnout cases on the respective subscales. High mean scores on EE and DP subscales correspond to higher degrees of experienced burnout, whereas a low mean score on the PG subscale corresponds to a higher degree of burnout. The MBI yields three, non-cumulative scores.

A large percentage of healthcare professionals reported high scores in at least one of the MBI domains: in particular, more than 1 out of 3 showed high score of Emotional Exhaustion and 1 out of 4 reported at high levels of Depersonalization, while only around 15% reported low levels of Personal Gratification. A series of one-sample t-test was used to compare the means in our sample with normative values: analyses revealed that levels of emotional exhaustion were higher than in the normative sample (t(320)=3.765; p<.001; difference in means=2.53), while levels of depersonalization appear somehow lower (t(320)=-2.906; p=.004; difference in means=-0.91) and Personal Gratification higher (t(320)=11.856; p<.001; difference in means=5.02).

The 45% of the sample experienced - with high frequency – at least one physical symptom in the previous 4 weeks. In particular, increased irritability, change in food habits, difficulty falling asleep and muscle tension were very frequently experienced by the majority of the respondents.

Pearson's correlations showed that higher levels of burnout were indeed associated with a more frequent experience of symptoms (calculated by averaging answers to the set of questions). In particular, both higher levels of Emotional Exhaustion and Depersonalization were linked with more frequent experiences of symptoms (respectively, r=.491, p=<.001; r=.268, p>.001), while Personal Gratification emerged as a significant protective factor (r=-.126, p=.025). Emotional Exhaustion was also negatively correlated with self-perceived health status (r=-.251, p<.001).

General linear models testing gender and occupational role as independent variables and including age and years of profession as covariates were run to assess the presence of significant differences in levels of burnout and experienced symptoms. Results showed a main effect of gender on Emotional Exhaustion (F 1, 312=12.444; p<.001; ηp2=.038), with females showing higher levels than male counterparts (M=24.05, SD=11.57; M=18.74, SD=12.65, respectively). A significant main effect emerged for gender (F1, 308=13.836; p<.001; ηp 2=.043) and occupational role (F2, 308=5.173; p=.006; ηp 2=.032) on experienced symptoms, with males experiencing symptoms less frequently than females (M=2.47, SD=.94; M=3.09, SD=.88, respectively) and physicians less frequently than nurses (M=2.47, SD=.83; M=3.05, SD=.93, respectively).

3. Discussions

This research highlighted the huge psychological and physical impact of COVID-19 emergency outbreak on Italian healthcare workers. Professionals who are directly involved in the care of patients with COVID-19 reported significant work-related psychological pressure and frequent somatic symptoms. Levels of Emotional Exhaustion appeared higher than normative values and the percentage of workers with high levels of Exhaustion was significantly higher than the one found in other Italian samples before COVID-19 outbreak (Bressi et al., 2008) or in other healthcare settings during the SARS pandemic (Maunder et al., 2006).

This result requires special attention as previous studies showed that emotional distress is frequently associated with suboptimal patient care and professional inefficiencies along with long-lasting effect on health professionals’ health status (Panagioti et al., 2018). On the other hand, healthcare workers seemed to be still capable of finding some gratification from their job, as only a rather small amount of them appeared to have low levels of Personal Gratification, which may be considered as a relevant protective factor for the professionals’ mental health, as demonstrated in previous studies (Bonetti et al., 2019; Zwack and Schweitzer, 2013).

Our study has some limitations. First, data obtained from self-reported questionnaires were not compared with clinical data on healthcare professionals’ health. Second, the sample was not representative of the Italian healthcare workers population and the study was performed in the early outbreak: these aspects may limit the generalizability of the findings and the comparison with MBI normative data. Follow-up, longitudinal studies should assess long-lasting effects of psychological and physical symptoms once the imminent threat of COVID-19 recovers.

Our study presents data after 5 weeks from the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy and provides early insight into the urgent need to support healthcare workers who are at higher risk of negative health consequences. We strongly recommend to provide timely counseling services and support systems to mitigate the massive impact of this emergency on their actual and future wellbeing.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Serena Barello: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing - original draft, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Lorenzo Palamenghi: Writing - original draft, Data curation, Formal analysis. Guendalina Graffigna: Conceptualization, Methodology, Supervision.

Declaration of Competing Interests

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Footnotes

Supplementary material associated with this article can be found, in the online version, at doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113129.

Appendix. Supplementary materials

mmc1.xml (201B, xml)

References

  1. Bonetti L., Tolotti A., Valcarenghi D., Pedrazzani C., Barello S., Ghizzardi G., Graffigna G., Sari D., Bianchi M. Burnout precursors in oncology nurses: a preliminary cross-sectional study with a systemic organizational analysis. Sustainability. 2019;11(5):1246. doi: 10.3390/su11051246. 1–13. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  2. Bressi C., Manenti S., Porcellana M., Cevales D., Farina L., Felicioni I., Meloni G., Milone G., Miccolis I.R., Pavanetto M., Pescador L., Poddigue M., Scotti L., Zambon A., Corrao G., Lambertenghi-Deliliers G., Invernizzi G. Haemato-oncology and burnout: an Italian survey. Br. J. Cancer. 2008;98:1046–1052. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6604270. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Lai J., Ma S., Wang Y., Cai Z., Hu J., Wei N., Wu J., Du H., Chen T., Li R., Tan H., Kang L., Yao L., Huang M., Wang H., Wang G., Liu Z., Hu S. Factors associated with mental health outcomes among health care workers exposed to coronavirus disease 2019. JAMA Netw. Open. 2020;3 doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.3976. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Maslach, C., Jackson, S.E., Leiter, M.P., 1997. Maslach burnout inventory: third edition, evaluating stress: a book of resources. 10.1017/S0033291798257163.
  5. Maunder R., Lancee W., Balderson K., Bennett J., Borgundvaag B., Evans S., Fernandes C., Goldbloom D., Gupta M., Hunter J., Hall McGillis, L. Nagle, L. Pain, C. Peczeniuk, S. Raymond, G. Read, N. Rourke, S. Steinberg, R. Stewart, T. VanDeVelde-Coke, S. Veldhorst, G., Wasylenki D. Long-term psychological and occupational effects of providing hospital healthcare during SARS outbreak. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2006;12:1924–1932. doi: 10.3201/eid1212.060584. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Panagioti M., Geraghty K., Johnson J., Zhou A., Panagopoulou E., Chew-Graham C., Peters D., Hodkinson A., Riley R., Esmail A. Association between physician burnout and patient safety, professionalism, and patient satisfaction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Intern. Med. 2018;178:1317–1330. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.3713. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] [Retracted]
  7. Sirigatti S., Stefanile C. Adattamento e Taratura per l'Italia, in: MBI Maslach Burnout Inventory. Organizzazioni Speciali; Firenze: 1993. MBI - Maslach Burnout Inventory; pp. 33–42. [Google Scholar]
  8. Styra R., Hawryluck L., Robinson S., Kasapinovic S., Fones C., Gold W.L. Impact on health care workers employed in high-risk areas during the Toronto SARS outbreak. J. Psychosom. Res. 2008;64:177–183. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2007.07.015. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. The Lancet COVID-19: protecting health-care workers. Lancet. 2020 doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30644-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. WHO Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak. Emerg. - Dis. 2020 [Google Scholar]
  11. Zwack J., Schweitzer J. If every fifth physician is affected by burnout, what about the other four? Resilience strategies of experienced physicians. Acad. Med. 2013 doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e318281696b. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

mmc1.xml (201B, xml)

Articles from Psychiatry Research are provided here courtesy of Elsevier

RESOURCES