Skip to main content
PLOS ONE logoLink to PLOS ONE
. 2020 May 29;15(5):e0233137. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0233137

Personal and psychosocial factors of burnout: A survey within the French neurosurgical community

Clément Baumgarten 1,*, Estelle Michinov 2, Géraldine Rouxel 2, Vincent Bonneterre 3, Emmanuel Gay 1, Pierre-Hugues Roche 4
Editor: Sergio A Useche5
PMCID: PMC7259549  PMID: 32469930

Abstract

Object

The neurosurgical community is particularly exposed to burnout. The objectives of this study were to report the prevalence and associated factors of burnout within the French neurosurgical community using validated academic and psychologic scales.

Methods

A national survey was sent to 141 French residents and 432 neurosurgeons between April and July 2019. Burnout was surveyed using the Maslach burnout inventory. The survey included demographic data and several academic psychologic scales. A stepwise multiple regression was used to determine factors that are associated with burnout scores.

Results

The response rate was 100% and 23.6% for residents and neurosurgeons, respectively. Prevalence of burnout within the French neurosurgical community was 49%. There were no significant differences between residents and neurosurgeons. Two categories of factors were associated with the main dimensions of burnout during the stepwise multiple regression: personality and factors related with neurosurgical practice. Personality types such as neuroticism were negatively associated with burnout while agreeableness was protective. Work addictive profile with excessive work and absorption at work were negatively associated. Factors associated with neurosurgical practice such as conflict of work into family life, unbalanced effort to reward ratio, work duration were negatively associated. Pleasure at work was protective.

Conclusion

Prevalence of burnout is high among French neurosurgeons. Predictive models can be used to identify and prevent burnout among profiles at risk.

Introduction

Workers in many occupational sectors are susceptible to creating a situational context that leads to burnout symptoms [1]. Burnout is a syndrome defined by emotional exhaustion (EE), feelings of depersonalization (DP) and a lack of personal accomplishment (PA) in relation to professional activity [2]. Studies have demonstrated that chronic stressors could increase burnout arise from an imbalance between job demands and job resources [3]. Burnout is associated with several comorbid factors such as chronic fatigue, addictive behaviors, substance use and suicidal ideation, and different health complains [4]. Studies suggest that burnout has a negative impact on psychological and physical health of workers, but also on their interpersonal relationships and job environment. For healthcare professionals and physicians, burnout affects the quality of patients’ care through increased medical errors, decreased empathy and decreased productivity at work [5]. Thus, efforts to identify and prevent burnout should lead to better health at work and better quality of care. The prevalence of burnout within different surgical specialties is about 40% [6], and for certain subspecialties such as neurosurgery, the prevalence of burnout is estimated to be 27% to 56.7% [79]. Neurosurgery is a demanding specialty in medicine. Work hours are among the longest [10] as the number of night shifts, and has a heavy medicolegal burden due to high malpractice risk [11].

In different American studies [7,8], prevalence and associated factors of burnout in residents and neurosurgeons have been reported. Surprisingly, Shakir et al. [7] reported a burnout rate of 36.5%, Attenello et al. [8] a 67% rate for residents, with an association with inadequate operative exposure, and social stressors while mentorship was a protective factor. McAbee et al. [9] reported for board certified neurosurgeons a 56.7% rate with an association with an unbalanced work and family life and anxiety over future earnings and health care reform. Still, burnout prevalence may differ depending on the health care system and further studies are needed to understand such a complex phenomenon. Moreover, psychological profiles and validated work-related academic scales have never been used when studying burnout in neurosurgery.

In this paper, we present the results of a nationwide survey targeting the entire neurosurgical community in France: residents and neurosurgeons, including those in private practice. The objectives of this work were to report the prevalence and associated factors of burnout within the French neurosurgical community using validated academic and psychologic scales.

Material and methods

Participants

At the time of the survey there were 587 board certified neurosurgeons. 354 worked in a public hospital, 139 were exclusively in private practice and 94 worked in both. There were 141 residents in the accredited French residency program. Contact information was obtained from the French Society of Neurosurgery. 141 and 432 email addresses were available for residents and neurosurgeons, respectively. An email with an anonymized link to the study survey was sent to the population mentioned above. For residents, the survey was part of the national days of neurosurgery teaching. The content of the mail is provided in the supplementary material (S1 Appendix). The mail was sent in April 2019 and two follow up requests were sent in May and June 2019. Responses were collected in July 2019. Survey responses were anonymous. Completing all of the questions was mandatory, so there was no missing data. Written consent was not required due to the non-mandatory nature of this questionnaire. The questionnaire was declared to the CNIL, the French Commission of Informatics and Liberty, (n° 2211947 v 0). The questionnaire was approved by the ethics committee (ref. IRB00011687).

Questionnaire

The questionnaire included several work scales and psychologic tests: the Siegrist effort-reward scale [12]; the French DUWAS scale [13] to explore addiction at work; a two sided work-family conflict scale [14]; the work-related flow inventory [15]; the big five inventory for personality traits [16]; the Maslach Burnout Inventory scale [2] and several demographic data sets.

All definitions were based on the MBI scale [2]. Burnout was defined as having high score for emotional exhaustion and/or depersonalization in the MBI. High EE was defined by an EE score ≥30. High DP was defined by a score higher than 12. Low PA was defined by a score lower than 33.

Statistical analysis

Demographic information was compiled from a series of descriptive statistics. Overall burnout rate and differences in MBI scores, depending on gender and hierarchical status, were reported. Prior to any analysis, we conducted a Cronbach’s alpha analysis to explore the reliability of each questionnaire’s items. Item 20 of the overinvestment scale as well as item 35 et 41 of the BFI test were excluded. Cronbach’s alphas are reported in S2 Table. Gender and hierarchical status comparison of severe burnout was done using a chi-square test for association. All expected cell frequencies were greater than five. An independent-sample t-test was run to determine if there were differences in MBI scores between genders. An independent-samples test was also run for worked hours and number of night shifts comparison depending on resident and neurosurgeons. A one-way ANOVA was run to determine if there were differences in MBI score between professional status (i.e. fellows, professor…). Prior assumptions were checked when one-way ANOVA was used for mean comparisons between multiples groups. There were no outliers, as assessed by boxplot; data was normally distributed for each group, as assessed by Shapiro-Wilk test (p > .05); and there was homogeneity of variances, as assessed by Levene's test of homogeneity of variances (p = >0.05). A Tukey post hoc test was used when the result of the one-way ANOVA showed significance.

We conducted a stepwise multiple regression to determine factors that are associated with burnout scores. The list of entered factors is available in S2 Table. There was linearity as assessed by partial regression plots and a plot of studentized residuals against the predicted values. There was independence of residuals, as assessed by a Durbin-Watson statistic of respectively 2.02, 1.97, 2.045 for EE, DP and PA scores. There was homoscedasticity, as assessed by visual inspection of a plot of studentized residuals versus unstandardized predicted values. There was no evidence of multicollinearity, as assessed by tolerance values greater than 0.1. There were no studentized deleted residuals greater than ±3 standard deviations, no leverage values greater than 0.2, and values for Cook's distance above 1. There assumption of normality was met, as assessed by Q-Q Plot. All data were analyzed using the SPSS 24.0 statistical software (IBM, Armonk, New York).

Results

141 residents (100%) completed the survey as it was part of national days of teaching of neurosurgery in France. Of the 432 contacted neurosurgeons, 102 (23.6%) completed the survey. The demographic characteristics of the respondents are shown in Table 1. Thus, more than half of the population were residents (57.3%). In the overall population: 26.6% were women; 28% of the residents and 22% of the neurosurgeons.

Table 1. Demographic data.

Sex n %
Men 179 73.4
Women 64 26.6
Professional status
Resident 141 58
1st year 26 10.6
2nd year 24 9.8
3rd year 23 9.3
4th year 31 12.6
5th year 37 15.04
Fellow 22 9.1
Attending neurosurgeon 31 12.8
Professor 21 8.6
Private practice 28 11.5
Children
Yes 92 37.9
No 151 62.1
Marital status
Single 79 32.5
Common law 72 29.6
Married 84 34.6
Divorced 8 3.3
Security rest
Yes 77 30.9
No 90 36.6
It depends 79 32.5

Fig 1 represents the mean declared working time per week and number of night shifts of residents and neurosurgeons. There was a significant difference depending on hierarchical status in working time: mean working time n = 69.65h and n = 57.08h for residents and neurosurgeons, respectively (p<0.001). There was also a significant difference for the number of shifts with residents declaring the most shifts: n = 5.91 and n = 3.76 for residents and neurosurgeons, respectively (p<0.001).

Fig 1. Worked hours per week and number of night shifts per month depending on hierarchical status.

Fig 1

Table 2 reports an overall burnout rate of 49% within the French neurosurgical community. This is a prevalence and reflects the burnout rate at the time of the study i.e. July 2019. A comparison of MBI scores is reported depending on gender and hierarchical status. There was no significant difference between gender and hierarchical status for severe burnout. There was only a significant difference between residents and neurosurgeons for DP (p = 0.002). There was a significant difference depending on hierarchical status for depersonalization according to the one-way ANOVA test. However, there were conflicting results with a Tukey post hoc test that did not show significant differences between groups.

Table 2. Overall burnout rate and differences in MBI scores depending on gender and hierarchical status.

Emotional exhaustion Personal accomplishment Depersonalization Burnout Proportion
N Mean (SD) Mean (SD) Mean (SD)
Overall 243 23.84 11.01 33.04 8.2 10.41 6.21 49%
Gender
Women 64 23.79 10.94 33.5 8.34 9.3 5.95 48.4%
Men 179 23.84 10.07 32.88 8.16 10.79 6.28 49.2%
p-value 0.97 0.61 0.12 0.92
Professional status
Residents 141 23.22 11.14 32.43 9.03 11.45 6.45 52.5%
Neurosurgeons 102 24.68 10.82 33.90 6.82 8.99 5.56 47.5%
p-value 0.31 0.32 0.002 0.24
Fellows 22 25.78 10.47 33.27 4.89 10.04 6.34 54.5%
Senior 31 26.81 11.57 32.48 7.53 8.09 5.56 48.4%
Professor 21 24.14 10.24 36.24 5.81 7.81 4.64 38.1%
Private practice 28 21.89 10.59 34.21 7.78 9.14 5.75 35.7%
p-value 0.37 0.32 0.03 0.51

Table 3 reports the stepwise multiple regression analysis demonstrating the associations between burnout categories and several factors. Two types of variables are associated with burnout categories. Personality dimensions appear to be an independent variable with neurosurgical practice. Neuroticism was associated with EE. Agreeableness was a protective factor against depersonalization and has a positive impact on personal accomplishment. Openness to experience, extraversion and consciousness was associated with personal accomplishment. Fig 2 represents the mean BFI scores for each dimension within the French neurosurgical community. Neurosurgeons appear as introverted, conscientious, compassionate, inventive, and rather secure regarding the neuroticism dimension. There were variables related to neurosurgical practice: the conflict of work on family life has a negative impact on emotional exhaustion and depersonalization. Pleasure at work was negatively associated with EE and DP while it was positively associated with PA. Absorption at work has a negative association with EE. An unbalance effort/reward ratio has a negative association with EE but positive association with PA. Excessive work according to Duwas scale was associated with EE. Rise on hierarchical status has a positive association with DP. Finally, working hours have a negative association with EE. The univariates analysis and direction of each associated factors obtained during the stepwise multiple regression are represented in the S1 Fig.

Table 3. Stepwise multiple regression analyses to test the relative contributions of different predictors on burnout dimensions.

β t p R2 F p
Emotional exhaustion .524 36.47 < .001
Big Five Neuroticism dimension .22 4.46 < .001
Work to family conflict .31 6.02 < .001
Effort/Reward Ratio .18 3.72 < .001
Pleasure at Work—Flow -.30 -5.14 < .001
Absorption at Work–Flow .13 2.18 .03
Excessive Work–Workaholism .11 1.94 .054
Work duration .10 2.01 .046
Depersonalization .323 22.29 < .001
Big Five Agreeableness dimension -.18 -3.17 .002
Work to family conflict .25 4.13 < .001
Overinvestissment .16 2.69 .008
Pleasure at Work—Flow -.25 -4.36 < .001
Hierarchical Status .26 4.68 < .001
Personal accomplishment .339 19.89 < .001
Big Five Agreeableness dimension .26 4.44 < .001
Big Five Openness dimension .19 3.19 .002
Big Five Extraversion dimension .17 2.94 .004
Big Five Consciousness dimension .16 2.75 .006
Pleasure at Work—Flow .19 3.31 .001
Effort/Reward Ratio .15 2.64 .009

Professional Status (coded 1 = Residents; 0 = Clinical practitioners in private and public sectors). Work duration = continuous variable.

Fig 2. Big five personality traits mean scores within the French neurosurgical community.

Fig 2

Table 4 reports the suicidal thoughts and drug uses within the French neurosurgical community. Use of drugs and consultation of a psychiatrist were significantly associated with burnout. There was only a non-significant trend with suicidal thoughts.

Table 4. Association between suicidal thoughts, drug uses, psychological needs and burnout.

Suicidal thoughts n % p-value
Never 173 70.3
Rarely 61 24.8
Often 5 12.3
Yes, with intention to act 7 2.85 0.062
Psychiatry, psychology 22 8.9 0.019
Antidepressant 11 4.47 0.32
Sleeping pill 21 8.5 0.42
Drugs 15 6.1 0.013
Performance enhancer 8 3.3 0.52

Discussion

This study assessed burnout within the French neurosurgical community and explored associated factors. To our knowledge, this is the first study that assessed burnout rate of neurosurgeons and residents in neurosurgery at the same time and with the same variables, giving a full picture of a community. Overall burnout rate was 49% and no significant differences between hierarchical status were found. Two types of variables were found: 1) the impact of personality as an independent factor with neurosurgical practice and 2) factors associated with neurosurgical practice measured with validated academic scales. In the following sections, we discuss the results and the proposed multivariate model to predict and prevent burnout in neurosurgery.

Burnout rate and comparisons

Burnout has been largely described in the medical field [17] and even among surgical communities [18]. Little data exists in neurosurgery event though this is an extreme specialty in terms of working hours [10] and medicolegal burden [11]. American studies showed an overall burnout rate of 56.7% for neurosurgeons [9] and two studies reported either a 36.5% [7] and 67% [8] rate for residents. Keeping the same burnout definition, burnout among Lithuanian neurosurgeons [19] vary between 25.8–41.9%. In this study we reported an overall burnout rate of 49% which is higher than the 29% rate in comparison with the most comprehensive and complete meta-analysis of French physicians [17] following the same burnout definition. As for surgeons, Campbell et al. [18] reported a 32% rate in a population of American surgeons.

As the female proportion is growing in neurosurgery [20] and some studies tend to demonstrate that females were more susceptible to burnout [21], we investigated if burnout rate differs between genders. In this study there was no significant difference between genders. There are 28% of women among residents and 22% among neurosurgeons. A growing percentage of women among neurosurgeons should not affect burnout rate in the years to come.

Although there was a trend of decreased burnout rate when one advanced in hierarchical status, no significant difference was shown in the analysis. Lack of power due to lower response rate among neurosurgeons can explain this tendency. There was no difference in the effort/reward ratio of residents and neurosurgeons (0.7). Hierarchical status was only associated with depersonalization in the stepwise multiple regression. The only variables that appear to be statistically different are shifts per month (5.91 vs 3.76: p<0.001) and working hours (69.65 vs 57.08 p<0.001) for residents and neurosurgeons, respectively. Data in the literature finds inadequate operative exposure, lack of opportunities for professional development, and dissatisfaction with colleagues are all common factors between residents and neurosurgeons [8,9]. Residents face problems like working hours, night shifts, social stressors and lack of mentorship [8]. As their careers advance, neurosurgeons face unbalance between work and life outside of the hospital and anxiety over future earnings and/or health care reform [9]. Our data suggests that burnout rate does not seem to vary during the career. From residency to retirement, physicians face different problems with potential negative impacts during the advancement of their career. Zoer et al. [22] drew similar conclusions when they studied associations between psychosocial workload and mental health complaints in different age groups in a railway company. Understanding those subtle differences is crucial to provide accurate interventions.

Impact of personality

Personality appears as an independent variable within neurosurgical practice. The stepwise multiple regression analysis showed a negative impact of the neuroticism factor for emotional exhaustion. Openness to experience, conscientiousness, extraversion and agreeableness was associated with personal accomplishment. Agreeableness was a protective factor against depersonalization. To our knowledge, this is the first study to explore personality in neurosurgery. Association between personality and burnout has been reported in several work domains [23,24] and also among physicians [25,26]. There are suggestions that surgeons are more likely to be associated with extraversion and openness to experience while pediatricians and family practitioners are more likely to correspond to higher neuroticism [27]. Though neurosurgery is more likely to be exposed to stress and medicolegal burden [11,28], personality traits seems to be protective against burnout in this specialty. In our sample, personality traits tend to show higher levels on agreeableness, openness to experience and conscientiousness and low levels on extraversion and neuroticism. Personality modification does not seem either ethical or desirable. Still, cognitive and psychosocial interventions [29,30] that reduce stress, and anxiety while increasing social support and self-esteem might reduce the complex impact of personality factors on burnout. Also, personality screening at the beginning of residency can be measured to follow personality traits that are more likely to develop burnout. This strategy has been adopted in other fields with high responsibilities and high levels of competence such as special forces in the army [31,32] or airline pilots [33].

Factors associated with neurosurgical practice

Work to family conflict is a well-documented association with burnout. Jensen et al. [34,35] rigorously demonstrated in a longitudinal study the reciprocal relationships between work to family conflict, emotional exhaustion and psychological health complaints in a population with a lot of business travels. In our study, work to family conflict was the first associated variable in both emotional exhaustion and depersonalization regression models. The results are in line with numerous other studies [3638]. This is not surprising; neurosurgery is a specialty with night shifts, work hours are among the longest [10], there is some work schedule inflexibility and shiftwork is irregular. All of those factors are associated with work to family conflict [39]. According to the conclusion of Jensen et al, it is likely that today’s organization in neurosurgery produces a vicious circle leading to burnout and its consequences. Better organization of continuity of care to clear regular family time may improve this factor.

While high score of absorption according to the WOLF of Bakker et al. [15] has a negative impact, work enjoyment is a protective factor against emotional exhaustion and depersonalization. Neurosurgeons seems to particularly enjoy operative exposure [9] or more broadly clinical work [19] while administrative tasks, which seem to take one-sixth of a physician’s time [40], lower career satisfaction. Recruiting administrative assistants whose training time is not as long as that of a neurosurgeon could be a strategy to improve neurosurgeons’ clinical productivity as well as improving health at work. Finally, according to Siegrist et al. [12], improvement in rebalancing the effort /reward ratio, which appeared as an independent factor of emotional exhaustion, may reduce burnout.

More modestly, working hours have a negative association. This seems especially true for residents (mean declared working time 69.65h per week) who work at least 20h more than the EU working time directive (48h per week). According to previous discussion, we did not explore the concept of quantity of work weighted by quality. There might be a shift of administrative burden from neurosurgeons to residents that needs to be explored to explain these results. The status of residents seems to expose to depersonalization while advancing during the career seems to protect from depersonalization.

Associations between burnout, suicidal thoughts and drug uses

Burnout as a syndrome does not have a particular impact but has been described in literature as associated with a negative impact for patient’s care and the own physician’s health [5,41]. Though it was not the main primary objective of the study we assessed the associations between burnout and health consequences in our studied population. Suicidal thoughts showed a trend that was not statistically significant. Psychiatry or psychologic consultation was associated as well as drug usage. Those results confirm previous findings, [4245] and actions to prevent burnout may improve physicians’ health in neurosurgery.

Limitations

There are some usual limitations regarding survey studies. There was a 100% answer rate for the residents because it was part of national teaching days. It was a common decision by the French national society of neurosurgery and the college of neurosurgery teachers to make it part of this pedagogic events. There were no significant outliers in the residents’ responses after visual inspection of the boxplots. The neurosurgeons were harder to reach with a 23.6% response rate which is rather low in such studies but comparable to the answer rate of other neurosurgical surveys [8,9,46]. This rate was exposed to a selection bias, attending physicians are usually less involved in academic work and are under-represented in this study.

This was not the first study about burnout in neurosurgery. We chose to explore different variables associated with burnout to further understand the phenomenon. Previous studies identified mainly dichotomous variables such as operative exposure and binary feeling of unbalance work and family life [79,19]. In this study we used quantified validated scales that help to understand and explain previous results.

Survey studies cannot be exhaustive, and a longer questionnaire would have lowered the response rate. Neurosurgeons shares many well documented associated factors of burnout with other occupational groups. While we did not measure occupational stress in this study it is certainly a shared features, notably with lawyers [47] and non-medical occupational health staff [48]. Further studies are required for further comprehension of this complex phenomenon. Moreover, as it is a transversal study, we can only identify associations related to burnout. Further studies will address the causality between those variables and burnout.

Conclusion

We have reported the prevalence and factors associated with burnout within the French neurosurgical community from the residents to the professors. Burnout prevalence is high in comparison with physicians and even among surgeons. Two categories of factors were identified. Personality types have an independent association regarding neurosurgical practice. Still, inherent factors associated with neurosurgical practice such as conflict of work into family life, unbalanced effort/reward ratio and work duration exist. Thus, this study may identify two levers of action to prevent and reduce burnout. A preliminary screening of personality may be proposed for a closer follow-up during residency. Improvement of working conditions, division of tasks of continuity of care and a readjustment of the effort / reward ratio may lower burnout in neurosurgery.

A prospective follow-up of the French neurosurgical cohort may answer if those levers of action can be effective to improve health at work in neurosurgery.

Supporting information

S1 Appendix. Questionnaire.

(PDF)

S1 Table. Cronbach alphas.

Alphas on the diagonal: a after elimination of item 20; b: after elimination of items 35 and 41.

(DOCX)

S2 Table. Variables entered during the stepwise multiple regression.

(DOCX)

S1 Fig. Univariate analysis of each associated factors with the main dimensions of burnout.

Factors associated with emotional exhaustion: a, b, c, d, e, f, g. a: linear regression between emotional exhaustion and pleasure at work; b: linear regression between emotional exhaustion and neuroticism; b: linear regression between emotional exhaustion and work to family conflict; c: linear regression between emotional exhaustion and effort/reward ratio; d: linear regression between emotional exhaustion and pleasure at work; e: linear regression between emotional exhaustion and absorption at work; f: linear regression between emotional exhaustion and excessive work; g: linear regression between emotional exhaustion and work duration. Factors associated with depersonalization: h, i, j, k, l. h: linear regression between depersonalization and agreeableness; i: linear regression between depersonalization and work to family conflict; j: linear regression between depersonalization and overinvestment; k: linear regression between depersonalization and pleasure at work; l: linear regression between depersonalization and hierarchical status. Factors associated with personal accomplishment: m, n, o, p, q, r. m: linear regression between personal accomplishment and agreeableness; n: linear regression between personal accomplishment and openness; o: linear regression between personal accomplishment and extraversion; p: linear regression between personal accomplishment and consciousness; q: linear regression between personal accomplishment and pleasure at work; r: linear regression between personal accomplishment and effort/reward ratio.

(TIFF)

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Blake Fleck for revising the English style.

Portions of this work has been presented (oral communication, plenary) during the annual research meeting of the French National Academy, Paris, France, and has been awarded the “Risk Prevention Prize”, the 22nd of November 2019.

Data Availability

All files are available from OSF: https://osf.io/3h5a7.

Funding Statement

The authors received no specific funding for this work.

References

  • 1.Aumayr-Pintar C, Cerf C, Parent-Thirion A. Burnout in the Workplace: A Review of the Data and Policy Responses in the EU.: 50. [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Maslach C, Jackson SE. The measurement of experienced burnout. J Organ Behav. 1981;2: 99–113. 10.1002/job.4030020205 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Schaufeli WB, Bakker AB. Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: a multi-sample study. J Organ Behav. 2004;25: 293–315. 10.1002/job.248 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Salvagioni DAJ, Melanda FN, Mesas AE, González AD, Gabani FL, Andrade SM de. Physical, psychological and occupational consequences of job burnout: A systematic review of prospective studies. van Wouwe JP, editor. PLOS ONE. 2017;12: e0185781 10.1371/journal.pone.0185781 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Shanafelt TD, Balch CM, Bechamps G, Russell T, Dyrbye L, Satele D, et al. Burnout and Medical Errors Among American Surgeons: Ann Surg. 2010;251: 995–1000. 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181bfdab3 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Shanafelt TD, Balch CM, Bechamps GJ, Russell T, Dyrbye L, Satele D, et al. Burnout and Career Satisfaction Among American Surgeons: Trans Meet Am Surg Assoc. 2009;127: 107–115. 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181ac4dfd [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Shakir HJ, McPheeters MJ, Shallwani H, Pittari JE, Reynolds RM. The Prevalence of Burnout Among US Neurosurgery Residents. Neurosurgery. 2018;83: 582–590. 10.1093/neuros/nyx494 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Attenello FJ, Buchanan IA, Wen T, Donoho DA, McCartney S, Cen SY, et al. Factors associated with burnout among US neurosurgery residents: a nationwide survey. J Neurosurg. 2018;129: 1349–1363. 10.3171/2017.9.JNS17996 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.McAbee JH, Ragel BT, McCartney S, Jones GM, Michael LM, DeCuypere M, et al. Factors associated with career satisfaction and burnout among US neurosurgeons: results of a nationwide survey. J Neurosurg. 2015;123: 161–173. 10.3171/2014.12.JNS141348 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Jr DCB, Daugherty SR, Tsai R, Jr MJS. A National Survey of Residents’ Self-Reported Work Hours: Thinking Beyond Specialty. Acad Med. 2003;78: 10. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Steele L, Mukherjee S, Stratton-Powell A, Anderson I, Timothy J. Extent of medicolegal burden in neurosurgery–An analysis of the National Health Service Litigation Authority Database. Br J Neurosurg. 2015;29: 622–629. 10.3109/02688697.2015.1054362 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Siegrist J, Starke D, Chandola T, Godin I, Marmot M, Niedhammer I, et al. The measurement of effort–reward imbalance at work: European comparisons. Soc Sci Med. 2004;58: 1483–1499. 10.1016/S0277-9536(03)00351-4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Sandrin E, Gillet N. Validation d’une version française de la Dutch Work Addiction Scale (DUWAS). Psychol Trav Organ. 2016;22: 147–159. 10.1016/j.pto.2016.02.007 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Netemeyer RG, Boles JS. Development and Validation of Work-Family Conflict and Family-Work Conflict Scales.: 11. [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Bakker AB. The work-related flow inventory: Construction and initial validation of the WOLF. J Vocat Behav. 2008;72: 400–414. 10.1016/j.jvb.2007.11.007 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Plaisant O, Courtois R, Réveillère C, Mendelsohn GA, John OP. Validation par analyse factorielle du Big Five Inventory français (BFI-Fr). Analyse convergente avec le NEO-PI-R. Ann Méd-Psychol Rev Psychiatr. 2010;168: 97–106. 10.1016/j.amp.2009.09.003 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Kansoun Z, Boyer L, Hodgkinson M, Villes V, Lançon C, Fond G. Burnout in French physicians: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Affect Disord. 2019;246: 132–147. 10.1016/j.jad.2018.12.056 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Campbell DA, Sonnad SS, Eckhauser FE, Campbell KK, Greenfield LJ. Burnout among American surgeons. Surgery. 2001;130: 696–705. 10.1067/msy.2001.116676 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Pranckeviciene A, Tamasauskas A, Deltuva VP, Bunevicius A. Professional burnout and its correlates in Lithuanian neurosurgeons. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2016;158: 1437–1445. 10.1007/s00701-016-2869-2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Renfrow JJ, Rodriguez A, Liu A, Pilitsis JG, Samadani U, Ganju A, et al. Positive trends in neurosurgery enrollment and attrition: analysis of the 2000–2009 female neurosurgery resident cohort. J Neurosurg. 2016;124: 834–839. 10.3171/2015.3.JNS142313 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Shanafelt TD, Boone S, Tan L, Dyrbye LN, Sotile W, Satele D, et al. Burnout and Satisfaction With Work-Life Balance Among US Physicians Relative to the General US Population. Arch Intern Med. 2012;172: 1377 10.1001/archinternmed.2012.3199 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Zoer I, Ruitenburg MM, Botje D, Frings-Dresen MHW, Sluiter JK. The associations between psychosocial workload and mental health complaints in different age groups. Ergonomics. 2011;54: 943–952. 10.1080/00140139.2011.606920 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Bakker AB, Van Der Zee KI, Lewig KA, Dollard MF. The Relationship Between the Big Five Personality Factors and Burnout: A Study Among Volunteer Counselors. J Soc Psychol. 2006;146: 31–50. 10.3200/SOCP.146.1.31-50 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Kim HJ, Shin KH, Swanger N. Burnout and engagement: A comparative analysis using the Big Five personality dimensions. Int J Hosp Manag. 2009;28: 96–104. 10.1016/j.ijhm.2008.06.001 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.van der Wal RAB, Bucx MJL, Hendriks JCM, Scheffer G-J, Prins JB. Psychological distress, burnout and personality traits in Dutch anaesthesiologists: A survey. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2016;33: 179–186. 10.1097/EJA.0000000000000375 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Brown PA, Slater M, Lofters A. Personality and burnout among primary care physicians: an international study. Psychol Res Behav Manag. 2019;Volume 12: 169–177. 10.2147/PRBM.S195633 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Borges NJ, Savickas ML. Personality and Medical Specialty Choice: A Literature Review and Integration. J Career Assess. 2002;10: 362–380. 10.1177/10672702010003006 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Mukherjee S, Pringle C, Crocker M. A nine-year review of medicolegal claims in neurosurgery. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2014;96: 266–270. 10.1308/003588414X13814021679834 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Li C, Chu F, Wang H, Wang X. Efficacy of Williams LifeSkills training for improving psychological health: A pilot comparison study of Chinese medical students: WLST efficacy in Chinese medical students. Asia-Pac Psychiatry. 2014;6: 161–169. 10.1111/appy.12084 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Clough BA, March S, Chan RJ, Casey LM, Phillips R, Ireland MJ. Psychosocial interventions for managing occupational stress and burnout among medical doctors: a systematic review. Syst Rev. 2017;6: 144 10.1186/s13643-017-0526-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Bartone PT, Roland RR, Picano JJ, Williams TJ. Psychological Hardiness Predicts Success in US Army Special Forces Candidates. Int J Sel Assess. 2008;16: 78–81. 10.1111/j.1468-2389.2008.00412.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Salgado JF. Big Five Personality Dimensions and Job Performance in Army and Civil Occupations: A European Perspective. Hum Perform. 1998;11: 271–288. 10.1080/08959285.1998.9668034 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Butcher JN. Psychological Assessment of Airline Pilot Applicants With the MMPI-2. J Pers Assess. 1994;62: 31–44. 10.1207/s15327752jpa6201_4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Jensen MT. Exploring business travel with work–family conflict and the emotional exhaustion component of burnout as outcome variables: The job demands–resources perspective. Eur J Work Organ Psychol. 2014;23: 497–510. 10.1080/1359432X.2013.787183 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Jensen MT, Knudsen K. A two-wave cross-lagged study of business travel, work–family conflict, emotional exhaustion, and psychological health complaints. Eur J Work Organ Psychol. 2017;26: 30–41. 10.1080/1359432X.2016.1197206 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Burke RJ, Greenglass ER. Hospital restructuring, work-family conflict and psychological burnout among nursing staff. Psychol Health. 2001;16: 583–594. 10.1080/08870440108405528 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Ádám S, Györffy Z, Susánszky É. Physician Burnout in Hungary: A Potential Role for Work—Family Conflict. J Health Psychol. 2008;13: 847–856. 10.1177/1359105308095055 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Wang Y, Liu L, Wang J, Wang L. Work‐family Conflict and Burnout among Chinese Doctors: The Mediating Role of Psychological Capital. J Occup Health. 2012;54: 232–240. 10.1539/joh.11-0243-OA [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Fuß I, Nübling M, Hasselhorn H-M, Schwappach D, Rieger MA. Working conditions and Work-Family Conflict in German hospital physicians: psychosocial and organisational predictors and consequences. BMC Public Health. 2008;8: 353 10.1186/1471-2458-8-353 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Woolhandler S, Himmelstein DU. Administrative Work Consumes One-Sixth of U.S. Physicians’ Working Hours and Lowers their Career Satisfaction. Int J Health Serv. 2014;44: 635–642. 10.2190/HS.44.4.a [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.West CP, Dyrbye LN, Shanafelt TD. Physician burnout: contributors, consequences and solutions. J Intern Med. 2018;283: 516–529. 10.1111/joim.12752 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Sonneck G, Wagner R. Suicide and Burnout of Physicians. OMEGA—J Death Dying. 1996;33: 255–263. 10.2190/0YVL-APPT-NL35-1LXJ [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.van der Heijden F, Dillingh G, Bakker A, Prins J. Suicidal Thoughts Among Medical Residents with Burnout. Arch Suicide Res. 2008;12: 344–346. 10.1080/13811110802325349 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Bianchi R, Schonfeld IS, Laurent E. Burnout–depression overlap: A review. Clin Psychol Rev. 2015;36: 28–41. 10.1016/j.cpr.2015.01.004 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Oreskovich MR. Prevalence of Alcohol Use Disorders Among American Surgeons. Arch Surg. 2012;147: 168 10.1001/archsurg.2011.1481 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Cohen-Gadol AA, Piepgras DG, Krishnamurthy S, Fessler RD. Resident Duty Hours Reform: Results of a National Survey of the Program Directors and Residents in Neurosurgery Training Programs. Neurosurgery. 2005;56: 398–403. 10.1227/01.NEU.0000147999.64356.57 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Tsai F, Huang W, Chan C. Occupational Stress and Burnout of Lawyers. J Occup Health. 2009;51: 443–450. 10.1539/joh.L8179 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Okuda Y, Iwasaki S, Deguchi Y, Nitta T, Mitake T, Sakaguchi A, et al. Burnout and occupational stressors among non-medical occupational health staff. Occup Med. 2019; kqz160 10.1093/occmed/kqz160 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Sergio A Useche

27 Feb 2020

PONE-D-20-00752

Personal and Psychosocial factors of Burnout: A Survey within the French Neurosurgical Community.

PLOS ONE

Dear MR Baumgarten,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Our reviewers have identified a certain potential in your submitted manuscript, highlighting its possible contribution to the development of applied measures and strategies for the improvement of the job quality and physical/mental health of specialized healthcare providers. Even though, you will find a relatively short (but substantial) set of comments and suggestions that you should consider responding to, in order to improve the manuscript and its scientific value.

Also, and as a personal suggestion, please consider updating the theoretical framework of the paper, taking into account recent studies on (e.g.) burnout and health issues among vulnerable occupational groups apart from physicians and healthcare providers, that share key factors such as a highly stressful work environment, time pressure and limited degrees of skill discretion. For instance, the relationship between EE (Emotional Exhaustion) and different health complaints affecting working populations (same as among medical personnel) is a factor that recent sources strongly highlight, and may enrich the comparability of your findings. This might contribute to strengthen the explanatory potential of the findings and empirical support given to your discussion.

We would appreciate receiving your revised manuscript by Apr 12 2020 11:59PM. When you are ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter.

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that if applicable you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). This letter should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. This file should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. This file should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Manuscript'.

Please note while forming your response, if your article is accepted, you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Sergio A. Useche, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements:

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at http://www.plosone.org/attachments/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and http://www.plosone.org/attachments/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly. Please see our Supporting Information guidelines for more information: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/supporting-information.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Partly

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Considerations:

The object of the study is very significant. Burnout is a syndrome that appears in several professional categories and affects the care of the population, due to causing mental exhaustion in the affected professionals.

1- The search objective is not clearly defined in the Abstract.

2- Methods should not contain the objectives (line 59). The objectives should be described in the previous session.

Reviewer #2: This ms reports results of a well-designed study that used validated assessment instruments to evaluate the role of personality, effort/reward ratio, and other factors like pleasure at work-flow to identify personal and psychosocial factors associated with burnout in the French neurosurgical community. There are some concerns the authors need to address to maximize the impact of this study.

1. While the associations documented by the rigorous statistical analyses are strong, it will help the reader understand the nature of those associations if the authors provided figures (or tables) that illustrate the directions of those associations – e.g., graphs showing levels of Emotional Exhaustion as Neuroticism increases, Depersonalization as Agreeable decreases, Personal Accomplishment as Effort/Reward ratio changes.

2. While they are probably correct in noting that “personality modification does not seem either ethical or desirable,” it could help appreciate the implications of the associations they have found if they consider the potential paths whereby the personality dimensions lead to burnout – e.g., high neuroticism � high depression �high emotional exhaustion. Interventions that reduce levels of such mediators could reduce the impact of personality factors on burnout. In a study of Chinese medical students, for example, Chun et al. (Efficacy of Williams LifeSkills training for improving psychological health: a pilot comparison study of Chinese medical students. Asia Pac Psychiatry. 2014;6(2):161-9. PMID: 23857943) found that training in cognitive behavioral stress management and interpersonal interaction skills produced improvements in anxiety, depression, negative coping, social support, and self-esteem.

3. Some minor concerns need to be addressed:

a. line 82 – “Maslach Burnout Inventory scale6” – what does the 6 refer to?

b. line 133 – The only significant difference between residents and neurosurgeons was for DP in Table 2, not PA as stated in the text.

c. line 151 – They say Pleasure at work is positively associated with each burnout dimension, but inspection of Table 3 show that Pleasure at Work-Flow is negatively associated with EE and DP, but positively associated with PA – suggesting that high Pleasure at Work is associated with lower EE and DP but higher PA, all of which makes sense. As per comment 1 above, it would help the reader understand these associations if figures were provided to illustrate them.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files to be viewed.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email us at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2020 May 29;15(5):e0233137. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0233137.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


20 Mar 2020

Editors

Plos ONE

Ref : PONE-D-20-00752R1

Personal and Psychosocial factors of Burnout: A Survey within the French Neurosurgical Community

To Sergio A. Useche, Academic Editor

Dear Sir,

Please find enclosed a revised manuscript entitled “Personal and Psychosocial factors of Burnout: A Survey within the French Neurosurgical Community” by Clément Baumgarten, Estelle Michinov, Géraldine Rouxel, Vincent Bonneterre, Emmanuel Gay and Pierre-Hugues Roche. This manuscript is submitted for consideration after revisions for publication in the PLOS ONE journal. We have addressed and clarified all the concerns that were raised by the academic editor and the reviewers. We believe that this revised version results in a much stronger paper for your journal. All the authors have reviewed and approved this revised version of the manuscript.

In addition to the revised version of our manuscript (in Word format), please find enclosed the following documents:

- A point-by-point list of all changes made in response to suggestions of the reviewers.

- A version of the manuscript in “track changes” format, with changes highlighted (in Word format).

In the hope that you find that this paper falls within the scope of PLOS ONE, and that it will be of interest to your readers, I look forward to hearing from you soon. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions.

Yours faithfully,

Clément Baumgarten

Response to reviewers

Ref: PONE-D-20-00752R1

Personal and Psychosocial factors of Burnout: A Survey within the French Neurosurgical Community

I. INTRODUCTION

The authors would like to thank the reviewers for their relevant remarks and suggestions for improving the paper. In this document, we provide a point-by-point response to each of the issues raised. Each issue is written in bold text, the corresponding response is in normal text, and we provide in italics the text added/modified in the paper to address the issue. In the main paper, all changes are clearly marked in yellow.

Each modification in the text of the manuscript was highlighted in red to be more easily visible for the reviewers.

Here is a point-by-point list of all changes made in response to the suggestions of the reviewers:

II. ACADEMIC EDITOR

Also, and as a personal suggestion, please consider updating the theoretical framework of the paper, taking into account recent studies on (e.g.) burnout and health issues among vulnerable occupational groups apart from physicians and healthcare providers, that share key factors such as a highly stressful work environment, time pressure and limited degrees of skill discretion. For instance, the relationship between EE (Emotional Exhaustion) and different health complaints affecting working populations (same as among medical personnel) is a factor that recent sources strongly highlight and may enrich the comparability of your findings. This might contribute to strengthen the explanatory potential of the findings and empirical support given to your discussion.

We thank you for your suggestion to enhance the theoretical discussion of the paper. We revised the introduction accordingly. We added several references to discuss and strengthen our findings.

Added text:

Line 45: “Workers in many occupational sectors are susceptible to creating a situational context that leads to burnout symptoms[1] . Burnout is a syndrome defined by emotional exhaustion (EE), feelings of depersonalization (DP) and a lack of personal accomplishment (PA) in relation to professional activity[2]. Studies have demonstrated that chronic stressors could increase burnout arise from an imbalance between job demands and job resources[3]. Burnout is associated with several comorbid factors such as chronic fatigue, addictive behaviors, substance use and suicidal ideation, and different health complains[4]. Studies suggest that burnout has a negative impact on psychological and physical health of workers, but also on their interpersonal relationships and job environment. For healthcare professionals and physicians, burnout affects the quality of patients’ care through increased medical errors, decreased empathy and decreased productivity at work[5]. Thus, efforts to identify and prevent burnout should lead to better health at work and better quality of care. The prevalence of burnout within different surgical specialties is about 40%[6], and for certain subspecialties such as neurosurgery, the prevalence of burnout is estimated to be 27% to 56.7%[7–9]. Neurosurgery is a demanding specialty in medicine. Work hours are among the longest[10] as the number of night shifts, and has a heavy medicolegal burden due to high malpractice risk[11].”

Line 223 : “Zoer et al[18] drew similar conclusions when they studied associations between psychosocial workload and mental health complaints in different age groups in a railway company. Understanding those subtle differences is crucial to provide accurate interventions.”

Line 238: “Work to family conflict is a well-documented association with burnout. Jensen et al[30,31] rigorously demonstrated in a longitudinal study the reciprocal relationships between work to family conflict, emotional exhaustion and psychological health complaints in a population with a lot of business travels.”

Line 255:” According to the conclusion of Jensen et al, it is likely that today’s organization in neurosurgery produces a vicious circle leading to burnout and its consequences.”

Line 299: “Neurosurgeons shares many well documented associated factors of burnout with other occupational groups. While we did not measure occupational stress in this study it is certainly a shared features, notably with lawyers[43] and non-medical occupational health staff[44].”

III. REVIEWER 1

The object of the study is very significant. Burnout is a syndrome that appears in several professional categories and affects the care of the population, due to causing mental exhaustion in the affected professionals.

1- The search objective is not clearly defined in the Abstract. Methods should not contain the objectives (line 59). The objectives should be described in the previous session.

We thank the reviewer 1 for helping us clarify the structure and the objectives of our manuscript. We clarify the objective section accordingly.

Added text line 25: The objectives of this study were to report the prevalence and associated factors of burnout within the French neurosurgical community using validated academic and psychologic scales.

Added text: line 70: “The objectives of this work were to report the prevalence and associated factors of burnout within the French neurosurgical community using validated academic and psychologic scales.”

IV. REVIEWER 2

This ms reports results of a well-designed study that used validated assessment instruments to evaluate the role of personality, effort/reward ratio, and other factors like pleasure at work-flow to identify personal and psychosocial factors associated with burnout in the French neurosurgical community. There are some concerns the authors need to address to maximize the impact of this study.

1. While the associations documented by the rigorous statistical analyses are strong, it will help the reader understand the nature of those associations if the authors provided figures (or tables) that illustrate the directions of those associations – e.g., graphs showing levels of Emotional Exhaustion as Neuroticism increases, Depersonalization as Agreeable decreases, Personal Accomplishment as Effort/Reward ratio changes.

We totally agree and thank the reviewer for this relevant suggestion. We provided a supplemental figure with each univariate analysis that were significant during the stepwise multiple regression. The figure provides the reader the direction of the association.

Added material: S4 Figure. Univariate analysis of each associated factors with the main dimensions of burnout.

Added text: line 172: “The univariates analysis and direction of each associated factors obtained during the stepwise multiple regression are represented in the S4 Appendix.”

2. While they are probably correct in noting that “personality modification does not seem either ethical or desirable,” it could help appreciate the implications of the associations they have found if they consider the potential paths whereby the personality dimensions lead to burnout – e.g., high neuroticism � high depression �high emotional exhaustion. Interventions that reduce levels of such mediators could reduce the impact of personality factors on burnout. In a study of Chinese medical students, for example, Chun et al. (Efficacy of Williams LifeSkills training for improving psychological health: a pilot comparison study of Chinese medical students. Asia Pac Psychiatry. 2014;6(2):161-9. PMID: 23857943) found that training in cognitive behavioral stress management and interpersonal interaction skills produced improvements in anxiety, depression, negative coping, social support, and self-esteem.

Burnout is a complex phenomenon intricated with a multitude of human factors. We agree that those kinds of interventions might affect the factors associated with personality and burnout.

Added text: line 241 : “Still, cognitive and psychosocial interventions[24,25] that reduce stress, and anxiety while increasing social support and self-esteem might reduce the complex impact of personality factors on burnout.”

3. Some minor concerns need to be addressed:

a. line 82 – “Maslach Burnout Inventory scale6” – what does the 6 refer to?

This typography error was corrected.

b. line 133 – The only significant difference between residents and neurosurgeons was for DP in Table 2, not PA as stated in the text.

We thank the reviewer 2 for correcting this mistype error.

Corrected text line 149: “There was only a significant difference between residents and neurosurgeons for DP”

c. line 151 – They say Pleasure at work is positively associated with each burnout dimension, but inspection of Table 3 show that Pleasure at Work-Flow is negatively associated with EE and DP, but positively associated with PA – suggesting that high Pleasure at Work is associated with lower EE and DP but higher PA, all of which makes sense. As per comment 1 above, it would help the reader understand these associations if figures were provided to illustrate them.

We apologize for this misinterpretation error. We addressed this issue in the first comment answer.

Added text line 167: Pleasure at work was negatively associated with EE and DP while it was positively associated with PA.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 1

Sergio A Useche

17 Apr 2020

PONE-D-20-00752R1

Personal and Psychosocial factors of Burnout: A Survey within the French Neurosurgical Community

PLOS ONE

Dear MR Baumgarten,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please refer to the comments appended below, where one of the reviewers requires you to perform a relatively small (but important) amendment in regard to (i) the reported burnout levels in this group of professionals, and (ii) the scale indicating whether burnout levels are high or low.

Once you send you revisions, and if the quality of the amendments is good enough, I will proceed to accept the paper without a new round of reviews.

We would appreciate receiving your revised manuscript by Jun 01 2020 11:59PM. When you are ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter.

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that if applicable you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). This letter should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. This file should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. This file should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Manuscript'.

Please note while forming your response, if your article is accepted, you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Sergio A. Useche, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: The research is relevant. The burnout syndrome is a disease that affects various professional categories and grow the number of research on this subject. In the Abstract the authors reported a high prevalence of burnout in French Neurosurgeons. However, in the final conclusion the authors did not make any reference to the burnout levels in this category of professionals. Also i did not realise the scale wich indicates the burnout levels are high or low.

Please, check it.

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files to be viewed.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email us at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2020 May 29;15(5):e0233137. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0233137.r004

Author response to Decision Letter 1


18 Apr 2020

This is indeed a relevant point in the move of our paper that was missing. We compared our results with a meta-analysis of French physicians and American surgeons. Our conclusion of high prevalence of burnout was drawn on this comparison because such scale does not exist. Burnout definition and high, medium, or low level of each subscales (i.e. emotional exhaustion, depersonalization and personal accomplishment) were based on [1].

1. Maslach C, Jackson SE. The measurement of experienced burnout. J Organ Behav. 1981;2: 99–113. doi:10.1002/job.4030020205

Added text line 196: which is higher than the 29 % rate in comparison with the most comprehensive and complete meta-analysis of French physicians[17] following the same burnout definition. As for surgeons, Campbell et al[18] reported a 32% rate in a population of American surgeons.

Added text line 300: Burnout prevalence is high in comparison with physicians and even among surgeons.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 2

Sergio A Useche

29 Apr 2020

Personal and Psychosocial factors of Burnout: A Survey within the French Neurosurgical Community

PONE-D-20-00752R2

Dear Dr. Baumgarten,

We are pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it complies with all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you will receive an e-mail containing information on the amendments required prior to publication. When all required modifications have been addressed, you will receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will proceed to our production department and be scheduled for publication.

Shortly after the formal acceptance letter is sent, an invoice for payment will follow. To ensure an efficient production and billing process, please log into Editorial Manager at https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the "Update My Information" link at the top of the page, and update your user information. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to enable them to help maximize its impact. If they will be preparing press materials for this manuscript, you must inform our press team as soon as possible and no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

With kind regards,

Sergio A. Useche, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Acceptance letter

Sergio A Useche

13 May 2020

PONE-D-20-00752R2

Personal and Psychosocial factors of Burnout: A Survey within the French Neurosurgical Community

Dear Dr. Baumgarten:

I am pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper at this point, to enable them to help maximize its impact. If they will be preparing press materials for this manuscript, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

For any other questions or concerns, please email plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE.

With kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Sergio A. Useche

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

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

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Appendix. Questionnaire.

    (PDF)

    S1 Table. Cronbach alphas.

    Alphas on the diagonal: a after elimination of item 20; b: after elimination of items 35 and 41.

    (DOCX)

    S2 Table. Variables entered during the stepwise multiple regression.

    (DOCX)

    S1 Fig. Univariate analysis of each associated factors with the main dimensions of burnout.

    Factors associated with emotional exhaustion: a, b, c, d, e, f, g. a: linear regression between emotional exhaustion and pleasure at work; b: linear regression between emotional exhaustion and neuroticism; b: linear regression between emotional exhaustion and work to family conflict; c: linear regression between emotional exhaustion and effort/reward ratio; d: linear regression between emotional exhaustion and pleasure at work; e: linear regression between emotional exhaustion and absorption at work; f: linear regression between emotional exhaustion and excessive work; g: linear regression between emotional exhaustion and work duration. Factors associated with depersonalization: h, i, j, k, l. h: linear regression between depersonalization and agreeableness; i: linear regression between depersonalization and work to family conflict; j: linear regression between depersonalization and overinvestment; k: linear regression between depersonalization and pleasure at work; l: linear regression between depersonalization and hierarchical status. Factors associated with personal accomplishment: m, n, o, p, q, r. m: linear regression between personal accomplishment and agreeableness; n: linear regression between personal accomplishment and openness; o: linear regression between personal accomplishment and extraversion; p: linear regression between personal accomplishment and consciousness; q: linear regression between personal accomplishment and pleasure at work; r: linear regression between personal accomplishment and effort/reward ratio.

    (TIFF)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    All files are available from OSF: https://osf.io/3h5a7.


    Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES