Table 1.
Characteristics | Intervention (N=57) |
Control (N=57) |
Male sex-no (%) | 10 (17.5) | 15 (26.3) |
Age-year | ||
Median | 33 | 35 |
IQR | 9.5 | 12 |
Specialty-no (%) | ||
Paediatrics | 57 (100) | 32 (56.1) |
Internal medicine | – | 15 (26.3) |
Neurology | – | 10 (17.5) |
Professional role-no (%) | ||
Resident | 33 (57.9) | 36 (63.2) |
Specialist | 24 (42.1) | 21 (36.8) |
Hospital-no (%) | ||
EMC | 32 (56.1) | 33 (57.9) |
LUMC | 25 (43.9) | 9 (15.8) |
VUmc | – | 7 (12.3) |
AMC | – | 8 (14.0) |
Coaching experience-no (%) | 22 (38.6) | 19 (33.3) |
Home situation-no (%) | ||
Children, one or more | 28 (49.1) | 29 (50.9) |
No children | 29 (50.9) | 28 (49.1) |
*This study was conducted at four academic hospitals in the Netherlands. In this study, the authors investigated the effects of an individual coaching intervention on burn-out symptoms, work engagement, personal resources, job demands and job resources among paediatric residents and specialists.
AMC, Academic Medical Center Amsterdam; EMC, Erasmus Medical Center; LUMC, Leiden University Medical Center; VUmc, VU University Medical Center.