Impact of confrontation to patient suffering and death on wellbeing and burnout in professionals: a cross-sectional study

Abstract

Abstract Background Palliative care and oncology generate a risk of burnout and psychological distress in professionals. The purpose of this study is to identify both psychopathological and positive factors related to mental health at work. It aims (i) to explore the extent to which these professionals are confronted with suffering, illness, and death; and to explore the prevalence of psychological distress and/or burnout, (ii) to identify potential determinants of burnout and psychological wellbeing at work, (iii) to develop an integrative model of mental health; and to identify frequency and impact of confrontations with death, and (iv) to identify profiles of professionals are at risk of developing a mental health disorder or, conversely, characterized by wellbeing. Methods A cross-sectional questionnaire study was conducted in palliative care and oncology evaluating confrontations with death, coping, burnout, psychological distress, personality, self-esteem, well-being and meaning at work. Regressions, clustering, and structural equation modeling analyses were performed. Results 109 professionals participated (58% from oncology and 42% from palliative care), of which 79% were female, and 65% were between 30 and 49 years old. Aim i: 30% witnessed an intolerable suffering at least 9 times a month, 45% reported moderate to high levels of burnout, 39% suffered from anxiety and 11% from depression. Aim ii: the determinants of burnout were the personality traits conscientiousness and neuroticism, low meaning of work, and low wellbeing (R2 = 0.44). The determinants of wellbeing were work meaning, depersonalization, self-esteem, fulfillment and low emotional exhaustion (R2 = 0.71). Aim iii: the integrative model included both well-being (self-esteem, conscientiousness) and psychopathology (neuroticism, anxiety) parameters, and strongly satisfied the standard SEM goodness of fit indices (e.g., CFI, IFI, and TLI ≥ 0.95). Aim iv: three profiles were identified: (a) a “distressed profile” with a majority of professionals at the patient’s bedside, (b) a “disengaged profile” with professionals working as second-line consultants, (c) a “wellbeing profile” contains profiles of caregivers insensitive to psychological distress and with a high level of positive Impact of confrontation on different areas of their lives. Conclusions An integrative approach is essential to understand the full range of mental health issues for professionals. Meaning of work is a key factor in professional interventions that should primarily affect front-line professionals with limited experience.