Internal Reliability and Validity of Copenhagen Burnout Inventory and Oldenburg Burnout Inventory Compared with Maslach Burnout Inventory among Nigerian Resident Doctors: A Pilot Study

Abstract

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Copyrighted Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) is perhaps the most widely used and validated tool in assessing burnout among different occupations and health care professionals compared to the free to use Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI) and Oldenburg Burnout Inventory (OLBI). This study aimed to determine the reliability and validity of these tools in comparison with MBI among a subset of Nigerian resident doctors. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> A cross-sectional survey with reliability of the burnout scales calculated using Cronbach’s alpha. Construct validity was assessed by principal component analysis and correlating dimensions within each burnout tool with one another using Pearson’s correlation coefficient. The criterion validity of each dimension was assessed for the ability of independent variables to predict their scores using multiple linear regression. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Copenhagen Personal Burnout dimension had the highest Cronbach’s alpha score of 0.91. MBI-Emotional Exhaustion had the highest correlations with Copenhagen Work-related, Copenhagen Personal-related, and Oldenburg Exhaustion burnout dimensions. Only the multiple regression models for Copenhagen personal (<i>p</i> = 0.04) and work-related (<i>p</i> = 0.02) burnout dimensions were significant, with the specialty of the residents being the significant independent variable in both models. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> CBI and OLBI have high internal consistency and reliability among the subset of resident doctors recruited into this study, CBI dimensions had the best predictive and construct validity and can be used as valid alternative to MBI.