Psychometric properties of the St. Elizabeth Youngstown hospital wellbeing inventory and non-burnout inventory for physicians and nurses

C Michael Dunham, Amanda L Burger, Barbara M Hileman, Elisha A Chance, C Michael Dunham, Amanda L Burger, Barbara M Hileman, Elisha A Chance

Abstract

Background: Physicians and nurses have substantial problems with wellbeing and burnout. We examined the reliability and construct validity of a wellbeing inventory (WBI) administered to some physicians and nurses working in St. Elizabeth Youngstown Hospital (SEYH).

Methods: The SEYH-WBI, consisting of 4 positive affect (PA) items and 7 negative affect (NA) items developed from 5 validated surveys, was administered (n = 419). A non-burnout inventory (SEYH-NBI) consisting of 2 PA items and 3 NA items was derived from the SEYH-WBI. The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS), a validated survey consisting of 10 PA items and 10 NA items, was conducted (n = 191). The Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI), a validated survey consisting of 3 domains (3 items each), was completed (n = 150).

Results: For the SEYH-WBI, Cronbach coefficients were 0.76 for PA items and 0.83 for NA items. The NA item loading on factor 1 was 0.55-0.84 and the PA item loading on factor 2 was 0.47-0.89. Confirmatory indices were as follows: root mean square residual, 0.07 and Bentler Comparative Fit Index, 0.92. For the SEYH-NBI, Cronbach coefficients were 0.76 for PA items and 0.79 for NA items. The NA item loading on factor 1 was 0.80-0.87 and the PA item loading on factor 2 was 0.89-0.90. Confirmatory indices were as follows: root mean square residual, 0.02; and Bentler Comparative Fit Index, 0.99. PANAS correlations were as follows: SEYH-WBI PA and PANAS PA scores, r = 0.9; p < 0.0001; SEYH-WBI NA and PANAS NA scores, r = 0.9; p < 0.0001; SEYH-NBI PA and PANAS PA scores, r = 0.8; p < 0.0001; and SEYH-NBI NA and PANAS NA scores, r = 0.7; p < 0.0001. Correlations for SEYH-NBI and MBI were as follows: total NBI and total MBI, r = - 0.6, p < 0.0001; NA and emotional exhaustion, r = 0.6, p < 0.0001; PA and personal accomplishment, r = 0.3, p = 0.0003; and NA and depersonalization, r = 0.3, p = 0.0008.

Conclusions: Validation assessments indicate that the SEYH-WBI and SEYH-NBI have acceptable psychometric performance. Similar findings in a larger cohort would be more compelling.

Keywords: Affect; Burnout, professional; Nurses; Physicians; Psychometric testing; Scale validation; Stress.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

    1. Dyrbye LN, West CP, Satele D, Boone S, Tan L, Sloan J, et al. Burnout among U.S. medical students, residents, and early career physicians relative to the general U.S. population. Acad Med. 2014;89:443–451. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000134.
    1. Vahey DC, Aiken LH, Sloane DM, Clarke SP, Vargas D. Nurse burnout and patient satisfaction. Med Care. 2004;42:II57–II66. doi: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000109126.50398.5a.
    1. Poghosyan L, Clarke SP, Finlayson M, Aiken LH. Nurse burnout and quality of care: cross-national investigation in six countries. Res Nurs Health. 2010;33:288–298. doi: 10.1002/nur.20383.
    1. Lindqvist R, Smeds Alenius L, Griffiths P, Runesdotter S, Tishelman C. Structural characteristics of hospitals and nurse-reported care quality, work environment, burnout and leaving intentions. J Nurs Manag. 2015;23:263–274. doi: 10.1111/jonm.12123.
    1. Chang EM, Bidewell JW, Huntington AD, Daly J, Johnson A, Wilson H, et al. A survey of role stress, coping and health in Australian and New Zealand hospital nurses. Int J Nurs Stud. 2007;44:1354–1362. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2006.06.003.
    1. Dunham CM, Burger AL, Hileman BM, Chance EA. Learning receptive awareness via neurofeedback in stressed healthcare providers: a prospective pilot investigation. BMC Res Notes. 2018;11:645. doi: 10.1186/s13104-018-3756-0.
    1. Osman A, Wong JL, Bagge CL, Freedenthal S, Gutierrez PM, Lozano G. The depression anxiety stress Scales-21 (DASS-21): further examination of dimensions, scale reliability, and correlates. J Clin Psychol. 2012;68:1322–1338. doi: 10.1002/jclp.21908.
    1. Cohen S, Kamarck T, Mermelstein R. A global measure of perceived stress. J Health Soc Behav. 1983;24:385–396. doi: 10.2307/2136404.
    1. Watson D, Clark LA, Tellegen A. Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1988;54:1063–1070. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063.
    1. Cappelleri JC, Bushmakin AG, McDermott AM, Dukes E, Sadosky A, Petrie CD, et al. Measurement properties of the medical outcomes study sleep scale in patients with fibromyalgia. Sleep Med. 2009;10:766–770. doi: 10.1016/j.sleep.2008.09.004.
    1. Maslach C, Leiter MP. Early predictors of job burnout and engagement. J Appl Psychol. 2008;93:498–512. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.93.3.498.
    1. Dugani S, Afari H, Hirschhorn LR, Ratcliffe H, Veillard J, Martin G, et al. Prevalence and factors associated with burnout among frontline primary health care providers in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review. Gates Open Res. 2018;2:4. doi: 10.12688/gatesopenres.12779.3.
    1. Riley MR, Mohr DC, Waddimba AC. The reliability and validity of three-item screening measures for burnout: evidence from group-employed health care practitioners in upstate New York. Stress Health. 2018;34:187–193. doi: 10.1002/smi.2762.
    1. Agho AO. The moderating effects of dispositional affectivity on relationships between job characteristics and nurses' job satisfaction. Res Nurs Health. 1993;16:451–458. doi: 10.1002/nur.4770160609.
    1. Rossi V, Pourtois G. Transient state-dependent fluctuations in anxiety measured using STAI, POMS, PANAS or VAS: a comparative review. Anxiety Stress Coping. 2012;25:603–645. doi: 10.1080/10615806.2011.582948.
    1. Simon CR, Durand-Bush N: Differences in psychological and affective well-being between physicians and resident physicians: does high and low self-regulation capacity matter? Psychology of Well-Being 2014; 4:1–19. Website: . Accessed: 10 Oct 2018.
    1. MacCallum RC, Widaman KF, Zhang S, Hong S. Sample size in factor analysis. Psychol Methods. 1999;4:84–99. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.4.1.84.
    1. Denollet J, De Vries J. Positive and negative affect within the realm of depression, stress and fatigue: the two-factor distress model of the global mood scale (GMS) J Affect Disord. 2006;91:171–180. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2005.12.044.
    1. Durak M, Senol-Durak E, Gencoz T: Psychometric properities of the satisfaction with life scale among Turkish university students, correctional officers, and elderly adults. Soc Indic Res 2010; 99:413–429. Website: . Accessed: 22 Oct 2018.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

3
Subscribe