Department of Psychiatry, University of Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain.
BMC Public Health. 2010 Jun 2;10:302. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-10-302.
Burnout syndrome has been clinically characterised by a series of three subtypes: frenetic, underchallenged, and worn-out, with reference to coping strategies for stress and frustration at work with different degrees of dedication. The aims of the study are to present an operating definition of these subtypes in order to assess their reliability and convergent validity with respect to a standard burnout criterion and to examine differences with regard to sex and the temporary nature of work contracts.
An exploratory factor analysis was performed by the main component method on a range of items devised by experts. The sample was composed of 409 employees of the University of Zaragoza, Spain. The reliability of the scales was assessed with Cronbach's alpha, convergent validity in relation to the Maslach Burnout Inventory with Pearson's r, and differences with Student's t-test and the Mann-Whitney U test.
The factorial validity and reliability of the scales were good. The subtypes presented relations of differing degrees with the criterion dimensions, which were greater when dedication to work was lower. The frenetic profile presented fewer relations with the criterion dimensions while the worn-out profile presented relations of the greatest magnitude. Sex was not influential in establishing differences. However, the temporary nature of work contracts was found to have an effect: temporary employees exhibited higher scores in the frenetic profile (p < 0.001), while permanent employees did so in the underchallenged (p = 0.018) and worn-out (p < 0.001) profiles.
The classical Maslach description of burnout does not include the frenetic profile; therefore, these patients are not recognised. The developed questionnaire may be a useful tool for the design and appraisal of specific preventive and treatment approaches based on the type of burnout experienced.
倦怠综合征在临床上表现为三种亚型：狂热型、挑战不足型和疲惫型，这与应对工作压力和挫折的不同程度投入的策略有关。本研究的目的是提出这些亚型的操作定义，以评估它们与标准倦怠标准的可靠性和收敛效度，并研究性别和工作合同临时性质的差异。
通过主成分法对专家设计的一系列项目进行了探索性因子分析。该样本由西班牙萨拉戈萨大学的 409 名员工组成。采用克朗巴赫 α 系数评估量表的信度，采用皮尔逊 r 相关评估与 Maslach 倦怠量表的收敛效度，采用学生 t 检验和曼-惠特尼 U 检验评估差异。
量表的因子有效性和可靠性良好。这些亚型与标准维度的关系程度不同，当工作投入度较低时，关系程度较大。狂热型的表现与标准维度的关系较少，而疲惫型的表现则关系最大。性别对确定差异没有影响。然而，工作合同的临时性被发现有影响：临时员工在狂热型（p < 0.001）方面表现出更高的分数，而永久员工在挑战不足型（p = 0.018）和疲惫型（p < 0.001）方面表现出更高的分数。
经典的 Maslach 倦怠描述不包括狂热型；因此，这些患者未被识别。开发的问卷可能是基于所经历的倦怠类型设计和评估特定预防和治疗方法的有用工具。
