Translation and validation of the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory amongst  Greek doctors

Efstathios Papaefstathiou; Andreas Tsounis; Maria Malliarou; Pavlos Sarafis

doi:10.4081/​hpr.2019.7678

Submit to HPR

Apply for special issue

Cite this article

Citations

Views

Translation and validation of the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory amongst Greek doctors

Efstathios Papaefstathiou¹, Andreas Tsounis², Maria Malliarou³, Pavlos Sarafis^4*

Show Less

¹ 2nd Urology Department, School of Medicine, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece

² School of Psychology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece

³ Faculty of Nursing, Technological Educational Institute of Larissa, Greece

⁴ Department of Nursing, School of Health Sciences, Limassol, Cyprus

HPR 2019 , 7(1), 1; https://doi.org/10.4081/hpr.2019.7678

Submitted: 6 July 2018 | Revised: 3 April 2019 | Published: 2 May 2019

© 2019 by the Author(s). Licensee Health Psychology Research, USA. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution -Noncommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0) ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ )

Download PDF

Cite

XML

Abstract

The Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI) is a tool for burnout measurement and includes three different subscales: (i) personal, (ii) work-related and (iii) client-related burnout. The aim of this study was the translation and validation of CBI into the Greek Language. The forward-backward translation method was performed. Initially the questionnaire was distributed to 35 med ical students for face validity assessment. Then, 284 residents answered the Greek version of CBI so as for construct validity to be examined. The data analysis was performed by using SPSS and AMOS. Face validity was estimated above 0.8 for the Greek ver sion of CBI. The three factors model of CBI-Greek, with 1 item removed, achieved not so well-defined inner structure in CFI. However, the 16-item model achieved good levels of goodness-of fit indices (Cmin/df 2.52, RMSEA 0.074, GFI 0.901, CFI70.938, NFI 0.901, TLI 0.923). The composite reliability values, also var ied from 0.842 to 0.852. Cronbach’s alpha index values surpassed 0.844. The 16-item model of CBI-Gr is a valid tool with high internal consistency that can be used in the evaluation of burnout in Greek population. The original 3-items model is a possible alternative.

Keywords

Copenhagen Burnout Inventory; Cross-cultural; Validity; Reliability

References

1. Baka, L., & Basinska, B.A. (2016). Psychometric properties of the Polish version of the Oldenburg Burnout Inventory (OLBI). Medycyna Pracy, 67, 29-42.
2. Bentler, P.M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238-246.
3. Bentler, P.M., & Bonett, D.G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588-606.
4. Berat, N., Jelić, D., & Popov, B. (2016). Serbian version of the work burnout scale from the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory: adaptation and psychometric properties. Applied Psychology, 9, 177-198.
5. Bianchi, R. (2015). A reflection on the measurement of the burnout syndrome. Academic Emergency Medicine, 22, 378-378.
6. Brisson, R., & Bianchi, R. (2017). On the inconsistency of burnout conceptualization and measurement. Journal of the American College of Surgeons, 224, 87.
7. Browne, M.W., & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods & Research, 21, 230-258.
8. Chin, R.W.A., Chua, Y.Y., Chu, M.N., Mahadi, N.F., Wong, M.S., Yusoff, M.S., & Lee, Y. Y. (2018). Investigating validity evidence of the Malay translation of the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory. Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences, 13, 1-9.
9. Costello, A.B., & Osborne, J.W. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 10, 1-9.
10. DaSilva Schuster, M., & daVeiga Dias, V. (2018). Oldenburg Burnout Inventory-validation of a new way to measure Burnout in Brazil. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, 23, 553-562.
11. Demerouti, E., & Bakker, A.B. (2008). The Oldenburg Burnout Inventory: A good alternative to measure burnout and engagement. Handbook of stress and burnout in health care, 65-78.
12. Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., Vardakou, I., & Kantas, A. (2003). The convergent validity of two burnout instruments: A multi-trait-multimethod analysis. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 19, 12-23.
13. Fong, T.C., Ho. R.T., & Ng S. (2014). Psychometric properties of the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory e Chinese version. Journal of Psychology, 148, 255-266.
14. Gómez-Urquiza, J. L., Emilia, I., Albendín-García, L., Vargas-Pecino, C., Ortega-Campos, E. M., & Cañadas-De la Fuente, G. A. (2017). Prevalence of burnout syndrome in emergency nurses: A meta-analysis. Critical Care Nurse, 37, e1-e9.
15. Hair, J.J, Black, W., Babin, B., & Anderson, R. (2009). Multivariate data analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice-Hall.
16. Halbesleben, J.R., & Demerouti, E. (2005). The construct validity of an alternative measure of burnout: Investigating the English translation of the Oldenburg Burnout Inventory. Work & Stress, 19, 208-220.
17. Joreskog, K.G., & Sorbom, D. (1984). LISREL VI users guide. 3rd ed. Moorsville, IN: Scientific Software.
18. Kristensen, T.S., Borritz, M., Villadsen, E., & Christensen, K.B. (2005). The Copenhagen Burnout Inventory: A new tool for the assessment of burnout. Work & Stress, 19, 192-207.
19. Lahana, E., Papadopoulou, K., Roumeliotou, O., Tsounis, A., Sarafis, P., & Niakas, D. (2017). Burnout among nurses working in social welfare centers for the disabled. BMC Nursing, 16, 15.
20. Lee, Y.Y., Medford, A.R., Halim, A.S. (2015). Burnout in physicians. Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh, 45, 104-107.
21. Loera, B., Converso, D., & Viotti, S. (2014). Evaluating the psychometric properties of the Maslach Burnout Inventory-Human Services Survey (MBI-HSS) among Italian nurses: how many factors must a researcher consider?. PLoS One, 9, e114987.
22. Mahmoudi, S., Atashzadeh-Shoorideh, F., Rassouli, M., Moslemi, A., Pishgooie, A. H., & Azimi, H. (2017). Translation and psychometric properties of the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory in Iranian nurses. Iranian Journal of Nursing and Midwifery Research, 22, 117-122.
23. Maticorena-Quevedo, J., Anduaga-Beramendi, A., & Beas, R. (2016). Burnout syndrome among medical students in Mexico: considerations about its measurement with the Maslach Burnout Inventory. Medwave, 16, e6446.
24. Milfont, T.L., Denny, S., Ameratunga, S., Robinson, E., & Merry, S. (2008). Burnout and wellbeing: Testing the Copenhagen burnout inventory in New Zealand teachers. Social indicators research, 89, 169-177.
25. Molinero-Ruiz, E., Gomez-Quintero, H., & Lluis, S. (2013). Validation of the Spanish version of the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory questionnaire. Rev Esp Salud Pública, 87, 165-179.
26. Odagiri, Y., Shimomitsu, T., Ohya, Y., & Kristensen, T. S. (2004). Overcommitment and high effort are strongly associated with burnout among Japanese nurses. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 11(Suppl), 214.
27. Parola, V., Coelho, A., Cardoso, D., Sandgren, A., & Apóstolo, J. (2017). Prevalence of burnout in health professionals working in palliative care: a systematic review. JBI Database of Systematic Reviews and Implementation Reports, 15, 1905-1933.
28. Pines, A.M., & Aronson, E. (1988). Career burnout: Causes and cures. New York: The Free Press.
29. Platsidou, M., & Daniilidou, A. (2016). Three scales to measure burnout of primary school teachers: empirical evidence on their adequacy. International Journal of Educational Psychology, 5, 164-186.
30. Polit, D.F., Beck, C.T., & Owen, S.V. (2007). Is the CVI an acceptable indicator of content validity? Appraisal and recommendations. Research in Nursing & Health, 30, 459-467.
31. Schaufeli, W.B, & Buunk, B.P. (2002) Burnout: an overview of 25 years of research and theorizing. In: M.J. Schabracq, J.A.M. Winnubst, C.L. Cooper, (Ed.), The handbook of work and health psychology (pp. 384-425). 2nd ed. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
32. Schaufeli, W.B., Leiter, M.P., & Maslach, C. (2009). Burnout: 35 years of research and practice. Career Development International, 14, 204-220.
33. Schaufeli, W.B., & Taris, T.W. (2005). The conceptualization and measurement of burnout: Common ground and worlds apart. Work & Stress, 19, 256-262.
34. Shirom, A. (2005). Reflections on the study of burnout. Work & Stress, 19, 263-270.
35. Winwood, P.C., & Winefield, A.H. (2004). Comparing two measures of burnout among dentists in Australia. International Journal of Stress Management, 11, 282-289.
36. WHO (2014). Process of translation and adaptation of instruments. Retrieved online from: http://www.who.int/substance_abuse/research_tools/translation/en/#.
37. Worley, J.A., Vassar, M., Wheeler, D.L., & Barnes, L.L. (2008). Factor structure of scores from the Maslach Burnout Inventory: A review and meta-analysis of 45 exploratory and confirmatory factor-analysis of 45 exploratory and confirmatory factor-analytic studies. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 68, 797-823.
38. Yeh, W.Y., Cheng, Y., Chen, C.J., Hu, P.Y., & Kristensen, T.S. (2007). Psychometric properties of the Chinese version of Copenhagen burnout inventory among employees in two companies in Taiwan. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 14, 126-133.
39. Yusoff, M.S.B. (2014). Interventions on medical students’ psychological health: A meta-analysis. Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences, 9, 1-13.
40. Zainudin, A. (2012). Structural equation modeling using AMOS graphic. Shah Alam: UiTM Press.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no potential conflict of interest.

Previous article in this issue

Next article in this issue

Health Psychology Research, Electronic ISSN: 2420-8124 Published by Health Psychology Research