[Nurses' health during the COVID-19 pandemic in Switzerland: A longitudinal study with mixed methods design]. / Gesundheit von Pflegenden während der COVID-19-Pandemie in der Schweiz.

Nurses' health during the COVID-19 pandemic in Switzerland: A longitudinal study with mixed methods design Abstract: Background: The COVID19 pandemic has had a significant impact on healthcare systems worldwide. Nurses have played a crucial role in responding to the crisis, often at the expense of their own health and wellbeing. Aim: The aim of the study was to investigate the physical and mental health status as well as the resources of certified nurses during the pandemic, in German-speaking Switzerland. Methods: In a longitudinal study with a mixed methods design, data were collected among nurses from acute hospitals between 2021 and 2022 using a questionnaire survey and focus group interviews. The data were analysed using multiple regression analysis, knowledge mapping and the Neuman system model. Results: The results show improvements in health, quality of life and job satisfaction, and a decrease in stress; whereby influencing extrapersonal factors are, among others, reorganisations within hospitals with the active involvement of nurses. On the interpersonal level, support from managers or colleagues proved helpful. At the intrapersonal level, the recognition of the nurses' competencies was deemed particularly important, to help them to remain healthy during the pandemic. Conclusions: Increased recognition, participation, training and career opportunities as well as flexible working models need to be implemented in the long term to ensure a sustainable improvement of the health and well-being of nurses.

Protective Factors of Nurses' Mental Health and Professional Wellbeing During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Multicenter Longitudinal Study.

Objective: Using a salutogenic approach, this study aimed to identify similarities in the protective factors of nurses' psychological Quality of Life (QoL) and professional wellbeing (PWB) in four countries and to assess their variability over time during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: This multicentric study used a longitudinal design with three measurements points: Autumn 2021, spring 2022, and autumn 2022. The study consisted in a self-administered online questionnaire addressed to nurses working in hospitals. Across all measurement times, 3,310 observations were collected in France, 603 in Switzerland, 458 in Portugal, and 278 in Canada. The outcomes were psychological QoL and PWB, and several potential protective factors were used as determinants. Results: Analyses revealed few changes over time in the outcomes. Across all countries, psychological QoL was associated positively with resilience and perceived social support, whereas PWB was associated positively with the ability to provide quality work and support from colleagues and superiors. Conclusion: The findings of this study highlighted the potential of several factors protective of nurses' psychological QoL and PWB. These should be fostered through policies and measures to support nurses.

Protocol for the Swiss COhort of Healthcare Professionals and Informal CAregivers (SCOHPICA): Professional trajectories, intention to stay in or leave the job and well-being of healthcare professionals.

INTRODUCTION: Healthcare professionals' shortage, low job satisfaction, high levels of burnout, and excessive staff turnover are some of the challenges health systems face worldwide. In Switzerland, healthcare stakeholders have called to address the health workforce crisis and have pointed out the scarcity of data on the conditions of healthcare professionals (HCPs). Hence, the Swiss Cohort of Healthcare Professionals and Informal Caregivers (SCOHPICA) was developed to study the career trajectories, well-being, intention to stay in or leave the position/profession/health sector, and their determinants, of HCPs and informal caregivers, respectively. This paper describes the protocol for the HCPs cohort of SCOHPICA and discusses its implications. METHODS: SCOHPICA is a prospective open cohort using an explanatory sequential mixed methods design. All types of HCPs working directly with patients and practicing in Switzerland are eligible, irrespective of their healthcare setting and employment status. Baseline and annual follow-up electronic surveys will take place once a year, featuring both core questions and modules developed according to information needs. While outcome variables are HCPs' trajectories, well-being, intention to stay in or leave the position/profession/health sector, independent variables include organizational, psychosocial, and psychological determinants, as well as occupational (professional) and sociodemographic factors. The qualitative phase will be organized every two years, inviting participants who agreed to take part in this phase. The findings from quantitative analyses, along with the issues raised by healthcare stakeholders in the field, will guide the topics investigated in the qualitative phase. DISCUSSION: Using innovative methodologies, SCOHPICA will gather nationwide and longitudinal data on HCPs practicing in Switzerland. These data could have numerous implications: promoting the development of research related to HCPs' well-being and retention intentions; supporting the development of policies to improve working conditions and career prospects; contributing to the evolution of training curricula for future or current healthcare professionals; aiding in the development of health systems capable of delivering quality care; and finally, providing the general public and stakeholders with free and open access to the study results through an online dashboard.

Health Workforce Challenges: Key Findings From the Swiss Cohort of Healthcare Professionals and Informal Caregivers (SCOHPICA).

Objectives: The Swiss Cohort of Healthcare Professionals and Informal Caregivers (SCOHPICA) was created to study the career trajectories, retention intentions, and wellbeing of healthcare professionals (HCPs), addressing challenges such as staff turnover, low job satisfaction and burnout. Methods: SCOHPICA is a prospective open cohort. An electronic questionnaire was used to collect data from HCPs across multiple healthcare settings in Switzerland, encompassing the intention to stay in the profession, wellbeing, and various organizational, psychosocial, occupational and sociodemographic determinants. Results: The first (2022) baseline sample included 1707 HCPs from over 20 professions. Notably, 13% did not intend to stay in their profession, with intermediate caregivers (24%), registered nurses (17%) and pharmacists (17%) reporting the highest rates. Pharmacists scored lowest in wellbeing. Across determinants, pharmacists, physicians, and registered nurses reported worse scores for workload and work-life balance. Nursing professions had lower scores in various determinants, including influence at work, staffing and resource adequacy, and possibilities for development. Conclusion: SCOHPICA will provide critical insights on HCPs' work conditions and experiences, supporting health workforce monitoring and management, and informing policy-making to ensure high-quality healthcare delivery.

Factors associated with intent to stay in the profession: an exploratory cluster analysis across healthcare professions in Switzerland.

Retention issues are widespread within the health workforce. This cross-sectional study used data collected from 1707 healthcare professionals in 2022-23 to identify with k-means clustering groups of individuals sharing similar working experiences. These profiles were linked with varying levels of turnover intentions and a range of healthcare professions. While occupational therapists and paramedics reported in average better working conditions, registered nurses and intermediate caregivers reported the poorest experiences. In other clusters, salaries were high where work-life balance was low, and inversely. By learning from similarities and differences in the working conditions of diverse healthcare professionals, shared initiatives aimed at improving retention across professions can be facilitated.

Navigating HIV-Related Stigma in Switzerland: A Qualitative Study.

Objectives: This study sought to understand how people living with HIV experience, perceive, and navigate stigma in their everyday life and in care settings in an urban French-speaking area in Switzerland. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were carried out with 19 people living with HIV in Lausanne concerning their experience of HIV-related stigma in both everyday life and in healthcare settings. Content analysis was performed to identify main and sub-themes. Results: "Living with HIV" posed little or no difficulty for participants. However, the burden of anticipated and internalized HIV-related stigma played a disproportionately large role in their lives. Participants considered the general population's low level of knowledge about HIV as problematic in this regard. While participants reported few examples of enacted stigma generally, healthcare environments were sometimes experienced as sites of prejudice and discrimination. However, some healthcare professionals were also sources of information and knowledge, contributing to participants' "journeys of self-acceptance." Conclusion: Even in an urban environment in a country with ready access to healthcare and education, HIV-related stigma remains a concern for people living with HIV.

Factors Associated With Intent to Leave the Profession for the Allied Health Workforce: A Rapid Review.

Shortages of satisfied and well-trained health care professionals are an urgent threat for health systems worldwide. Although numerous studies have focused on retention issues for nurses and physicians, the situation for the allied health workforce remains understudied. We conducted a rapid review of the literature on allied health workers to investigate the main reasons for leaving their profession. 1,305 original research articles were retrieved from databases MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycInfo, and Epistemonikos, of which 29 were eligible for data extraction. Reviewed studies featured mainly pharmacists, psychologists, dietitians, physical therapists, emergency medical professionals, and occupational therapists. We categorized 17 typical factors of the intent to leave as organizational, psychological, team and management, and job characteristics. The relative importance of each factor was assessed by measuring its prevalence in the selected literature. By revealing common themes across allied health professions, our work suggests actionable insights to improve retention in these vital services.

Factors protecting Swiss nurses' health during the COVID-19 pandemic: a longitudinal study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic reached Europe in early 2020 and impacted nurses over a prolonged period, notably causing heavy work overloads. Exposure to sources of stress in such situations is inevitable, which can put nurses' health at risk. The present study took a salutogenic approach to investigating nurses' health and the principal factors protecting it found in the literature (i.e., resilience, post-traumatic growth, social support, and certain organizational factors), as well as how those elements evolved from February 2021 to September 2022. METHODS: All nurses working at eight French-speaking Swiss hospitals who accepted to disseminate the study to their employees were invited to complete an online questionnaire at four time points (February 2021, September 2021, March 2022, and September 2022: T0, T1, T2, and T3, respectively) and respond to items measuring their health, factors protecting their health, and their perceived stress levels. Data were analyzed using random-intercept linear regression models. RESULTS: A cumulated total of 1013 responses were collected over all measurement points (625 responses at T0; 153 at T1; 146 at T2; 89 at T3). Results revealed that nurses' health had not changed significantly between measurements. However, their perceived stress levels, feelings of being supported by their management hierarchies, and belief that they had the means to deliver a high quality of work all diminished. At every measurement point, nurses' health was negatively associated with perceived stress and positively associated with resilience, perceived social support, and the belief that they were provided with the means to deliver a high quality of work. CONCLUSION: Despite the difficult conditions caused by the pandemic, the factors recognized as protective of nurses' health played their role. The lack of improvements in nurses' health in periods when the pandemic's effects lessened suggests that the pressure they were experiencing did not drop during these moments. This phenomenon may have been due to the need to clear backlogs in scheduled surgery and the work overloads caused by prolonged staff absences and nurses quitting the profession. Monitoring changes in nurses' health is thus crucial, as is establishing measures that promote factors protective of their health. Organizational factors influencing nurses' working conditions are also key and should not be neglected.

Workplace Wellbeing and Quality of Life Perceived by Portuguese Nurses during the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Role of Protective Factors and Stressors.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, nurses were exposed to many stressors, which may have been associated with some mental health problems. However, most of the studies carried out on nurses' quality of life and workplace wellbeing during the COVID-19 pandemic took a pathogenic approach. Given that current scientific knowledge in this field presented too many gaps to properly inform preventive and therapeutic action, the aim of this study was to explore whether protective factors (resilience, perceived social support, and professional identification) and stressors (perceived stress and psychosocial risks in the workplace) influenced the quality of life and workplace wellbeing perceived by Portuguese nurses during the COVID-19 pandemic. Data for this cross-sectional study was collected through online self-administered questionnaires. Linear regression models were used to analyze the relationships between variables. Results showed that perceived stress, resilience and job satisfaction were associated with quality of life and workplace wellbeing among Portuguese nurses. The study's findings could serve to inform health policy and should draw the attention of nursing managers to the needs and difficulties reported by nurses, to the importance of providing them with emotional support, and to the relevance of promoting a good work environment.

Protective Factors and Coping Styles Associated with Quality of Life during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Comparison of Hospital or Care Institution and Private Practice Nurses.

In France, nurses work either in hospitals and care institutions or in private practice, following physicians' prescriptions and taking care of patients at their homes. During the COVID-19 pandemic, these populations of nurses were exposed to numerous sources of stress. The main objective of the present study was to identify the protective factors they mobilized to face the crisis and how these factors contributed to sustaining their quality of life (QoL). A cross-sectional study was conducted to answer these questions. Overall, 9898 French nurses participated in the study, providing demographic information and filling out QoL (WHOQOL-BREF), perceived stress (PSS-14), resilience (CD-RISC), social support (MSPSS), and coping style (BRIEF-COPE) questionnaires. The results revealed very few differences between the two groups of nurses, which is surprising given the drastically different contexts in which they practice. Social support and two coping strategies (positive reframing and acceptance) were associated with a high QoL, whereas perceived stress and four coping strategies (denial, blaming self, substance use, and behavioral disengagement) were associated with poor QoL. In the light of these results, we recommended promoting social support and coping strategies to help nurses cope during the pandemic.

Facilitators and barriers of women's participation in HIV clinical research in Switzerland: A qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: Women are underrepresented in most HIV clinical trials in Western countries, but their participation remains crucial as the lack of information on sex- and gender-specific effects may hinder the safety and efficacy of antiretroviral treatments. The aim of this study was to identify barriers to and facilitators of women's participation in HIV clinical trials in Switzerland. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews among 20 women with HIV to explore factors associated with non-participation in clinical trials. The interviewer presented to participants a clinical trial's description and discussed it with them. Lexicometric analysis on transcribed interviews identified three themes and eight sub-themes related to the pros and cons of participation in HIV clinical trials. RESULTS: Participants evoked mainly decision-making drivers, concerns for women living with HIV and treatment side-effects. They highlighted the need for extensive information provided by trusted healthcare professionals on the research process as central to the decision to enrol in HIV clinical trials. Familial responsibilities were clearly identified as barriers to their participation, but not pregnancy. Additional preoccupations were other health concerns and comorbidities and the consequences of stopping ongoing antiretroviral treatments. CONCLUSIONS: To overcome the barriers to the participation of women living with HIV in clinical research in Western countries, healthcare professionals and researchers should increase women's research literacy by involving them in the study design and by tailoring clinical trials to their social roles and health concerns. Trust in professionals is a facilitator of enrolment of women living with HIV that should be maintained.

Patient and Public Preferences for Coordinated Care in Switzerland: Development of a Discrete Choice Experiment.

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to develop and test a discrete choice experiment (DCE) eliciting public and patient preferences for better-coordinated care in Switzerland. METHODS: We applied a multistage mixed-methods procedure using qualitative and quantitative approaches. First, to identify attributes, we performed a review of the DCE literature in healthcare with a focus on chronic care. Next, attribute selection involved stakeholders (N = 7) from various healthcare sectors to select the most relevant and actionable attributes, followed by three organized focus groups involving the general public and patients (N = 21) to verify the selection and the clarity of the DCE tasks and explanations. Finally, we conducted an online pilot in the target population to test the survey and obtain priors for a final six tested attributes to refine the final design of the experiment. RESULTS: After identifying an initial 33 attributes, a final list of six attributes was selected following stakeholder involvement and the three focus groups involving the target population. At the online pilot-testing stage with 301 participants, the majority of respondents found the DCE choice tasks socially relevant for Switzerland but challenging. The quality of the answers was relatively high. Most attributes had signs matching those in the literature and focus group discussions. CONCLUSION: This article will be useful to researchers designing DCEs from a broad health policy perspective. The multistage approach involving a range of stakeholders was essential for the development of a DCE that is relevant for policy makers and well-accepted by the general public and patients.

Healthcare stakeholders' perspective on barriers to integrated care in Switzerland: Results from the open-ended question of a nationwide survey.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to identify the main barriers to integrated care (IC) as reported by healthcare stakeholders from various linguistic regions and health system specificities, according to their reality of practice. METHODS: Information was gathered through an open-ended question from a national survey conducted in Switzerland in 2019. Responses were analysed qualitatively with the IRaMuTeQ software. RESULTS: Answers from 410 respondents were obtained. Respondents reported barriers at two levels: the system and professional level. Threat to financial benefits, concerns for patient data sharing and tensions between quality of care and benefits for patients versus costs were mentioned at the professional level, in their activity and in patient care. At the system level, limitations at the political level due to federalism and the lack of support and training for professionals were important barriers, in addition to the lack of recognition and compensation for professionals and the fragmented functioning of the health care system. CONCLUSION: Our study underlines the importance of implementing innovative funding strategies and reimbursement schemes, as well as political willingness to move towards IC. The alignment between federal policies and cantonal specificities also appears as necessary to achieve involvement of professionals, promote integration of services and coordination of professionals for continuous and efficient care.

Stressors, self-reported overall health, potential protective factors and the workplace well-being of nurses during the COVID-19 pandemic in Switzerland: a longitudinal mixed-methods study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic was making a huge impact on Europe's healthcare systems in the spring of 2020, and most predictive models concurred that pandemic waves were in the offing. Most studies adopted a pathogenic approach to the subject; few used a salutogenic approach. These showed, however, that nurses can retain their health despite a pandemic by mobilising generalised resistance resources. Our study aims to understand how nurses working in Switzerland's hospitals protected their health and workplace well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic by investigating the moderating effects of the health resources they mobilised against the stressors inherent to the situation. The study aims to explore and describe the stressors and the resources nurses used to remain healthy during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHOD AND ANALYSIS: We will use a concurrent mixed-methods panel design with qualitative analyses ancillary to quantitative analyses. Quantitative data will be collected using electronic questionnaires at four time points over 2 years. Qualitative data will be collected using focus groups. Nurses from Switzerland's two main linguistic regions who had direct, indirect or no contact with patients with COVID-19 will be invited to participate. The a priori sample size will be at least 3631 participants at T0 and 1852 at T4. Longitudinal structural equation modelling and knowledge mapping will be used to analyse quantitative and qualitative data, respectively. The results derived from the two data types will then be compared and discussed using a side-by-side approach to determine whether they agree or disagree and how they complement each other to achieve our aims. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Nurses will receive an electronic informed consent form. The data collected will be stored on a secure server at the authors' institution. This research project was approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of the Canton of Vaud (2020-02845).

Realist evaluation of a pilot intervention implementing interprofessional and interinstitutional processes for transitional care.

In 2016, in Switzerland, we implemented transitional interprofessional and interinstitutional shared decision-making processes (IIPs) between a short-stay inpatient care unit (SSU) and primary care professionals. Between 2018 and 2019, we evaluated this intervention using a realist design to answer the following questions: for whom, with whom, in which context and how have IIPs been implemented? Our initial theory was tested via interviews with patients, primary care professionals and staff from the SSU. Results showed that a patient's stay at the SSU, with actors committed to facilitating IIPs, reinforced the perceived appropriateness and implementation of those IIPs. However, this appropriateness varied according to different contextual elements, such as the complexity of needs, preexisting collaborative practices and the purpose of the inpatient stay. Since IIPs occurred in a context of fragmented practices, proactive and sustained efforts are required of the actors implementing them and the organizations supporting them.

Workplace Well-Being and Intent to Stay by Health Care Workers Reassigned during the First COVID-19 Wave: Results of a Swiss Survey.

Our study aimed at investigating the way not having the choice to be reassigned was associated to a poorer experience of reassignment among health care workers (HCWs) during the first wave of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and indirectly to a lower workplace well-being and reduced intent to stay at the hospital. We also investigated the moderating role of the perceived hospital management responsiveness on these associations. A cross sectional survey was sent to all professionals from 11 hospitals and clinics in the French-speaking part of Switzerland, in July 2020. Out of 2811 professionals who completed the survey, 436 were HCWs reassigned to COVID-19 units during the first wave of the pandemic and constituted our analysis sample. Results indicated that hospital management responsiveness moderated the association between lack of choice and reassignment experience, indicating that the more HCWs perceived responsiveness, the less the lack of choice affected their experience of reassignment and thus their intent to stay and workplace well-being. Lack of choice during reassignments can reduce intent to stay and workplace well-being, in particular if hospital management is not perceived to be responsive during the crisis. Attempts by hospital management to find solutions, such as flexibility in working hours or extraordinary leaves, can alleviate the perceived constraints of reassignment and be considered signs of responsiveness from hospital management.

An Overview of Reviews on Interprofessional Collaboration in Primary Care: Effectiveness.

INTRODUCTION: Interprofessional collaboration (IPC) is increasingly used but diversely implemented in primary care. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of IPC in primary care settings. METHODS: An overview (review of systematic reviews) was carried out. We searched nine databases and employed a double selection and data extraction method. Patient-related outcomes were categorized, and results coded as improvement (+), worsening (-), mixed results (?) or no change (0). RESULTS: 34 reviews were included. Six types of IPC were identified: IPC in primary care (large scope) (n = 8), physician-nurse in primary care (n = 1), primary care physician (PCP)-specialty care provider (n = 5), PCP-pharmacist (n = 3), PCP-mental healthcare provider (n = 15), and intersectoral collaboration (n = 2). In general, IPC in primary care was beneficial for patients with variation between types of IPC. Whereas reviews about IPC in primary care (large scope) showed better processes of care and higher patient satisfaction, other types of IPC reported mixed results for clinical outcomes, healthcare use and patient-reported outcomes. Also, reviews focusing on interventions based on pre-existing and well-defined models, such as collaborative care, overall reported more benefits. However, heterogeneity between the included primary studies hindered comparison and often led to the report of mixed results. Finally, professional- and organizational-related outcomes were under-reported, and cost-related outcomes showed some promising results for IPC based on pre-existing models; results were lacking for other types. CONCLUSIONS: This overview suggests that interprofessional collaboration can be effective in primary care. Better understanding of the characteristics of IPC processes, their implementation, and the identification of effective elements, merits further attention.

An Overview of Reviews on Interprofessional Collaboration in Primary Care: Barriers and Facilitators.

INTRODUCTION: Interprofessional collaboration (IPC) is becoming more widespread in primary care due to the increasing complex needs of patients. However, its implementation can be challenging. We aimed to identify barriers and facilitators of IPC in primary care settings. METHODS: An overview of reviews was carried out. Nine databases were searched, and two independent reviewers took part in review selection, data extraction and quality assessment. A thematic synthesis was carried out to highlight the main barriers and facilitators, according to the type of IPC and their level of intervention (system, organizational, inter-individual and individual). RESULTS: Twenty-nine reviews were included, classified according to six types of IPC: IPC in primary care (large scope) (n = 11), primary care physician (PCP)-nurse in primary care (n = 2), PCP-specialty care provider (n = 3), PCP-pharmacist (n = 2), PCP-mental health care provider (n = 6), and intersectoral collaboration (n = 5). Most barriers and facilitators were reported at the organizational and inter-individual levels. Main barriers referred to lack of time and training, lack of clear roles, fears relating to professional identity and poor communication. Principal facilitators included tools to improve communication, co-location and recognition of other professionals' skills and contribution. CONCLUSIONS: The range of barriers and facilitators highlighted in this overview goes beyond specific local contexts and can prove useful for the development of tools or guidelines for successful implementation of IPC in primary care.

Brief Report: Representations and Willingness of People Living With HIV in Switzerland to Participate in HIV Cure Trials: The Case of Gene-Modified Cell Therapies.

BACKGROUND: Recent advances made in cell and gene therapies for cancer suggest that they represent plausible strategies to cure HIV. However, the health risks and constraints associated with these therapies require a deeper understanding of the expectations of such treatments among people living with HIV (PLWH). METHODS: We conducted 15 semistructured in-depth interviews among patients from 2 HIV units in Switzerland. After a conversation about their perceptions of research on HIV therapies, participants were provided with a trial description using a gene-modified cell therapy as a potentially curative approach. They were invited to discuss how they might consider participation in the trial. Content analysis was performed to identify core themes. RESULTS: Participants perceived the trial as burdensome and uncertain. Most were aware that cure was not guaranteed, and 6 of the 15 considered that they would participate. Two main concerns were expressed about potential participation: (1) the impact on the professional life and fear to be stigmatized because of this and (2) the fact that stopping antiretroviral treatment would challenge the balance currently achieved in their lives. The decision to participate would depend on their understanding of the trial, the availability of sufficient information, and the relationship with health care professionals. CONCLUSION: Involving PLWH in early stages of research would be crucial to improve their understanding of gene-modified cell therapies. It could also help adapt trials to address key factors, including the anticipation of stigma, which may discourage PLWH from participating in treatment research.

Work-related burnout among personnel at a university hospital: identifying quantitative and qualitative differences using latent class analysis.

BACKGROUND: Burnout among hospital personnel is frequent and has impacts on the quality of care. Monitoring is important, but there is a lack of specificity for individual patterns of burnout syndromes. AIMS: This study aimed to identify specific burnout profiles in a hospital setting. METHOD: Using job satisfaction data from a survey of 4793 hospital personnel, we performed a latent class analysis on the work-related items of the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI). Total burnout score, job satisfaction and work-related variables were compared across classes. RESULTS: Five latent work-related burnout profiles were revealed, including a high-risk class (9.5% of participants) and two classes with similar total CBI scores: a high-fatigue class (6%), including young administrative personnel who reported less pleasure at work but a better work-life balance, and an emotional-exhaustion class (13.1%), including older healthcare personnel who were more satisfied at work and could use their skills appropriately. Finally, personnel in the high-risk class were younger healthcare professionals, reporting lower job satisfaction, poorer working conditions and less respect from their direct hierarchy. CONCLUSIONS: The risk and type of burnout depended on personnel's characteristics and their social and work environments. Tailored interventions should be used to address these different profiles.