Resumen de Symptoms of distress when suffering from burnout

Jesús Montero Marín, Mattie Tops, Javier Prado Abril, Marta Puebla Guedea, María de la Cruz Pérez, Alba López Montoyo, Javier García Campayo

• Objective: To compare the structure and explanatory power of the traditional and the subtype burnout definitions on symptoms of distress.

  Methods: We used a cross-sectional design with a random sample of university employees (n=429), who completed the MBI-GS, BCSQ-12 and HSCL-30. The structure of the scales was assessed using parallel analysis from polychoric correlations, unweighted least squares and promin rotation. Multivariate regression models were built among symptoms and burnout models.

  Results: The HSCL showed a two-factor structure (psychological and somatic; IFS=0.87;

  GFI=0.99; RMSR=0.05); the MBI a forced three-factor structure (exhaustion, efficacy and cynicism; IFS=0.95; GFI>0.99; RMSR=0.03); the BCSQ a three-factor structure (neglect, lack of development and overload; IFS=0.98; GFI>0.99; RMSR=0.02). The variance of psychological distress was for 40% explained by MBI-GS and for 27% by BCSQ-12; the variance of somatic symptoms was for 31% explained by MBI-GS and 16% by BCSQ-12. All the BCSQ-12 factors contributed to explain psychological and somatic symptoms, but only exhaustion from MBI-GS.

  Conclusions: The typological definition showed better structure, but worse explanatory power on symptoms, than the traditional perspective. Exhaustion seems to be the burnout core dimension, althought the subtypes would explain a specific characterization of the syndrome