Effort–reward ratio, over-commitment and burnout: a cross-sectional study among Vietnamese healthcare professionals

Figures & data

Figure 1. The model effort-reward imbalance at work (source: Siegrist, 2016).

Figure 2. Hypothesized model.

Table 1. Descriptive data and correlations between effort, reward, over-commitment and study outcomes (N = 1162)

	Range	Mean (SD)	1	2	3	4	5	6
1. Effort	5–25	12.58 (4.46)	-	-	-	-	-	-
2. Reward	22–55	39.95 (6.67)	−0.24***	-	-	-	-	-
3. Effort-reward ratio	0.20–2.00	0.72 (0.31)	0.91***	−0.57***	-
4. Overcommitment	6–30	14.31 (4.68)	0.67***	−0.30***	0.68***	-	-	-
5. Emotional Exhaustion	0–54	14.97 (11.76)	0.62***	−0.40***	0.67***	0.62***	-	-
6. Depersonalization	0–30	7.48 (5.98)	0.45***	−0.36***	0.52***	0.48***	0.73***	-
7. Personal Accomplishment	0–48	32.01 (9.64)	−0.02, ns	0.41***	−0.16***	−0.06*	−0.04, ns	−0.06*

*p < 0.05; ***p < 0.001; ns-non significant

Table 2. Linear regression of factors significantly associated with burnout’s dimensions

Independent variables	Emotional exhaustion		Depersonalization		Personal accomplishment
	Beta	t	Beta	t	Beta	t
Constant	-	−2.97**		2.23*		19.78***
Gender	0.05	2.08*	−0.05	−1.56, ns	0.02	−0.32, ns
Income	−0.02	−0.95, ns	−0.01	−0.42, ns	0.09	2.70**
Effort-reward ratio	0.44	14.09***	0.30	8.00***	−0.21	−4.69***
Overcommitment	0.31	10.01***	0.26	7.12***	−0.06	−2.19*
R^2 (%)	50.00		29.4		3.50

*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001, gender (0-male, 1-female)

Figure 3. Mediation analyses between ERI components and burnout dimensions.(Arrows denote correlations, e1, e2, e3, and e4 are residual variances)

Table 3. Path coefficients between structural variables and significance test of mediating way

Model pathways	Estimated	95% CI
Total effects Over-commitment → Emotional Exhaustion Over-commitment → Depersonalization Over-commitment → Personal Accomplishment Effort-reward imbalance → Emotional Exhaustion Effort-reward imbalance → Depersonalization Effort-reward imbalance → Personal Accomplishment Over-commitment → Effort-reward imbalance	0.62 0.48 –0.06 0.47 0.35 –0.21 0.68	(0.58)—(0.65) (0.43)—(0.53) (−0.12)—(−0.01) (0.42)—(0.52) (0.29)—(0.41) (−0.29)—(−0.13) (0.64)—(0.71)
Direct effects Over-commitment → Emotional Exhaustion Over-commitment → Depersonalization Over-commitment → Personal Accomplishment Effort-reward imbalance → Emotional Exhaustion Effort-reward imbalance → Depersonalization Effort-reward imbalance → Personal Accomplishment Over-commitment → Effort-reward imbalance	0.30 0.24 –0.08 0.47 0.35 –0.21 0.68	(0.24)—(0.36) (0.17)—(0.31) (−0.01)—(−0.16) (0.42)—(0.52) (0.29)—(0.41) (−0.29)—(−0.13) (0.64)—(0.71)
Indirect effects Over-commitment → Emotional Exhaustion Over-commitment → Depersonalization Over-commitment → Personal Accomplishment	0.32 0.24 –0.14	(0.28)—(0.36) (0.20)—(0.29) (−0.20)—(−0.09)

Siegrist, J. (2016). Chapter 9 - effort-reward imbalance model. In G. Fink (Ed.), Stress: Concepts, Cognition, Emotion, and Behavior (pp. 81–86). Academic Press.

 Google Scholar

Data Availability Statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation