Skip to main content


Burnout has been defined as a prolonged response to chronic emotional and interpersonal stresses on the job[1]. It manifests itself as exhaustion, cynicism, and diminished professional efficacy. There is a risk of burnout when a discrepancy prevails between the expectations of a motivated employee and the reality of an unfavourable work situation. This discrepancy progresses towards burnout via dysfunctional ways of coping. Severe burnout is related to performance deficits, mental disorders, and physical illnesses. It is also related to a higher risk of work disability, as indicated by sickness absence and disability pension. Prevention of burnout is quite similar to management of work-related stress. To achieve a successful recovery from burnout it is essential to change the working conditions where burnout has developed.

Definition of burnout

Burnout describes an individual's psychological response to chronic stressors at work[1]. It is not regarded as a medical condition, i.e., it is not included as a diagnosis in the medical classification systems. However, in the International Classification of Diseases (ICD 11) burnout can be coded as a factor that influences health status. Burnout is defined as ‘a syndrome conceptualized as resulting from chronic workplace stress that has not been successfully managed’[2].

The burnout phenomenon was originally discovered in professionals employed in human service work; particularly among professional care groups. A major part of this work involves contact with a variety of people, which can subsequently develop into a source of stress. Relative to human service work, the symptoms of burnout were labelled as emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and diminished personal accomplishment. They centred on the relationship with clients[1]. It was later realised that burnout can result from prolonged work stress in a wider range of occupations. Following this, burnout was conceptualised much more as a crisis in one's relationship with work in general[3].

Burnout is widely understood as a multidimensional syndrome. According to the original definition, burnout manifests itself by symptoms of exhaustion, cynicism, and diminished professional efficacy[3]. In the ICD11 the same three symptoms are mentioned to describe burnout[2]:

  • Exhaustion refers to feelings of overstrain, tiredness, and fatigue, which result from long-term involvement in an over-demanding work situation.
  • Cynicism reflects an indifferent and distant attitude towards work, disengagement, and a lack of enthusiasm for work. It is a dysfunctional way of coping with exhausting situations, reducing the possibilities of finding creative solutions at work.
  • Professional efficacy consists of feelings of competence, successful achievement, and accomplishment in one's work, which diminishes as burnout develops.

Relative to the symptoms of burnout, studies have found support for the exhaustion and cynicism factors. However, authors have postulated that diminished professional efficacy may be a separate but related entity[4]. Therefore, the dimensional definition of burnout has been criticized for lacking a theoretical basis in its grouping of different concepts[5]. In the alternative definitions of burnout, the exhaustion alone is usually considered to constitute burnout. According to these alternative definitions, burnout is defined as, for example, a state of physical fatigue, emotional and mental exhaustion, and cognitive weariness[6]. The fact that almost all researchers agree on ‘exhaustion’ being the core of burnout resulted in the following harmonised definition accepted by a panel of experts from 29 countries (2021): “In a worker, occupational burnout or occupational physical AND emotional exhaustion state is an exhaustion due to prolonged exposure to work-related problems”[7]

However, it has been argued that the definitions that only consider exhaustion lack a sound theoretical base and ignore the multidimensional aspect of burnout[8]. The theoretical concept underpinning the Burnout Assessment tool developed by Schaufeli, Desart & De Witte (2019)[9][10]considers seven dimensions for defining burnout, four primary and three secondary dimensions. The four primary dimensions include:

1. Exhaustion: chronic fatigue and severe loss of energy, both physical and mental. 
2. Emotional impairment: reduced functional capacity to adequately regulate emotional processes, such as anger or sadness, e.g.  feeling unable to control one’s emotions at work.
3. Cognitive impairment: reduced functional capacity to regulate cognitive processes adequately, such as memory or attention. 
4. Mental distance: mental withdrawal and psychological detachment from the job.

These four core dimensions are accompanied by three secondary dimensions. They are considered as secondary because they are not unique for burnout, but also appear in other physical and mental disorders.
5. Depressed mood: a common, temporary reaction to disappointment or loss.
6. Psychological distress symptoms: e.g. sleep problems, worrying, and feeling tense or anxious.
7. Psychosomatic complaints: physical complaints that are caused, or exacerbated, by psychological factors9.

Assessment of burnout

Burnout can be assessed by the utilisation of validated self-report questionnaires. The most widely used instrument is the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI), which is targeted for human service professionals. The MBI consists of 22 items. Its general version, the Maslach Burnout Inventory – General Survey[11], comprises of 16 items and can be used in a variety of workplaces. Other burnout measures include, for example, the Oldenburg Burnout Inventory[4], the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory[5], the Shirom-Melamed Burnout Measure (SMBM)[12]and the Burnout Assessment Tool (BAT)[9].

There are no universal guidelines on how to assess burnout syndrome on the basis of the scores on the sub scales of exhaustion, cynicism, and diminished professional efficacy. In addition, the cut-off points to define when an employee suffers from burnout are lacking although efforts are made to define such measurement scores in order to diagnose for discriminating between employees with and without burnout[13].

Prevalence and cost of burnout

Due to the lack of consensus on a universal definition of burnout and the assessment criteria, the prevalence estimates for burnout are not comparable across countries and studies. In addition, it is probable that the prevalence of burnout fluctuates with work-life balance and the economy in general. A report from Eurofound on burnout in the workplace (2018)[14] gives an overview of several major cross-sectoral representative studies in the EU. The general conclusion remains that it is not possible to present a clear overview of burnout prevalence, as the findings of the different studies are not comparable. Different variations of burnout are reported and severe forms of burnout are not common: only 2% of men and 3% of women reported symptoms of severe burnout in a study based on a survey in Finland. Other, more moderate forms of burnout were reported by between 15% and 25% of respondents in the different surveys[14].

There is no detailed information on the costs of burnout. Based on studies of its individual and organisational consequences (i.e., performance deficits, health problems, and work disability), burnout can be indirectly linked to economic losses. The yearly cost of work stress, an antecedent of burnout, was estimated to be €1,768 per worker in the Netherlands. This amount was attributable to prevention and work-related illnesses. In the United Kingdom, 10 million working days were lost due to anxiety, depression, and stress caused by work. Additionally, stress-related illnesses cost France between € 830 and €1,656[15]. In the U.S. labour force, workers who experienced context-free fatigue, which resembles the exhaustion dimension of burnout, experienced a loss in work time due to ill health. The cost of this was estimated at $136 billion annually, an excess of $101 billion compared to workers without fatigue[16].

Risk factors and antecedents of burnout

Theoretical models on burnout

Table 1: Factors in theoretical models explaining burnout

Table 1: Factors in theoretical models explaining burnout


Several theoretical viewpoints on the origins of burnout have been presented. These range from individual and interpersonal level explanations to organisational and societal level approaches[3]. Examples of the explaining factors in the different levels are given in Table 1[3]. Many of the models share a basic assumption, that there is some form of chronic discrepancy between the expectations of a motivated employee, on one hand, and the reality of the unfavourable work conditions, on the other. This discrepancy progresses towards burnout via dysfunctional ways of coping. These elements, the discrepancy, its personal meaning, and coping, are also basic elements of the traditional stress theory. They highlight the development of stress as a result of the interaction between the individual and his or her environment.

Work factors and burnout

With regard to unfavourable work conditions, it has been suggested that, occupational burnout can result from a combination of high demands and low resources at work[17]. Job demands refer to the physical, psychological, social, and organisational aspects of the work that require sustained effort. Excessive job demands and sustained effort over a prolonged period of time have been found to be associated with physiological and psychological costs for the individual. Job resources refer to those beneficial aspects of the job that help individuals achieve work goals, reduce the associated costs, and to stimulate learning and professional development. According to longitudinal studies, the psychosocial work characteristics which typically precede burnout are high quantitative and qualitative workload, emotional labour, role conflict and ambiguity, low predictability, experienced unfairness, and lack of participation and social support[3] [18][19][20]. Adverse social behaviour in the workplace such as verbal abuse, threats, harassment and violence is also a risk factor for burnout. Individuals who experience adverse social behaviour in the workplace are around three times more likely to experience physical and emotional burnout and emotional exhaustion[21]

Other environmental factors and burnout

The importance of environmental influence in the development of burnout has also been supported in studies among twins and their siblings[22]. Common environmental factors explained 22% of the burnout scores. On the other hand, similar genetic factors between identical twins did not seem to be of importance for their burnout scores. In addition, a significant correlation of burnout between spouses supported the conclusion that a common environment does play a role in the development of burnout.

Individual factors and burnout

The vulnerability to burnout may also emerge from individual differences. The dimensions of the five-factor model of personality have been found to be associated with burnout[23]. This model describes salient aspects of individual's personality according to the traits of neuroticism, extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, and openness. Workers who show higher scores in neuroticism and lower scores in extraversion, agreeableness, and conscientiousness have been reported to be more prone to experience burnout. In addition, alexithymia (i.e., individual difficulty in identifying and describing feelings) and a low sense of coherence (sense of coherence, according to Antonovsky’s concept (1979), describes an individual characteristic to perceive the world as understandable, meaningful, and manageable[24][19]) have been found to be associated with burnout[25][26]. The individual's degree of involvement seems to be important as well. In particular, excessive involvement has been suggested as a significant trigger, especially when attaining goals becomes unattainable. The expectations employees hold about their work are connected to the degree of burnout. Higher expectations and more ambitious goal-setting result in increased efforts, subsequently leading to elevated levels of emotional exhaustion and depersonalization. This misalignment between expectations and actual outcomes can give rise to frustration and burnout among workers[20].

Rather than causing burnout directly, it has been proposed that individual factors interact with situational factors resulting in either acceleration or a buffer against the development of burnout[3].

Socio-demographic factors and burnout

With regard to socio-demographic factors, burnout has been claimed to be more frequent among women than men[27]. With regard to age, research results are not conclusive. In some population-based studies, the level of burnout has been noted to increase with age[28][29] while other studies have found just the opposite, i.e. people will experience lower levels of burnout as their age increases[20] [3]. However, detailed analyses of samples which represent different jobs and sectors nationwide revealed that age was differentially related to burnout in separate age groups of men and women[30]. The level of burnout increased with age among middle-aged men and older women and decreased with age among younger women. There is no clear consensus about the association of burnout with education, occupational grade, and marital status[28][29].

Consequences of burnout

Burnout and work performance

According to a summary based on several studies[23], severe burnout is moderately related to low rated work performance. Interestingly, the relationship between burnout and work performance was consistently stronger when performance was rated by others, rather than by the employee in question. This indicates that those who suffer from burnout may not be fully aware of the extent to which burnout affects their work behaviour. In addition, the association of burnout with performance related to general contextual activities at work, which may be discretionary, was stronger than the association between burnout and performance related to the main task-related duties. This indicates that employees with burnout try to the bitter end to maintain focus on taking care of their core tasks.

Burnout and cognition

Burnout has been associated with cognitive malfunctioning and deficits, in particular, a decline in three main cognitive functions: executive functions, attention and memory. The decline is a result of cognitive exhaustion[10]. Patients diagnosed with clinical burnout report experiencing cognitive problems with significant impact on daily functioning, which may last for several years after treatment despite clinical improvement. Results from a systematic review study showed that clinical burnout is associated with broad impairment across several cognitive domains, i.e. episodic memory, short-term and working memory, executive function, attention and processing speed, and fluency, with effect sizes ranging from small to medium[31].

Burnout and health

Burnout has also been found to be related to mental disorders. In a population-based sample[28], 45% of employees with severe burnout fulfilled the criteria for a depressive disorder, 21% for an anxiety disorder, and 10% for alcohol dependence. In a longitudinal design monitoring dentists, burnout predicted depressive symptoms during a three-year-follow-up[32]. Burnout has also predicted new cases of insomnia during an 18-month follow-up of employed adults[33].

Burnout also has a relationship with physical illnesses[34]. In a population-based Finnish sample[28], 47% of employees with severe burnout suffered a musculoskeletal disorder and 28% had a cardiovascular disease. After adjustments, musculoskeletal disorders were related to burnout among women, while cardiovascular diseases were related to burnout among men. In longitudinal designs, burnout has predicted type 2 diabetes[35] as well as gastroenteritis and common colds[36]. These findings have been confirmed in several other studies showing that burnout is associated with several physical health problems. But the way these symptoms manifest themselves is not the same in everyone, and they do not all have to occur[20].

Only 10% of employed adults who experienced weekly symptoms of burnout were healthy (i.e., free from a physical illness or common mental disorder)[28]. Consequently, there seems to be a major overlap between a severe-level of burnout and ill health. Burnout may also lead to critical health problems. In a sample of pulp and paper industry workers, burnout predicted hospitalisation due to mental disorders and cardiovascular diseases during a 10-year follow-up[37]. In addition, burnout predicted early death among pulp and paper industry workers younger than 45 years of age at the beginning of the study[38]. During the 10-year follow-up period, the level of burnout was positively related to the risk of all-cause mortality among younger workers, but not among those over 45 years of age at the beginning of the study.

The mechanism affecting the association between work stress and health problems can be direct (i.e., stress predisposes individuals to illness, or accelerates the disease process in its subclinical phase), indirect (i.e., stress increases individuals' unfavourable health behaviour), or even reversed (i.e., coping with illness further increases stress). Since it seems to reflect the accumulated exposure to work stress, burnout may be a phase in the process between adverse psychosocial work environment and ill health. However, it is equally possible that the early phases of illness reduce the possibility of reaching one's goals at work, eventually leading to burnout. In the three years' longitudinal study of dentists, a reciprocal relationship was established between burnout and depression[32]. Burnout predisposed individuals to depression and depression predisposed individuals to burnout. However, the relationship between job strain and depression was fully mediated by burnout, while the relationship between job strain and burnout was only partially mediated by depression.

Burnout and work ability

Both temporary work disability (indicated by sickness absence) and chronic work disability (indicated by disability pension) may follow burnout. Burnout has been shown to predict sickness absences. A higher level of burnout was related to a greater number of medically certified absence spells during a three-year follow-up in a multi-national pulp and paper industry organisation[39]. Additionally, burnout was related to longer company-registered absence duration during a one-year follow-up in a nutrition production organisation[40]. In the former study, burnout increased future absences, which were granted for mental disorders and diseases of the musculoskeletal and circulatory systems. A significant association has also been found between a high level of burnout and self-certified sickness absence during a three-year follow-up period among human service workers[41].

In a Finnish population level study, burnout was associated with medically certified sickness absence independent of prevalent mental disorders and physical illnesses. The duration of absence over two years was an excess of 55 sickness absence days in men, and 41 days in women[28]. German data on burnout and sick leave provided by one of the statutory health insurers, BKK, shows that on average burnout accounted for 70 sick days per 1,000 members in 2021. Sick leave due to burnout is higher among women (111 days per 1,000 members) compared to men (70 days). The increase in the number of days has increased sharply during the last few decades. By comparison, in 2004, the number of sick leave days due to burnout per 1,000 members was 4.6[42].

Burnout also predicted chronic work disability over four years in the Finnish population-based sample[43]. This association was independent of the employees' health status at the beginning of the study. The disability pension granted to those with burnout was most often awarded on the basis of mental and behavioural disorders, and diseases of the musculoskeletal system in this Finnish sample.

Managing and preventing burnout

Various interventions to tackle burnout (presented in Table 2[3]) may be grouped according to either their purpose (i.e., ranging from the recognition and prevention of burnout to its treatment and rehabilitation) or their focus (i.e., the individual, the organisation, or the interface between the individual and the organisation)[3]. This summary of interventions is similar to the interventions that are widely used for managing work-related stress. Primary prevention is aimed at all employees, while secondary prevention is aimed at those known or identified to be at risk for burnout. Individually focussed interventions aim at strengthening the individual's resources by providing better coping skills, while organisation-focussed interventions aim at changing the situation at work. Those interventions, which focus on the individual-organisational interface, concentrate on tackling the interrelationship between the employee and his or her work situation.

Supervisor support and leadership are recognised as critical work resources that can effectively mitigate employee burnout. Several studies have demonstrated that authentic, transformational, and servant leadership styles are associated with reduced burnout and have beneficial effects on employees' psychological well-being. Therefore, it is important to develop and provide training in these leadership styles to prevent burnout. Moreover, it is advisable to regularly assess the performance of leaders, with a particular focus on their leadership behaviours, through feedback from their team members. This ensures the identification of any potentially negative aspects that could contribute to burnout[20].

Table 2: Summary of burnout interventions

Table 2: Summary of burnout interventions

The approaches to alleviating burnout deal with the same issues as those measures aimed at its prevention[3]. In guidelines for occupational health practitioners, treatment suggestions for stress-related conditions have included a change or a reorganisation of the work situation, in combination with rehabilitation and retraining, psychotherapy and other forms of counselling, as well as pharmacological treatment depending on the type and severity of the symptoms[44]. It is noteworthy that mere individually focused help is not considered sufficient. A change in the working conditions, where burnout had developed, was also included in the successful process of recovery from burnout discovered in a qualitative study of 20 employees who had suffered from severe burnout[45].

This recovery process included six phases as follows:

  • admitting the problem,
  • distancing from work,
  • restoring health (both tension reduction and enjoyment),
  • questioning values (both giving up the old and obtaining new ones),
  • exploring work possibilities, and
  • effecting a change.


The phase number four, questioning values, was described as being the most difficult while phase five, exploring work possibilities, lasted the longest.

Work-focused burnout workshops, in which employees discuss their work conditions in a group and together plan ways to resolve work-related challenges or to develop their work, have proven to be efficient ways for reducing burnout[46]. During a rehabilitation process, those clients who benefited most in terms of a reduction in their burnout scores experienced an increase in their job resources and a decrease in their job demands[47]. Participatory programs, which included co-operation with workplace representatives, were especially helpful for white-collar women[48]. With the help of such programs, employees gained a sense of increased control in their jobs.


[1] Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B. & Leiter, M. P., Job Burnout, Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 52, 2001, pp. 397-422.

[2] WHO – World Health Organisation. International Classification of Diseases (ICD 11). QD85 Burnout. Available at: 

[3] Schaufeli, W. & Enzmann, D., The Burnout Companion to Study and Practice: A Critical Analysis, London: Taylor & Francis, 1998.

[4] Halbesleben, J. R. B. & Demerouti, E., The construct validity of an alternative measure of burnout: investigating the English translation of the Oldenburg Burnout Inventory, Work & Stress, Vol.19, 2005, pp. 208-220.

[5] Kristensen, T. S., Borritz, M., Villadsen, E. & Christensen, K. B., The Copenhagen Burnout Inventory: a new tool for the assessment of burnout, Work & Stress, Vol. 19, 2005, pp. 192-207.

[6] Shirom, A., Reflections on the study of burnout, Work & Stress, Vol. 19, 2005, pp. 263-270

[7] Canu, I. G., Marca, S. C., Dell’Oro, F., Balázs, Á., Bergamaschi, E., Besse, C., ... & Wahlen, A. Harmonized definition of occupational burnout: A systematic review, semantic analysis, and Delphi consensus in 29 countries. Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health, 2021, 47(2), 95.

[8] Schaufeli, W. The burnout enigma solved?. Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health, 2020, 47(3), 169.

[9] Schaufeli, W. B., Desart, S., & De Witte, H. Burnout Assessment Tool (BAT)—development, validity, and reliability. International journal of environmental research and public health, 2020, 17(24), 9495.

[10] Desart, S., & De Witte, H. Burnout 2.0—A New Look at the Conceptualization of Burnout. The Fun and Frustration of Modern Working Life. Contributions from an Occupational Health Psychology Perspective, 2019, 140-152.

[11] Maslach, C., Leiter, M. P. & Schaufeli W.‚ Measuring burnout. In C. L. Cooper & S. Cartwright (Eds.) The Oxford handbook of organizational well-being. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2008.

[12] Shirom, A., & Melamed, S. A comparison of the construct validity of two burnout measures in two groups of professionals. International journal of stress management, 2006, 13(2), 176.

[13] Schaufeli, W. B., De Witte, H., Hakanen, J. J., Kaltiainen, J., & Kok, R. How to assess severe burnout?: Cutoff points for the Burnout Assessment Tool (BAT) based on three European samples. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 2023, 49(4), 293-302.

[14] Eurofound. Burnout in the workplace: A review of data and policy responses in the EU. Report, 2018. Available at: 

[15] EU-OSHA – European Agency for Safety and Health at Work. OSH in figures: stress at work - facts and figures. Report, 2009. Available at: 

[16] Ricci, J. A., Chee, E., Lorandeau, A. L. & Berger, J., Fatigue in the U.S. workforce: Prevalence and implications for lost productive work time, Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Vol. 49, 2007, pp. 1-10.

[17] Schaufeli, W. B. & Bakker, A. B., Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: a multi-sample study, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 25, 2004, pp. 293-315.

[18] Borritz, M., Bültmann, U., Rugulies, R., Christensen, K.B., Villadsen, E. & Kristensen, T., Psychosocial work characteristics as predictors for burnout: findings from 3-year follow up of the PUMA study, Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Vol. 47, 2005, pp. 1015-1025.

[19] Maslach, C. & Leiter, M. P., Early predictors of job burnout and engagement, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 93, 2008, pp. 498-512.

[20] Edú-Valsania, S., Laguía, A., & Moriano, J. A. Burnout: A review of theory and measurement. International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022, 19(3), 1780.

[21] Eurofound. Violence in the workplace: Women and frontline workers face higher risks. 27 February 2023. Available at: 

[22] Middeldorp, C. M., Stubbe, J. H., Cath, D. C. & Boomsma, D. I., Familial clustering in burnout: a twin-family study, Psychological Medicine, Vol. 35, 2005, pp. 113-120.

[23] Swider, B. W. & Zimmerman, R. D., Born to burnout: A meta-analytis path model of personality, job burnout, and work outcomes, Journal of Vocational Behavior, vol. 76, 2010, pp. 487-506.

[24] Antonovsky, A. Health, stress and coping. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1979.

[25] Kalimo, R., Pahkin, K., Mutanen, P. & Toppinen-Tanner, S., Staying well or burning out at work: work characteristics and personal resources as long-term predictors, Work & Stress, Vol. 17, 2003, pp.109-122.

[26] Mattila, A., Ahola, K., Honkonen, T., Salminen, J. K., Huhtala, H. & Joukamaa, M., Alexithymia and occupational burnout are strongly associated in working population, Journal of Psychosomatic Research, Vol. 62, 2007, pp. 657-665.

[27] Lindblom, K. M., Linton, S. J., Fedeli, C. & Bryngelsson, I.-L., Burnout in the working population: relations to psychosocial work factors, International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, Vol. 13, 2006, pp. 51-59.

[28] Ahola, K., Occupational burnout and health, People and Work Research, Report 81, Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Helsinki, 2007.

[29] Lindblom, K. M., Linton, S. J., Fedeli, C. & Bryngelsson, I.-L., Burnout in the working population: relations to psychosocial work factors, International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, Vol. 13, 2006, pp. 51-59.

[30] Ahola, K., Honkonen, T., Virtanen, M., Aromaa, A. & Lönnqvist, J., Burnout in relation to age in adult working population, Journal of Occupational Health, Vol. 50, 2008, pp. 362-365.

[31] Gavelin, H. M., Domellöf, M. E., Åström, E., Nelson, A., Launder, N. H., Neely, A. S., & Lampit, A. Cognitive function in clinical burnout: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Work & Stress, 36(1), 2022, 86-104.

[32] Ahola, K. & Hakanen, J., Job strain, burnout, and depressive symptoms: A prospective study among dentists, Journal of Affective Disorders, Vol. 104, 2007, pp. 103-110.

[33] Armon, G., Shirom, A., Shapira, I. & Melamed, S., On the nature of burnout-insomnia relationships: A prospective study among employed adults, Journal of Psychosomatic Research, Vol. 65, 2008, pp. 5-12.

[34] Shirom, A., Melamed, S., Toker, S., Berliner, S. & Shapira, I. Burnout and health review: current knowledge and future research directions, In G. Hodgkinson & F. Ford (Eds.) International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, 2005, pp. 269-308.

[35] Melamed, S., Shirom, A., Toker, S. & Shapira, I. Burnout and risk of type 2 diabetes: a prospective study of apparently healthy employed persons, Psychosomatic Medicine, Vol. 68, 2006, pp. 863-869.

[36] Mohren, D. C. Swaen, G. M., Kant, I. J., van Amelsvoort, L. G., Borm, P. J. & Galama, J. M., Common infections and the role of burnout in a Dutch working population, Journal of Psychosomatic Research, Vol. 55, 2003, pp. 201-208.

[37] Toppinen-Tanner, S., Ahola, K., Koskinen, A. & Väänänen, A., Burnout predicts hospitalization for mental and cardiovascular disorders: 10-year prospective results from industrial sector, Stress and Health, Vol. 25, 2009, pp. 287-296.

[38] Ahola, K., Koskinen, A., Kouvonen, A., Shirom, A. & Väänänen, A., Burnout as a predictor of mortality among industrial employees: ten-year prospective register-linkage study, Journal of Psychosomatic Research, Vol. 69, 2010, pp. 51-57.

[39] Toppinen-Tanner, S., Ojajärvi, A., Väänänen, A., Kalimo, R. & Jäppinen, P., Burnout as a predictor of medically certified sick-leave absences and their diagnosed causes, Behavioral Medicine, Vol. 31, 2005, pp. 18-27.

[40] Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., de Boer, E. & Schaufeli, W. B., Job demands and job resources as predictors of absence duration and frequency, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 62, 2003, pp. 341-356.

[41] Borritz, M., Rugulies, R., Christensen, K. B., Villadsen, E. & Kristensen, T., Burnout as a predictor of self-reported sickness absence among human service workers: prospective findings from three year follow up of the PUMA study, Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Vol. 63, 2006, pp. 98-106.

[42] Statista. Krankheitstage durch das Burn-out-Syndrom in Deutschland nach Geschlecht in den Jahren 2004 bis 2021. Available at: 

[43] Ahola, K., Gould, R., Virtanen, M., Honkonen, T., Aromaa, A. & Lönnqvist, J., Occupational burnout as a predictor of disability pension: a population-based cohort study, Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Vol. 66, 2009, pp. 284-290.

[44] Glass, L. S., Blais, B. R., Genovese, E., Goertz, M. N., Harris, J. S., Hoffman, H. E., Klees, J. E. & Rowlett, C. D., Occupational Medicine Practice Guidelines. Evaluation and Management of Common Health Problems and Functional Recovery of Workers, 2. Ed. Beverly Farms, OEM Press, 2004.

[45] Bernier, D., A study of coping: successful recovery from severe burnout and other reactions to severe work-related stress, Work & Stress, Vol. 12, 1998, pp. 50-65

[46] Le Blanc, P. & Schaufeli, W. B., Burnout interventions: An overview and illustrations. In J. R. B. Halbesleben (Ed.) Handbook of Stress and Burnout in Health Care, Happauge: Nova Science Publishers, 2008.

[47] Hätinen, M., Kinnunen, U., Mäkikangas, A., Kalimo, R., Tolvanen, A. & Pekkonen, M., Burnout during a long-term rehabilitation: comparing low burnout, high burnout – benefited, and high burnout – not benefited trajectories, Anxiety Stress Coping, 22, 2009, pp. 341-360.

[48] Hätinen, M., Treating Job Burnout in Employee Rehabilitation Changes in Symptoms, Antecedents, and Consequences. University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, 2008.

Further reading

EU-OSHA - European Agency for Safety and Health at Work, E-guide to managing stress and psychosocial risks. Available at: 

EU-OSHA - European Agency for Safety and Health at Work, Healthy workers, thriving companies - a practical guide to wellbeing at work, 2018. Available at: 

Eurofound. Burnout in the workplace: A review of data and policy responses in the EU. Report, 2018. Available at: 

Select theme

Klaus Kuhl

Kirsi Ahola

Karla Van den Broek

Prevent, Belgium