GENEVA (AFP) - The World Health Organisation has for the first time recognised "burn-out" in its International Classification of Diseases (ICD), which is widely used as a benchmark for diagnosis and health insurers.
The decision, reached during the World Health Assembly in Geneva, which wraps up on Tuesday (May 28), could help put to rest decades of debate among experts over how to define burnout, and whether it should be considered a medical condition.
In the latest update of its catalogue of diseases and injuries around the world, WHO defines burn-out as "a syndrome conceptualised as resulting from chronic workplace stress that has not been successfully managed".
It said the syndrome was characterised by three dimensions: "1) feelings of energy depletion or exhaustion; 2) increased mental distance from one's job, or feelings of negativism or cynicism related to one's job; and 3) reduced professional efficacy."
"Burn-out refers specifically to phenomena in the occupational context and should not be applied to describe experiences in other areas of life," according to the classification.
The updated ICD list, dubbed ICD-11, was drafted last year following recommendations from health experts around the world, and was approved on Saturday.
"This is the first time" burnout has been included in the classification, WHO spokesman Tarik Jasarevic told reporters.
The ICD-11, which is to take effect in January 2022, contains several other additions, including classification of "compulsive sexual behaviour" as a mental disorder, although it stops short of lumping the condition together with addictive behaviours.
It does however for the first time recognise video gaming as an addiction, listing it alongside gambling and drugs like cocaine.
The updated list removes transgenderism from its list of mental disorders meanwhile, listing it instead under the chapter on "conditions related to sexual health".
SkittleTittys on May 27th, 2019 at 17:58 UTC »
I've studied burnout a bit.
Burnout in medicine: Doctors did what doctors do-- They made clinical criteria and identified it as a syndrome. Even has its own ICD code. Z73.0
Moss wrote some interesting things about burnout syndrome.
check out his graphic, Figure 1. Its exemplary.
https://www.atsjournals.org/doi/full/10.1164/rccm.201604-0708ST
things to be concerned about, when considering burnout, besides the obvious:
The assumption that since an individual experiences it, the individual is accountable for its accrual, rather than the organization, or a confluence of systemic factors interplaying with an individual(s).
The cost to patients that comes with burnout. It is accompanied/correlated in literature with compassion fatigue, attrition, perceived lower quality of care delivered, moral distress, etc. and all of these items are associated with increased healthcare costs and lower healthcare outcomes.
research into burnout sometimes studies whether resiliency techniques may reduce burnout. for example, whether mindfulness and/or yoga can mediate the effects of burnout. Resiliency techniques is a term that is new, but we are all conceptually familiar with: Coping skills. Workers are being told that the way to endure clear, horrid trouble within the working systems is to enhance their ability to cope with the systemic problems. That, IMO, is the really concerning aspect. There will very likely be literature published soon that attempts to demonstrate that resiliency techniques ought to be used to reduce burnout. That strikes me like treating sepsis with tylenol--might make you feel better as you die rapidly. In reality, the bug in system ought to be fixed. We need Vanco. The way to get vanco is to start saying ' No. '. This can be done via labor organizations, or political activism, or research, or grass roots unit level leadership.
satan_take_my_soul on May 27th, 2019 at 16:29 UTC »
Oh no...now I have a pre-existing condition
Onlykitten on May 27th, 2019 at 15:45 UTC »
My mother had her masters in nursing and “burnout” was recognized by medical professionals a long time ago - I recall her talking about it in the late ‘70’s and early ‘80’s...what has taken the WHO so damn long?