Cited by 67Mindfulness and Compassion InterventionsStress and Burnout ResearchHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnout

Effectiveness of Mindfulness Intervention in Reducing Stress and Burnout for Mental Health Professionals in Singapore

Open access
Suyi, Yang, Meredith, Pamela, Khan, Asaduzzaman·2017·EXPLORE

Abstract

Introduction Stress and burnout have been shown to be a concern among mental health professionals in several countries including Singapore, and can affect quality of care and staff turnover. The aim of this study was to examine the effectiveness of a mindfulness program in increasing mindfulness and compassion, and reducing stress and burnout, among mental health professionals in Singapore.Methods The study utilized data from a prospective pre-post study design with follow-up. A total of 37 mental health professionals participated in the program, which was conducted in three cohorts over nine months. The program consisted of six, two-hour sessions offered once a week over six weeks, and used a range of mindfulness techniques to teach participants to cultivate compassionate and non-judgemental attitudes toward their inner experiences. Data were collected at three stages: pre- and post-intervention, and three months follow-up. Assessments considered mindfulness (five facets mindfulness questionnaire), compassion (self-compassion scale-SF and compassion scale), stress (perceived stress scale-10), and burnout (Oldenburg Burnout inventory).Results Participants demonstrated significant improvement in four of the five mindfulness facets (observe, describe, non-judge, and non-react) and in compassion levels, and a significant reduction in stress, following intervention. The gains in mindfulness and self-compassion scores were maintained at three months follow-up. No change was observed for burnout variables.Conclusion Results suggest that mindfulness training was effective in reducing stress and improving mindfulness and compassion, but not decreasing burnout, for this group of mental health professionals in Singapore. Future experimental research with larger samples is warranted to validate the findings of the present study.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.explore.2017.06.001

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Suyi, Y., Meredith, P., & Khan, A.
Affiliations
The University of Queensland (AU)
Venue
EXPLORE
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-09
Volume
13
Issue
5
Pages
319-326
ISSN
1550-8307 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2728562002
Cited by
67
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 1
FWCI
5.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • EXPLORE (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Acquire (CQUniversity) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Stress and Burnout Research
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
Keywords
mindfulness-based interventions, occupational stress, burnout, mental health professionals, compassion, self-compassion, mindfulness training, compassion-focused therapy
MeSH terms
Adult, Burnout, Professional, Empathy, Female, Health Personnel, Humans, Male, Mental Health Services, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies, Singapore, Stress, Psychological, Meditation, Mindfulness

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review