Evaluation of the Current State of Burnout Among Clinical Pharmacists

ABSTRACT Background Burnout, recognized by the World Health Organization in the 10th revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD‐10), is characterized by emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and reduced personal accomplishment. Although widely studied in other health care professionals, limited data exist among clinical pharmacists. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic may have uniquely influenced this group. Methods This cross‐sectional survey evaluated burnout among United States clinical pharmacists and clinical pharmacy specialists providing at least 50% direct patient care. Respondents with less than 1 year of post‐training experience or part‐time roles were excluded. The survey, distributed via Vizient and the American Society of Health‐System Pharmacists (ASHP) networks between August 1 and September 19, 2024, included demographic variables and the Maslach Burnout Inventory–Human Services Survey (MBI–HSS) for Medical Personnel. Burnout was defined using established thresholds. Descriptive statistics, chi‐squared tests, and odds ratios (ORs) assessed associations between burnout and demographic or job‐specific factors. Results Among 401 respondents, most were female (77.6%), White (82.8%), and had more than 10 years of experience (65.3%). Overall, 78% met criteria for burnout in at least one dimension; 30% reported high emotional exhaustion, 62% high depersonalization, and 54% low personal accomplishment. Nineteen percent met criteria for all three dimensions. Burnout prevalence was highest in emergency medicine (94%) and lowest in ambulatory care (68%). On‐site work suggested trends of higher burnout, whereas remote roles were protective. Notably, respondents with only a PGY‐1 had an increased burden of burnout (OR: 1.88; p = 0.026). Married individuals without children were more than twice as likely to report burnout (OR: 2.53; p = 0.011). Emergency medicine pharmacists had the highest risk (OR: 4.49; p = 0.027), whereas ambulatory care pharmacists had a reduced risk (OR: 0.53; p = 0.041). Conclusion Burnout is highly prevalent among clinical pharmacists, particularly in high‐acuity settings, with depersonalization as the most common dimension. Although role and work environment influence risk, burnout is widespread across demographics and practice areas, underscoring the need for system‐level strategies. Future research should evaluate the effectiveness of interventions and their impact on workforce retention, collaboration, and patient care.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
JACCP JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CLINICAL PHARMACY
Published
2025-11-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/jac5.70139
Primary Topic
Pharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Evaluation of the Current State of Burnout Among Clinical Pharmacists

Stella Ye, Kristi Quairoli, Robert H. Hollis, Alexandria May et al.
JACCP JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CLINICAL PHARMACY
Pharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
article

Evaluation of the Current State of Burnout Among Clinical Pharmacists

Stella Ye, Kristi Quairoli, Robert H. Hollis, Alexandria May, S. Boyko, Sydney A. Kisala
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT Background Burnout, recognized by the World Health Organization in the 10th revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD‐10), is characterized by emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and reduced personal accomplishment. Although widely studied in other health care professionals, limited data exist among clinical pharmacists. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic may have uniquely influenced this group. Methods This cross‐sectional survey evaluated burnout among United States clinical pharmacists and clinical pharmacy specialists providing at least 50% direct patient care. Respondents with less than 1 year of post‐training experience or part‐time roles were excluded. The survey, distributed via Vizient and the American Society of Health‐System Pharmacists (ASHP) networks between August 1 and September 19, 2024, included demographic variables and the Maslach Burnout Inventory–Human Services Survey (MBI–HSS) for Medical Personnel. Burnout was defined using established thresholds. Descriptive statistics, chi‐squared tests, and odds ratios (ORs) assessed associations between burnout and demographic or job‐specific factors. Results Among 401 respondents, most were female (77.6%), White (82.8%), and had more than 10 years of experience (65.3%). Overall, 78% met criteria for burnout in at least one dimension; 30% reported high emotional exhaustion, 62% high depersonalization, and 54% low personal accomplishment. Nineteen percent met criteria for all three dimensions. Burnout prevalence was highest in emergency medicine (94%) and lowest in ambulatory care (68%). On‐site work suggested trends of higher burnout, whereas remote roles were protective. Notably, respondents with only a PGY‐1 had an increased burden of burnout (OR: 1.88; p = 0.026). Married individuals without children were more than twice as likely to report burnout (OR: 2.53; p = 0.011). Emergency medicine pharmacists had the highest risk (OR: 4.49; p = 0.027), whereas ambulatory care pharmacists had a reduced risk (OR: 0.53; p = 0.041). Conclusion Burnout is highly prevalent among clinical pharmacists, particularly in high‐acuity settings, with depersonalization as the most common dimension. Although role and work environment influence risk, burnout is widespread across demographics and practice areas, underscoring the need for system‐level strategies. Future research should evaluate the effectiveness of interventions and their impact on workforce retention, collaboration, and patient care.

JACCP JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CLINICAL PHARMACYVol. 8(12)
Grady Memorial Hospital (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 61%
Pharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.