L’engagement des soignants dans un exercice coordonné : entre influence sur la qualité de vie et des conditions de travail et risque d’épuisement professionnel

Résumé fourni par la source

INTRODUCTION: In response to healthcare desertification in the Centre-Val de Loire region, healthcare professionals have increasingly engaged in coordinated models of practice. While this involvement represents progress in healthcare organization, it may also lead to an unintended consequence: professional burnout. The objective of this study is to identify the influence of coordinated practice on the mental health, quality of life, and quality of working conditions of healthcare professionals involved in such models. METHODS: Twenty interviews were conducted with healthcare professionals from different specialties and with varying levels of involvement in coordinated practice. RESULTS: Coordinated practice transforms professional practices and representations, while also acting as a framework for learning and mutual recognition. However, it generates a significant mental workload, relational tensions, and a form of exhaustion associated with overcommitment. DISCUSSION: The findings of this study highlight changes in both practices and professional identities among healthcare providers engaged in coordinated practice. While this collective mechanism appears to be a driver for professional recognition and improved quality of working life, it also raises challenges related to burnout, collective expectations, and internal power dynamics. CONCLUSIONS: Coordinated practice represents a lever for improving quality of working life, strengthening the sense of usefulness, and fostering peer recognition. It provides a space for cooperation, skills enhancement, and collective support. Nevertheless, it may also be a source of tension, emotional fatigue, or even professional burnout when implicit expectations, social pressure, or unequal levels of involvement are not adequately balanced.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.