Prevalence of burnout in health professionals working in palliative care: a systematic review Vitor Parola 1,2,5  Adriana Coelho 1,2,5  Daniela Cardoso 2,5  Anna Sandgren 3,4  Joa ˜o Apo ´ stolo 2,5 1 Institute of Biomedical Sciences Abel Salazar: University of Porto, Porto, Portugal, 2 Health Sciences Research Unit: Nursing, Nursing School of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal, 3 Center for Collaborative Palliative Care, Linnaeus University, Va ¨xjo ¨, Sweden, 4 Department of Health and Caring Sciences, Linnaeus University, Va ¨xjo ¨, Sweden, and 5 Portugal Centre for Evidence-Based Practice: a Joanna Briggs Institute Centre of Excellence, Coimbra, Portugal EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Background More than ever, the current increasing need for palliative care leads to health professionals providing this type of care which further leads to multiple challenges, and stressful and demanding situations. The multiple challenges of working in palliative care put health professionals working in this context at the risk of burnout. Objectives To examine the evidence on the prevalence of burnout among health professionals working in palliative care. Inclusion criteria Types of participants The current review included studies that encompass qualified health professionals working in palliative care, caring for patients 18 years of age or older. Condition The current review considered studies reporting on the point prevalence of burnout, measured by a burnout scale, such as, but not limited to, the Maslach Burnout Inventory, Burnout Measure and Copenhagen Burnout Inventory. Context The current review considered studies conducted in the context of specialist palliative care, more specifically, palliative care units, specialized palliative home care or hospices. Types of studies The current review considered observational study designs, including prospective and retrospective cohort, case- control and cross-sectional studies. Search strategy An initial search of MEDLINE (via PubMed) and CINAHL was undertaken, followed by a second search for published and unpublished studies since 1975 in major healthcare-related electronic databases. Studies written in English, Spanish and Portuguese were included. Methodological quality Two independent reviewers assessed the methodological quality of studies using the standardized critical appraisal instrument from the Joanna Briggs Institute. No studies were excluded from the review based on the methodological appraisal. Data extraction Data were extracted using a data extraction table, taking into account the review questions. Data synthesis Significant differences were found between condition measures, thus we were unable to perform a meta-analysis. Results Eight cross-sectional studies met the inclusion criteria, with a total of 1406 health professionals. The sample was limited to nurses, physicians and social workers. None of the included articles presented data about other health Correspondence: Vitor Parola, vitorparola@esenfc.pt There is no conflict of interest in this project. DOI: 10.11124/JBISRIR-2016-003309 JBI Database of Systematic Reviews and Implementation Reports ß 2017 THE JOANNA BRIGGS INSTITUTE 1905 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW ©2017 Joanna Briggs Institute. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.