This page is a neutral synthesis of existing research on occupational burnout in the United States. It is not a self-help article, guide, or clinical explainer. Data presented here is informational only and does not constitute professional advice of any kind.
Section 1: What Researchers Mean by "Burnout"
Before examining prevalence data, it is essential to clarify how major organizations define burnout. Definitions vary across studies, which affects how statistics should be interpreted.
World Health Organization (ICD-11 Classification)
The World Health Organization includes burnout in the 11th Revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) as an occupational phenomenon. Critically, the WHO explicitly states that burnout is not classified as a medical condition. It appears in the chapter titled "Factors influencing health status or contact with health services," which includes reasons people contact health services that are not classed as illnesses or health conditions.[1]
According to the ICD-11, burnout is defined as "a syndrome conceptualized as resulting from chronic workplace stress that has not been successfully managed." The WHO characterizes burnout along 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.[1]
The WHO emphasizes that "burn-out refers specifically to phenomena in the occupational context and should not be applied to describe experiences in other areas of life."[1] This distinction serves as an ethical anchor for understanding burnout data: it is a workplace-related phenomenon, not a clinical diagnosis.
American Psychological Association
The American Psychological Association characterizes burnout as "physical, emotional, or mental exhaustion accompanied by decreased motivation, lowered performance, and negative attitudes towards oneself and others."[2] The APA notes that burnout is not included in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5), underscoring that it is not classified as a mental disorder in the United States.
Researchers commonly measure burnout using the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI), developed in 1981. This instrument assesses three components: emotional exhaustion, depersonalization (or cynicism), and reduced personal accomplishment (or professional efficacy).[3] Because different studies may use varying instruments, cut-off scores, or abbreviated measures, prevalence estimates can differ substantially. Some studies use only the exhaustion subscale, while others require elevated scores across all three dimensions. This methodological variation is an important consideration when interpreting statistics.
Section 2: Burnout Prevalence in the U.S.
Multiple organizations track workplace stress and burnout-related indicators among U.S. workers. The following statistics derive from large-scale surveys conducted by established research bodies.
Gallup
Gallup's State of the Global Workplace: 2025 Report, based on surveys of nearly a quarter-million workers across 160 nations, found that global employee engagement fell from 23% to 21% in 2024—the lowest level since the COVID-19 pandemic.[4] This decline in engagement is often accompanied by increased stress and burnout-related indicators.
Among employees in the United States and Canada, Gallup reports that 49% of workers experience significant daily stress.[4] Workers under age 35 report higher daily stress (59%) compared to workers aged 35 and older (50%).[5] Women report higher stress levels than men: 54% of female workers report daily stress compared to 45% of male workers.[5]
Manager engagement—a factor Gallup links to team-level burnout—declined from 30% to 27% globally in 2024. Younger managers (under 35) and female managers experienced the largest drops.[4] Gallup estimates that 70% of team engagement variance is attributable to the manager, suggesting that manager burnout and disengagement may have cascading effects on broader workforce well-being.
Pew Research Center
Pew Research Center surveys provide additional context on worker satisfaction and stress. In 2024, 88% of U.S. workers reported being at least somewhat satisfied with their jobs overall, though satisfaction varies substantially by specific job aspects.[44] Only 30% of workers reported being extremely or very satisfied with their pay—a 4-point drop from the previous year. Pay satisfaction ranked among the lowest of job aspects measured.
Among workers ages 65 and older, 67% reported being extremely or very satisfied with their jobs, compared to 43% of workers under 30.[44] Self-employed workers reported higher overall satisfaction (60% extremely or very satisfied) compared to those who are not self-employed (49%).[44] Job satisfaction across seven of nine measured aspects declined between 2023 and 2024, including satisfaction with training opportunities, promotion opportunities, and workplace relationships.
American Psychological Association
The APA's annual Stress in America surveys have tracked workplace stress indicators since 2007. The 2022 Work and Well-being Survey found that 79% of employees had experienced work-related stress in the month prior to the survey. Nearly three in five employees (59%) reported negative impacts from work-related stress, including lack of interest, emotional exhaustion, and physical fatigue.[6]
The APA's 2024 Work in America Survey found that 25% of workers reported emotional exhaustion in the preceding month. Workers who experienced lower psychological safety at work were significantly more likely to report feeling tense or stressed during a typical workday (61%) compared to those experiencing higher psychological safety (27%).[7]
In APA's 2025 Stress in America survey, 69% of adults cited the spread of inaccurate or misleading information as a major source of stress (up from 62% in 2024), and 57% reported stress related to the rise of AI (up from 49%).[8] While these stressors extend beyond workplace boundaries, they represent the broader context within which occupational stress occurs.
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)
NIOSH, part of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, has examined job stress and its health correlates. NIOSH reports that health care expenditures are nearly 50% greater for workers who report high levels of stress.[9] The Occupational Safety and Health Administration, citing NIOSH and other research, reports that 83% of U.S. workers suffer from work-related stress, and 54% report that work stress affects their home life.[10]
In April 2024, NIOSH published a report noting that "work-related psychosocial hazards are on the verge of surpassing many other occupational hazards in terms of their contribution to poor health, injury, disability, and costs."[11] The report emphasized that addressing these hazards requires organizational-level interventions rather than individually-focused approaches alone.
Section 3: Burnout by Profession
Burnout prevalence varies substantially across occupations. Healthcare workers have been particularly studied, though burnout affects workers across many sectors.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
The CDC's Vital Signs report (October 2023) found that in 2022, 46% of health workers reported feeling burned out often or very often, compared to 32% in 2018.[12] The percentage of health workers who reported experiencing harassment more than doubled during this period, from 6% in 2018 to 13% in 2022. Among health workers who experienced harassment, 81% reported feelings of burnout, compared to 42% of those who did not experience harassment.
Trust in management among health workers also declined—in 2022, 78% of health workers agreed or strongly agreed that they trusted management, compared to 84% in 2018. The percentage of health workers who reported that their workplace conditions supported productivity fell from 91% in 2018 to 82% in 2022.[12]
In March 2024, CDC/NIOSH launched the Impact Wellbeing Campaign, the first federal campaign specifically addressing healthcare worker burnout. The campaign released an evidence-informed guide for hospital leaders.[13]
National Institutes of Health / Peer-Reviewed Research
A study published in JAMA Network Open (April 2025), drawing on Veterans Health Administration data from 2018-2023, found that primary care physicians consistently reported the highest burnout among healthcare occupations, ranging from 46.2% in 2018 to 57.6% in 2022.[14] Several occupations saw burnout levels increase by 10% or more between 2018 and 2023, including dentists (from 26.7% to 41.7%), psychologists (from 34.1% to 47.6%), and dietitians (from 26.3% to 38.6%).
The study noted that "burnout rates among nurses were much higher than several of the physician specialties, highlighting the need for tailoring approaches to specific occupations."[14] Many occupations did see a decline in COVID-19-related stress between 2020 and 2023.
American Medical Association
The American Medical Association has tracked physician burnout through periodic surveys. According to AMA data, physician burnout was 43.2% in 2024, down from 48.2% in 2023, 53% in 2022, and 62.8% in 2021.[42] This represents a notable decline from pandemic peak levels, though rates remain elevated compared to pre-pandemic baselines.
Among medical specialties, emergency medicine physicians reported the highest burnout rates (52.2%), followed by family medicine (46.4%) and obstetrics and gynecology (45.8%).[42] Residents reported burnout at 34.5% in 2024.[43] The AMA has noted that burnout varies substantially by practice setting, with academic medical centers and large health systems reporting different patterns than smaller practices.
Research on healthcare worker burnout has identified work overload as a significant predictor. A study of 43,026 healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic found an overall burnout rate of 49.9%, with nurses reporting the highest rates (56.0%), followed by other clinical staff (54.1%), physicians (47.3%), and non-clinical staff (45.6%).[15]
Other Professions
Teachers report elevated burnout rates. Data cited by the American Institute of Stress indicates that 63% of female K-12 teachers reported burnout, with teachers experiencing roughly twice the rate of frequent burnout compared with similar working adults in 2024.[16]
Among pharmacy professionals, the 2023-2024 State of Well-Being Report (based on the Well-Being Index developed by Mayo Clinic) found burnout rates of 62% in 2023, down from 66% in 2022.[17] Attorneys reported burnout at 42% on average, with mid/senior associates at 51%.[18]
Section 4: Gender, Age, and Burnout
Demographic patterns in burnout data reveal differences by gender and age, though causation is complex and cannot be determined from prevalence surveys alone.
Gender Differences
Multiple sources report higher burnout rates among women compared to men. According to Gallup research, 54% of working women report experiencing significant daily stress, compared to 40% of men.[4] The McKinsey Women in the Workplace 2024 report found that 52% of employees reported feeling burned out, with women at 59% and men at 46%.[19]
The State of Workplace Burnout 2024 report indicated that female burnout rates increased by 4 percentage points (from 38% to 42%), while male burnout rates decreased by 3 percentage points (from 33% to 30%).[5] Gallup research found that women are more likely than men to report needing to address personal or family responsibilities during work hours (17% vs. 11%) and job-related responsibilities outside working hours (18% vs. 15%).[20]
Age and Generational Patterns
Younger workers generally report higher rates of burnout and stress. According to Gallup, approximately 68% of Gen Z and younger millennials report feeling burned out frequently, compared to about 40% of baby boomers.[21] Workers under age 35 report daily stress at 59%, compared to 50% among workers 35 and older.[5]
The Interview Guys' 2025 research report noted that Gen Z and millennial workers report peak burnout at 25 years old, 17 years earlier than the average American who experiences peak burnout at 42.[22] Pew Research has found that older workers are less likely to report feeling stressed or overwhelmed at work compared to younger workers, and are more likely to find satisfaction in their work.[23]
However, Pew notes that differences between age groups may reflect life-cycle factors rather than generational characteristics—younger employees may experience lower job satisfaction because they are newer to their industries and have not reached peak earnings.[23]
Section 5: Work Structure & Burnout Trends
Changes in work structure—including the shift to remote and hybrid arrangements, evolving work hours, and organizational demands—provide context for understanding current burnout trends.
Bureau of Labor Statistics
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average workweek for all employees (including part-time) in private industries was approximately 34.5 hours in 2022. Full-time employed people worked an average of 8.1 hours on days they worked in 2024.[24] Labor productivity in the nonfarm business sector increased 2.3% in 2024, with hours worked increasing by 0.6%.[25]
The BLS reports that total nonfarm employment rose by 2.2 million in 2024 (averaging 186,000 monthly gains), less than the 3.0 million increase in 2023.[26] Early 2025 data indicates an average monthly gain of approximately 49,000 jobs.[26] Employment continues to trend upward in health care, food services, and social assistance sectors.
Remote Work and Burnout
The relationship between remote work and burnout is nuanced. Nearly 6 in 10 U.S. workers (59%) currently work entirely in person, 24% are hybrid, and 17% work fully remotely. However, only 38% of workers prefer to work entirely in person, compared to 34% who prefer hybrid and 28% who prefer remote work.[5]
Research from Gallup suggests that employees whose current work arrangement matches their preferred arrangement report higher wellbeing and lower stress.[4] Fully remote employees were somewhat more likely to report high stress on the previous day (45%) compared with on-site workers (39% for remote-capable roles), while hybrid workers reported similar stress levels (46%).[27]
Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health
Research from the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health has examined organizational factors related to burnout. A 2024 study published in the International Journal of Public Health found that psychological safety—defined as the belief that speaking up will not lead to embarrassment, rejection, or punishment—was strongly protective against burnout, even during periods of intense stress and resource constraints.[28]
The study found that increasing psychological safety by one standard deviation was associated with a 0.72-point decrease in burnout scores.[28] Employees who reported higher levels of psychological safety in 2019 were more likely in 2021 to report willingness to stay in their jobs. The protective effect was particularly notable for physicians, women, and people of color.[28]
A 2019 consensus paper from the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, the Harvard Global Health Institute, the Massachusetts Medical Society, and the Massachusetts Health and Hospital Association characterized physician burnout as a "public health crisis" and called for systemic changes including the appointment of chief wellness officers and improvements to electronic health record systems.[29]
Section 6: Texas-Specific Data
Note on data availability: Texas-specific burnout statistics are limited compared to national data. The following information represents what is publicly available from Texas state agencies and related research.
Texas Department of State Health Services
The Texas Department of State Health Services (DSHS) maintains the Health Professions Resource Center, which tracks workforce supply and distribution for licensed health professionals in Texas.[30] According to DSHS data, more than 80% of Texas counties are designated as Mental Health Professional Shortage Areas, defined as having more than 30,000 residents per clinician.
DSHS reports that 23% of Texas psychiatrists in 2023 were over age 65, and estimates that nearly 42% of the Texas psychiatrist workforce will be over 65 within ten years.[31] This aging workforce factor has implications for provider availability and may contribute to workload pressures among remaining practitioners.
Texas Workforce and Healthcare System Data
The Texas Hospital Association reported that in 2023, more than 60% of hospitals were operating with fewer beds and reduced services due to staffing shortages.[32] It is projected that by 2032, demand for full-time registered nurses in Texas will outpace supply by more than 57,000 positions, representing a 16% deficit. The registered nurse vacancy rate increased from 6% in 2019 to 17.6% in 2022.
Texas nursing schools turned away 13,705 qualified applications in 2023 due to inability to accommodate demand, citing a lack of faculty and clinical space.[32] The Texas Hospital Association notes that "burnout, the additional stressors in the hospital workplace during the COVID-19 pandemic, and workplace violence" contribute to workforce challenges.
Texas currently cannot utilize over 700 of its 2,911 funded state psychiatric hospital beds due to workforce shortages, according to Texas Health and Human Services officials.[33] As of December 2022, state hospitals had 5,987 full-time employees, down from 7,409 full-time employees in 2019.
Mental Health Workforce Data
The Texas Behavioral Health Executive Council launched a workforce survey in 2023 to gather data from individuals licensed to practice psychology, marriage and family therapy, professional counseling, and social work in Texas.[34] According to an analysis by Addiction-Rep using federal data, Texas has 40.0 mental health workers per 10,000 residents, ranking among the lowest in the nation (the national average is 58.3 per 10,000).[35]
Major Texas metropolitan areas also show shortages: Dallas reports 36.6 mental health workers per 10,000 residents, and Houston reports 36.9 per 10,000.[35] This limited provider availability may contribute to increased workload and burnout risk among existing practitioners, though direct burnout prevalence data specific to Texas workers is not systematically collected by state agencies.
Section 7: Interpreting Trends Carefully
Burnout statistics require careful interpretation. The following considerations apply to data presented in this document and to burnout research more broadly.
Limitations of Self-Report Data
The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine has noted several limitations in burnout measurement. Current measures of burnout rely primarily on self-report, which creates challenges and may impact findings.[36] Not everyone feels equally safe to report burnout, especially those with intersecting marginalized identities.
A commissioned paper for the National Academies observed that "some studies used a one-item self-report scale as to how much people feel they are burned out, which not only fails to" capture the full three-dimensional construct.[37] The Maslach Burnout Inventory, while widely used, is intended as "a discovery tool to measure burnout in a given situation and not intended as a diagnostic tool for individuals."[38]
Variation in Definitions and Measurement
Prevalence estimates vary partly because of differences in how burnout is defined and measured. A 2023 analysis published in the Bulletin of the World Health Organization noted that when researchers "limited themselves to studies that used the canonical Maslach Burnout Inventory, the study team found 47 distinct definitions of burnout."[39]
The National Academies has stated that "in some research, burnout was conflated with stress, strain, and/or general fatigue. We must maintain the distinction between burnout (as a three-phase syndrome in response to poor organizational environments) and more general strain response."[37]
Contextual Factors
Burnout rates vary by occupation, work setting, organizational culture, and individual circumstances. The National Academies observed that "occupations, work responsibilities, and work settings drive some of the differences in the consequences of burnout."[40] For example, nurses experienced higher burnout and reported more changes in workload during the pandemic than did physicians, and work settings such as emergency medicine and intensive care also affect burnout patterns.
The 2019 National Academies consensus study "Taking Action Against Clinician Burnout" emphasized that "given that burnout is due to work-related stressors, the prevalence of burnout among clinicians would be expected to vary substantially among countries and health care delivery systems."[41] This principle applies more broadly: burnout statistics reflect specific populations, time periods, and organizational contexts.
Sources & Methodology
Source Selection Criteria
Sources for this reference page were selected based on the following criteria: (1) organizational credibility and research rigor; (2) recency of data; (3) methodological transparency; and (4) relevance to U.S. workers. Priority was given to government agencies (CDC, NIOSH, BLS), established research organizations (Gallup, APA, Pew Research Center), peer-reviewed publications, and consensus reports from the National Academies.
Statistics were attributed to their original sources whenever possible. When secondary sources were used, the original source was identified. Efforts were made to present prevalence data alongside information about sample sizes, survey methods, and any stated limitations.
Limitations and Disclaimers
This document is intended for informational purposes only. The data presented does not constitute medical advice, clinical assessment, or professional guidance of any kind. Readers should not use this information for diagnostic purposes or as a substitute for professional consultation.
Burnout statistics are subject to measurement limitations inherent in self-report surveys. Prevalence estimates may vary based on the specific instrument used, cut-off scores applied, timing of data collection, and characteristics of the sample population. Year-over-year comparisons should be interpreted cautiously, as methodological changes may affect apparent trends.
The absence of data for particular groups, occupations, or regions does not imply that burnout is not a concern in those contexts.
Last Updated
January 2026
References
[1] World Health Organization. "Burn-out an 'occupational phenomenon': International Classification of Diseases." May 28, 2019.
[2] American Psychological Association. APA Dictionary of Psychology: Burnout.
[3] Maslach C, Jackson SE, Leiter MP. "Maslach Burnout Inventory." Consulting Psychologists Press, 1996.
[4] Gallup. State of the Global Workplace: 2025 Report.
[5] Gallup. Employee Wellbeing research, 2024 data.
[6] American Psychological Association. "Work and Well-being Survey." 2022.
[7] American Psychological Association. "Work in America 2024: Psychological Safety in the Changing Workplace."
[8] American Psychological Association. "Stress in America 2025: A Crisis of Connection." November 2025.
[9] National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. "STRESS...At Work" (Publication No. 99-101).
[10] Occupational Safety and Health Administration. "Workplace Stress - Overview."
[11] NIOSH. "An Urgent Call to Address Work-related Psychosocial Hazards and Improve Worker Well-being." April 10, 2024.
[12] CDC Vital Signs. "Health Workers Face a Mental Health Crisis." October 2023.
[13] CDC/NIOSH. "Impact Wellbeing Guide: Taking Action to Improve Healthcare Worker Wellbeing." March 2024.
[14] Osborne TF, et al. "Burnout Trends Among US Health Care Workers." JAMA Network Open. April 2025.
[15] Linzer M, et al. "The Association of Work Overload with Burnout and Intent to Leave the Job Across the Healthcare Workforce." Journal of General Internal Medicine. 2023.
[16] American Institute of Stress / Gallup data on teacher burnout, 2024.
[17] Mayo Clinic Well-Being Index. "2023-2024 State of Well-Being Report."
[18] High5Test. "Employee Burnout Statistics in the Workplace." 2025.
[19] McKinsey & Company. "Women in the Workplace 2024."
[20] Gallup. "More Than a Program: A Culture of Women's Wellbeing at Work." December 2024.
[21] American Institute of Stress / Gallup data on generational burnout.
[22] The Interview Guys. "The State of Workplace Burnout in 2025: A Comprehensive Research Report." October 2025.
[23] Pew Research Center. Research on age and work satisfaction, 2024.
[24] Bureau of Labor Statistics. "American Time Use Survey" and Employment data, 2024.
[25] Bureau of Labor Statistics. "Productivity and Costs, 2024."
[26] Bureau of Labor Statistics. "Current Employment Statistics." 2024.
[27] High5Test citing International Journal of Indian Psychology on remote work and stress, 2024.
[28] Kerrissey M, Edmondson A, Bahadurzada H. "Psychological Safety and Burnout." International Journal of Public Health. May 2024.
[29] Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, et al. "A Crisis in Health Care: A Call to Action on Physician Burnout." 2019.
[30] Texas Department of State Health Services. Health Professions Resource Center.
[31] Texas Tribune. "A look at the Texas mental health workforce shortage." July 17, 2024.
[32] Texas Hospital Association. "The Workforce Pipeline." 2024.
[33] Texas Tribune. "Texas' shortage of mental health care professionals is getting worse." February 22, 2023.
[34] Texas Behavioral Health Executive Council. Workforce Survey and Data.
[35] Addiction-Rep analysis of SAMHSA data. "Texas Has the 3rd Biggest Mental Health Workforce Shortage in the U.S." 2025.
[36] National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. "Impact of Burnout on the STEMM Workforce: Proceedings of a Workshop." 2025.
[37] National Academies commissioned paper: "Breaking the Burnout Cycle." 2025.
[38] National Academies. "Understanding Burnout and Challenging Misconceptions." 2025.
[39] Bianchi R, et al. "Examining the evidence base for burnout." Bulletin of the World Health Organization. 2023.
[40] National Academies. "Consequences of Burnout and Measurement Challenges." 2025.
[41] National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. "Taking Action Against Clinician Burnout: A Systems Approach to Professional Well-Being." 2019.
[42] American Medical Association. "National Physician Burnout and Depression Report." 2024.
[43] American Medical Association. "Resident Burnout Survey Data." 2024.
[44] Pew Research Center. "Americans' job satisfaction in 2024." December 2024.