3.8 Article

Predictors and level of job satisfaction among the dental workforce in national guard health affairs

Publisher

WOLTERS KLUWER MEDKNOW PUBLICATIONS
DOI: 10.4103/jispcd.JISPCD_418_18

Keywords

Dental workforce; job satisfaction; Saudi Arabia

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To assess the level of job satisfaction among the dental workforce in the National Guard Health Affairs (NGHA) in Saudi Arabia and to explore any predictors that have impact on the level of satisfaction. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional study targeted dentists, dental assistants, dental hygienists, and dental lab technicians who are workers for the NGHA. A cluster random sampling procedure was conducted from seven dental centers. Data were collected through a self-reported questionnaire that was previously published. Satisfaction questions were related to (a) professional and personal life, (b) income and job security, (c) quality of service, and (d) prestige and self-perception domains. Data analysis included frequency distributions, and a comparison of mean using t-test was conducted using SPSS software. Results: The response rate was 55.5%. The mean satisfaction score was 65.7 out of 112 (2.9 out of 5). Of the four domains pertaining to job satisfactions, the highest mean score was obtained for quality of service (4.2 out of 5), followed by prestige and self-perception (2.8 out of 5), professional and personal life (2.8 out of 5), and income and job security (2.6 out of 5). Non-Saudis were found to be significantly more satisfied in professional and personal life; however, Saudi dentists were more satisfied for income and job security and quality of services. Conclusions: In general, the dental workforce practicing in NGHA experience a low level of job satisfaction. Professional and personal life, income and job security, and quality of services are all important factors affecting the level of job satisfaction.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available