4.2 Article

Factors Associated With Job Satisfaction in Medical Oncology Practices Results From a Multisite Survey

期刊

JOURNAL OF NURSING ADMINISTRATION
卷 51, 期 4, 页码 200-205

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/NNA.0000000000000998

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality [R01HS024914]
  2. National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health [P30CA046592]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The majority of clinicians in ambulatory oncology settings reported job satisfaction, but 15% were dissatisfied, mainly due to issues with communication and safety concerns. The study suggests leadership efforts to strengthen clinician communication and develop positive safety cultures are promising strategies to promote clinician well-being and high-quality cancer care.
OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to examine the factors influencing job satisfaction of nurses, physicians, and advanced practice providers in ambulatory oncology settings. BACKGROUND Job satisfaction is essential to clinician well-being and quality of care. METHODS In 2017, clinicians from 29 ambulatory medical oncology practices completed anonymous paper questionnaires that examined job satisfaction, clinician-to-clinician communication, and perceptions of patient safety. Linear regression, adjusted for clustered observations, examined the relationship between job satisfaction, clinician communication, and patient safety perceptions. RESULTS Of 280 respondents (response rate of 68%), 85% reported that they were satisfied or very satisfied with their current position. Patient safety and accuracy of clinician communication were positively and significantly associated with job satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS Although most surveyed clinicians were satisfied, 15% were dissatisfied and reported communication and safety concerns. Leadership efforts to strengthen clinician communication actions and develop positive safety cultures are promising strategies to promote clinician well-being and high-quality cancer care.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据