4.4 Article

Stress prevalence and stressors among anaesthesiology and intensive care unit workers: A multicentre survey study

期刊

AUSTRALIAN CRITICAL CARE
卷 31, 期 6, 页码 391-395

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.aucc.2017.11.001

关键词

Occupational stress; ICU; Anesthesiology; Work related stress

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: High stress levels have been commonly reported among ICU workers. Currently, anaesthesiology is safer for the patient but more stressful for the staff working in this branch of medicine. ICU and anaesthesiology personnel are prone to stress because of the specific character of their work. Objectives: Our objectives were to assess stress prevalence among anaesthesiology and ICU workers to compare this stress prevalence in relation to professional groups, sex, job seniority, and type of hospital and describe the importance of major stressors at work. Methods: The ICU and anaesthesiology workers of 15 randomly selected Polish hospitals were surveyed. To assess stress prevalence, the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10) was used. The analysis included 544 surveys. Results: The examined population was divided into two groups. Group N consisted of 406 nurses (74.60%) and group P of 138 physicians (25.40%). The mean result in the PSS-10 scale for the N group was 19.00 and for the P group 17.00. Both group results were related to a 6 sten score, which implied a medium level of stress. In the N group, the PSS-10 results were significantly higher than in the P group. Women showed higher levels of stress than men. Conclusions: Stress levels among ICU and anaesthesiology personnel were of a medium range. Nurses showed significantly higher levels of stress than physicians. Female personnel showed higher levels of stress than male personnel. Age, job seniority and type of hospital did not have an influence on stress levels. The most stressful circumstances for anaesthesiology and ICU personnel included night shifts and duty overload. (c) 2017 Australian College of Critical Care Nurses Ltd. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.4
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