4.5 Article

The impact of shift work on the psychological and physical health of nurses in a general hospital: a comparison between rotating night shifts and day shifts

期刊

RISK MANAGEMENT AND HEALTHCARE POLICY
卷 9, 期 -, 页码 203-211

出版社

DOVE MEDICAL PRESS LTD
DOI: 10.2147/RMHP.S115326

关键词

shift work; night work; health; sleep disorders; job satisfaction; nurses

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Shift work is considered necessary to ensure continuity of care in hospitals and residential facilities. In particular, the night shift is one of the most frequent reasons for the disruption of circadian rhythms, causing significant alterations of sleep and biological functions that can affect physical and psychological well-being and negatively impact work performance. Objectives: The aim of this study was to highlight if shift work with nights, as compared with day work only, is associated with risk factors predisposing nurses to poorer health conditions and lower job satisfaction. Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted from June 1, 2015 to July 31, 2015 in 17 wards of a general hospital and a residential facility of a northern Italian city. This study involved 213 nurses working in rotating night shifts and 65 in day shifts. The instrument used for data collection was the Standard Shift Work Index, validated in Italian. Data were statistically analyzed. Results: The response rate was 86%. The nurses engaged in rotating night shifts were statistically significantly younger, more frequently single, and had Bachelors and Masters degrees in nursing. They reported the lowest mean score in the items of job satisfaction, quality and quantity of sleep, with more frequent chronic fatigue, psychological, and cardiovascular symptoms in comparison with the day shift workers, in a statistically significant way. Conclusion: Our results suggest that nurses with rotating night schedule need special attention due to the higher risk for both job dissatisfaction and undesirable health effects.

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

4.5
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