4.1 Article

Comparing Jordanian nurses' job stressors in stressful and non-stressful clinical areas

期刊

CONTEMPORARY NURSE
卷 37, 期 2, 页码 173-187

出版社

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.5172/conu.2011.37.2.173

关键词

Jordan; job stressors; nurses; stress; stressors

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aims and objectives: To examine if Jordanian nurses' job stressors are different in various practice areas in hospitals, particularly in stressful or non-stressful clinical areas of work. Background: Nursing is a stressful profession. Nurses' job stressors have been studied in Jordan, but none compared job stressors in different clinical areas. There is a need to identify nurses' job stressors in different clinical areas to better manage them. Methods: A descriptive correlational design was used. Data about job stressors and demographics were collected from a convenience sample of 464 Jordanian nurses working in Jordanian hospitals. Nursing Stress Scale was used to measure nurses' job stressors. Findings: Nurses' job stressors experienced by nurses working in stressful areas were significantly different from those stressors experienced by nurses working in non-stressful areas in five subscales out of seven. Nurses' job stressors in non-stressful areas were best predicted by one variable, 'model of nursing care provision', whereas nurses' job stressors in stressful areas were best predicted by two variables: 'shift worked' and 'level of education'. Conclusions: Providing access to educational programs, not only in clinical areas, but in teamwork, communication, family interactions, and stress management will reduce nurses' job stressors in different clinical areas. Relevance to clinical practice: Knowing different stressors in different clinical areas among Jordanian nurses help nurse managers and hospital administrators to adopt strategies that manage job stressors effectively in different clinical areas of work. Examples of these strategies are scheduling, reduce workload, and improve work environment.

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

4.1
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