Siew Yim Loh1, Winn Than, Kia Fatt Quek. 1. Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. syloh@um.edu.my
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Chronic pressure at work has debilitating impact on healthcare employers (e.g. reduced productivity, high costs, poor patient care) and on female healthcare employees (e.g. sickness, dysfunction). This paper highlights relationship at work as the key occupational source of work-stress which is organisational in nature. METHODS: A cross-sectional study (n = 230) was conducted using the Pressure Management Inventory on several female dominated health professions within a large public hospital. Analysis of variance was used to show relationship between sources and outcome of pressure. Linear regressions were used to predict which sources of pressure (IV) was linked to the outcomes of occupational pressure (DV). RESULTS: The number one source of occupational pressure is relationships at work (i.e. with supervisors), and not workload. 'Relationship' is also the key predictor of several negative outcomes of pressure at work. Analysis of variance showed significant differences in two sources of pressures, i.e. Workload (P = 0.04) and Home-work balance (P = 0.03). CONCLUSION: This paper provides insights into the occupational pressure of women health professionals by highlighting the organisational sources of pressure and the implications for preventing occupational dysfunction secondary to stress at work.
INTRODUCTION: Chronic pressure at work has debilitating impact on healthcare employers (e.g. reduced productivity, high costs, poor patient care) and on female healthcare employees (e.g. sickness, dysfunction). This paper highlights relationship at work as the key occupational source of work-stress which is organisational in nature. METHODS: A cross-sectional study (n = 230) was conducted using the Pressure Management Inventory on several female dominated health professions within a large public hospital. Analysis of variance was used to show relationship between sources and outcome of pressure. Linear regressions were used to predict which sources of pressure (IV) was linked to the outcomes of occupational pressure (DV). RESULTS: The number one source of occupational pressure is relationships at work (i.e. with supervisors), and not workload. 'Relationship' is also the key predictor of several negative outcomes of pressure at work. Analysis of variance showed significant differences in two sources of pressures, i.e. Workload (P = 0.04) and Home-work balance (P = 0.03). CONCLUSION: This paper provides insights into the occupational pressure of women health professionals by highlighting the organisational sources of pressure and the implications for preventing occupational dysfunction secondary to stress at work.