OBJECTIVE: To investigate the current status and characteristics of work-related fatigue among scientific and technical personnel and its associated factors, and to provide a scientific basis for further interventions. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted in the staff from a single scientific institution, using a self-administered questionnaire. Basic information of participants, Fatigue Scale-14, and Job Content Questionnaire were collected. RESULTS: The prevalence of work-related fatigue among the scientific and technical personnel was 54.6%; work-related fatigue was positively correlated with occupational stress (rs = 0.384, P < 0.05). Significant differences in the scores, proportions, and types of fatigue were found between different types of occupational stress. The associated factors of work-related fatigue included occupational stress profiles, social support, and educational status. A higher risk of work-related fatigue was found in the staff under high stress, compared with those under low stress (OR = 8.5, 95%CI = 3.9∼18.7). Social support served as a protective factor for work-related fatigue, while a higher level of education was correlated with more severe work-related fatigue. CONCLUSION: Work-related fatigue is common and serious among scientific and technical personnel, especially in those under high stress. Effective interventions according to occupational stress are of great importance to reduce work-related fatigue.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the current status and characteristics of work-related fatigue among scientific and technical personnel and its associated factors, and to provide a scientific basis for further interventions. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted in the staff from a single scientific institution, using a self-administered questionnaire. Basic information of participants, Fatigue Scale-14, and Job Content Questionnaire were collected. RESULTS: The prevalence of work-related fatigue among the scientific and technical personnel was 54.6%; work-related fatigue was positively correlated with occupational stress (rs = 0.384, P < 0.05). Significant differences in the scores, proportions, and types of fatigue were found between different types of occupational stress. The associated factors of work-related fatigue included occupational stress profiles, social support, and educational status. A higher risk of work-related fatigue was found in the staff under high stress, compared with those under low stress (OR = 8.5, 95%CI = 3.9∼18.7). Social support served as a protective factor for work-related fatigue, while a higher level of education was correlated with more severe work-related fatigue. CONCLUSION: Work-related fatigue is common and serious among scientific and technical personnel, especially in those under high stress. Effective interventions according to occupational stress are of great importance to reduce work-related fatigue.