Margo M C van Mol1, Marjan D Nijkamp2, Jan Bakker3, Wilmar B Schaufeli4, Erwin J O Kompanje5. 1. Department of Intensive Care Adults, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Electronic address: m.vanmol@erasmusmc.nl. 2. Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Open University of the Netherlands, Heerlen, The Netherlands. Electronic address: marjan.nijkamp@ou.nl. 3. Department of Intensive Care Adults, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Division of Pulmonary, Allergy, and Critical Care, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons/New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA; Department of Pulmonary and Critical Care, Langone Medical Center, New York University, New York, USA; Department of Intensive Care, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile. Electronic address: jan.bakker@erasmusmc.nl. 4. Research Unit Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Professional Learning, KU Leuven, Dekenstraat 2, 3000 Leuven, Belgium; Department of Psychology, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands. Electronic address: wilmar.schaufeli@kuleuven.be. 5. Department of Intensive Care Adults, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Electronic address: e.j.o.kompanje@erasmusmc.nl.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Working in an Intensive Care Unit (ICU) is increasingly complex and is also physically, cognitively and emotionally demanding. Although the negative emotions of work-related stress have been well studied, the opposite perspective of work engagement might also provide valuable insight into how these emotional demands may be countered. This study focused on the work engagement of ICU professionals and explored the complex relationship between work engagement, job demands and advantageous personal resources. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional survey study among ICU professionals in a single-centre university hospital. Work engagement was measured by the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale, which included items about opinions related to the respondent's work environment. Additionally, 14 items based on the Jefferson Scale of Physician Empathy were included to measure empathic ability. A digital link to the questionnaire was sent in October 2015 to a population of 262 ICU nurses and 53 intensivists. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 61% (n=193). Work engagement was negatively related both to cognitive demands among intensivists and to emotional demands among ICU nurses. No significant relationship was found between work engagement and empathic ability; however, agreeableness, conscientiousness, and emotional stability were highly correlated with work engagement. Only the number of hours worked per week remained as a confounding factor, with a negative effect of workload on work engagement after controlling for the effect of weekly working hours. CONCLUSION: Work engagement counterbalances work-related stress reactions. The relatively high workload in ICUs, coupled with an especially heavy emotional burden, may be acknowledged as an integral part of ICU work. This workload does not affect the level of work engagement, which was high for both intensivists and nurses despite the known high job demands. Specific factors that contribute to a healthy and successful work life among ICU professionals need further exploration.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Working in an Intensive Care Unit (ICU) is increasingly complex and is also physically, cognitively and emotionally demanding. Although the negative emotions of work-related stress have been well studied, the opposite perspective of work engagement might also provide valuable insight into how these emotional demands may be countered. This study focused on the work engagement of ICU professionals and explored the complex relationship between work engagement, job demands and advantageous personal resources. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional survey study among ICU professionals in a single-centre university hospital. Work engagement was measured by the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale, which included items about opinions related to the respondent's work environment. Additionally, 14 items based on the Jefferson Scale of Physician Empathy were included to measure empathic ability. A digital link to the questionnaire was sent in October 2015 to a population of 262 ICU nurses and 53 intensivists. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 61% (n=193). Work engagement was negatively related both to cognitive demands among intensivists and to emotional demands among ICU nurses. No significant relationship was found between work engagement and empathic ability; however, agreeableness, conscientiousness, and emotional stability were highly correlated with work engagement. Only the number of hours worked per week remained as a confounding factor, with a negative effect of workload on work engagement after controlling for the effect of weekly working hours. CONCLUSION: Work engagement counterbalances work-related stress reactions. The relatively high workload in ICUs, coupled with an especially heavy emotional burden, may be acknowledged as an integral part of ICU work. This workload does not affect the level of work engagement, which was high for both intensivists and nurses despite the known high job demands. Specific factors that contribute to a healthy and successful work life among ICU professionals need further exploration.
Authors: María Del Carmen Pérez-Fuentes; José Jesús Gázquez Linares; María Del Mar Molero Jurado; María Del Mar Simón Márquez; África Martos Martínez Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2020-01-07 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: África Martos Martínez; María Del Carmen Pérez-Fuentes; María Del Mar Molero Jurado; María Del Mar Simón Márquez; Ana Belén Barragán Martín; José Jesús Gázquez Linares Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-04-13 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Leonieke W Kranenburg; Mathijs R de Veer; Karen M Oude Hengel; Tessa A Kouwenhoven-Pasmooij; Anne Pj de Pagter; Witte Jg Hoogendijk; Jan Jv Busschbach; Margo Mc van Mol Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-02-24 Impact factor: 2.692