Magdalena Kwiatosz-Muc1, Anna Fijałkowska-Nestorowicz2, Magdalena Fijałkowska3, Anna Aftyka2, Michał Kowalczyk4. 1. Department of Anaesthesiological and Intensive Care Nursing Medical University of Lublin, Ul. Chodźki 7, 20-093, Lublin, Poland. Electronic address: magdalenakwiatosz@wp.pl. 2. Department of Anaesthesiological and Intensive Care Nursing Medical University of Lublin, Ul. Chodźki 7, 20-093, Lublin, Poland. 3. 2nd Clinic of Anesthesiology and Intensive Therapy Medical University of Lublin, Ul. Staszica 16, 20-081, Lublin, Poland. 4. 1st Clinic of Anesthesiology and Intensive Therapy Medical University of Lublin, Ul. Jaczewskiego 8, 20-093, Lublin, Poland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: High stress levels have been commonly reported among ICU workers. Currently, anaesthesiology is safer for the patient but more stressful for the staff working in this branch of medicine. ICU and anaesthesiology personnel are prone to stress because of the specific character of their work. OBJECTIVES: Our objectives were to assess stress prevalence among anaesthesiology and ICU workers to compare this stress prevalence in relation to professional groups, sex, job seniority, and type of hospital and describe the importance of major stressors at work. METHODS: The ICU and anaesthesiology workers of 15 randomly selected Polish hospitals were surveyed. To assess stress prevalence, the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10) was used. The analysis included 544 surveys. RESULTS: The examined population was divided into two groups. Group N consisted of 406 nurses (74.60%) and group P of 138 physicians (25.40%). The mean result in the PSS-10 scale for the N group was 19.00 and for the P group 17.00. Both group results were related to a 6 sten score, which implied a medium level of stress. In the N group, the PSS-10 results were significantly higher than in the P group. Women showed higher levels of stress than men. CONCLUSIONS: Stress levels among ICU and anaesthesiology personnel were of a medium range. Nurses showed significantly higher levels of stress than physicians. Female personnel showed higher levels of stress than male personnel. Age, job seniority and type of hospital did not have an influence on stress levels. The most stressful circumstances for anaesthesiology and ICU personnel included night shifts and duty overload.
BACKGROUND: High stress levels have been commonly reported among ICU workers. Currently, anaesthesiology is safer for the patient but more stressful for the staff working in this branch of medicine. ICU and anaesthesiology personnel are prone to stress because of the specific character of their work. OBJECTIVES: Our objectives were to assess stress prevalence among anaesthesiology and ICU workers to compare this stress prevalence in relation to professional groups, sex, job seniority, and type of hospital and describe the importance of major stressors at work. METHODS: The ICU and anaesthesiology workers of 15 randomly selected Polish hospitals were surveyed. To assess stress prevalence, the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10) was used. The analysis included 544 surveys. RESULTS: The examined population was divided into two groups. Group N consisted of 406 nurses (74.60%) and group P of 138 physicians (25.40%). The mean result in the PSS-10 scale for the N group was 19.00 and for the P group 17.00. Both group results were related to a 6 sten score, which implied a medium level of stress. In the N group, the PSS-10 results were significantly higher than in the P group. Women showed higher levels of stress than men. CONCLUSIONS:Stress levels among ICU and anaesthesiology personnel were of a medium range. Nurses showed significantly higher levels of stress than physicians. Female personnel showed higher levels of stress than male personnel. Age, job seniority and type of hospital did not have an influence on stress levels. The most stressful circumstances for anaesthesiology and ICU personnel included night shifts and duty overload.
Authors: Sophia Appelbom; Aleksandra Bujacz; Anna Finnes; Karsten Ahlbeck; Filip Bromberg; Johan Holmberg; Liv Larsson; Birgitta Olgren; Michael Wanecek; Dan Wetterborg; Rikard Wicksell Journal: Front Psychiatry Date: 2021-09-03 Impact factor: 5.435
Authors: Sarah K Schäfer; Johanna Lass-Hennemann; Heinrich Groesdonk; Thomas Volk; Hagen Bomberg; Marlene Staginnus; Alexandra H Brückner; Elena Holz; Tanja Michael Journal: Front Psychiatry Date: 2018-09-19 Impact factor: 4.157