Juan Gómez-Salgado1,2, Sara Domínguez-Salas3, Macarena Romero-Martín4, Adolfo Romero5, Valle Coronado-Vázquez6,7, Carlos Ruiz-Frutos1,2. 1. Department of Sociology, Social Work and Public Health. Faculty of Labour Sciences, University of Huelva, Huelva, Spain. 2. Safety and Health Postgraduate Programme, Universidad Espíritu Santo, Guayaquil, Ecuador. 3. Department of Psychology, Universidad Loyola Andalucía, Dos Hermanas, Sevilla, Spain. 4. Centro Universitario de Enfermería Cruz Roja, University of Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain. 5. Nursing and Podiatry Department, Health Sciences School, Instituto de Investigación Biomédica de Málaga (IBIMA), University of Málaga, Málaga, Spain. 6. Department of Nursing, Catholic University of Ávila, Ávila, Spain. 7. Group B21-20R, Health Research Institute of Aragon (IIS), Zaragoza, Spain.
Abstract
AIMS: To describe the level of work engagement of active health care professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic, and its relationship with psychological distress according to the professional category. BACKGROUND: Health care professionals working on the front line of the COVID-19 pandemic are at risk of psychological distress, and work engagement could be a positive attitude that could serve as a protective factor. METHODS: Cross-sectional observational study of 1,459 health care professionals. Psychological distress was measured with the General Health Questionnaire and work engagement with the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale. Data were analysed with bivariate analyses and correlations. RESULTS: Psychological distress was reported by 80.6% of health care professionals. Work engagement as high with a total mean score of 5.04 (SD = 1.14). The results showed that distressed professionals showed significantly lower levels of work engagement. CONCLUSIONS: The present study identified psychological distress and work engagement experienced by health care professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic. Most of the variables included in the study revealed a significant relationship with psychological distress and work engagement. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT: The relationship between the working conditions with psychological distress and work engagement suggests that improvements in the workplace are needed to promote protective measure for the mental health of health care professionals.
AIMS: To describe the level of work engagement of active health care professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic, and its relationship with psychological distress according to the professional category. BACKGROUND: Health care professionals working on the front line of the COVID-19 pandemic are at risk of psychological distress, and work engagement could be a positive attitude that could serve as a protective factor. METHODS: Cross-sectional observational study of 1,459 health care professionals. Psychological distress was measured with the General Health Questionnaire and work engagement with the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale. Data were analysed with bivariate analyses and correlations. RESULTS: Psychological distress was reported by 80.6% of health care professionals. Work engagement as high with a total mean score of 5.04 (SD = 1.14). The results showed that distressed professionals showed significantly lower levels of work engagement. CONCLUSIONS: The present study identified psychological distress and work engagement experienced by health care professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic. Most of the variables included in the study revealed a significant relationship with psychological distress and work engagement. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT: The relationship between the working conditions with psychological distress and work engagement suggests that improvements in the workplace are needed to promote protective measure for the mental health of health care professionals.
Authors: Cristina Morgado-Toscano; Regina Allande-Cussó; Javier Fagundo-Rivera; Juan Jesús García-Iglesias; Jose Antonio Climent-Rodríguez; Yolanda Navarro-Abal; Juan Gómez-Salgado Journal: Risk Manag Healthc Policy Date: 2022-10-14
Authors: Magdalena Dziurka; Michał Machul; Patrycja Ozdoba; Anna Obuchowska; Michał Kotowski; Aleksandra Grzegorczyk; Aleksandra Pydyś; Beata Dobrowolska Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-05-23 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Carlos Ruiz-Frutos; Mónica Ortega-Moreno; Guillermo Soriano-Tarín; Macarena Romero-Martín; Regina Allande-Cussó; Juan Luis Cabanillas-Moruno; Juan Gómez-Salgado Journal: Front Psychol Date: 2021-12-16
Authors: Alice Dunning; Kevin Teoh; James Martin; Johanna Spiers; Marta Buszewicz; Carolyn Chew-Graham; Anna Kathryn Taylor; Anya Gopfert; Maria Van Hove; Louis Appleby; Ruth Riley Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-08-23 Impact factor: 3.006