Psychosocial factors at work and stress among the nursing staff of a central sterile services department

3Citations
Citations of this article
38Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: The international literature points out an association between stress and psychosocial factors at work (PFW) in different occupational groups. Among health care workers, providing direct patient care might be rewarding or contribute to cause stress, and central sterile services departments (CSSD) provide relevant support to in-hospital care. Objective: To investigate PFW liable to cause stress among the nursing staff of a university hospital CSSD. Methods: Quantitative and qualitative study of a non-probabilistic sample of 63 workers who responded a sociodemographic questionnaire and the Effort-Reward Imbalance (ERI) scale. Fifty-one participants were also subjected to individual interviews, which were recorded, transcribed and subjected to content analysis, resulting in thematic matrices and categories. Results: The sample mainly comprised women (92%) and was aged 45 years old, on average. Effort-reward imbalance was found for 16% of the participants. Working conditions, equipment and materials, relationship among coworkers, and management support were listed as factors related to job satisfaction or dissatisfaction. Lack of peer recognition was described as the main factor associated with dissatisfaction and stress. Conclusion: CSSD workers feel they are stigmatized and underestimated by their coworkers involved in direct patient care and the institution as a whole. Recognition of the work done is fundamental for job satisfaction and health protection and preservation.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Guissi, P. C., Zihlmann Pinho, M. A. S., Vieira, I., Neto, F. R., de Almeida Martins, D., das Dores Bandini, M. C., & de-Lucca, S. R. (2019). Psychosocial factors at work and stress among the nursing staff of a central sterile services department. Revista Brasileira de Medicina Do Trabalho, 17(4), 499–505. https://doi.org/10.5327/Z1679443520190453

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free