Sofrimento mental de professores do ensino público

  • Tostes M
  • Albuquerque G
  • Silva M
  • et al.
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
111Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

RESUMO Realizou-se estudo transversal do sofrimento mental com 1.021 professores do ensino público do Paraná. Utilizou-se o Self-Report Questionnaire para distúrbios psíquicos menores, os inventários de ansiedade e depressão de Beck, e questionário sociodemográfico e de morbidade autorreferida. Os testes Qui-quadrado, Exato de Fisher e Kruskal-Wallis foram utilizados na análise dos dados obtidos. Foram encontrados distúrbios psíquicos menores em 75%, depressão em 44% e ansiedade em 70% das pessoas observadas no presente estudo, havendo associação significativa (p<0,05) destes sintomas com o sexo feminino, outras doenças, o fato de levarem trabalho para casa e de trabalharem com o ensino fundamental. O sofrimento mental esteve presente em grande parcela da amostra estudada, apresentando relação com as condições de trabalho.ABSTRACT A cross-sectional study of mental suffering was carried out with 1.021 professors of the public education in Paraná. The Self-Report Questionnaire was utilized for minor psychic disorders, Beck's anxiety and depression inventories, and a sociodemographic and self-reported morbidity questionnaire. The Chi-square, Exact of Fischer and the Kruskal-Wallis tests were used in the analysis of the obtained data. Minor psychic disorders were found in 75%, depression in 44% and anxiety in 70% of the people observed in the present study, with a significant association (p<0,05) of this symptoms with the female sex, other illness, the fact of taking work home and working with elementary school. Mental distress was present in a large portion of the sample studied, presenting relation with the working conditions.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Tostes, M. V., Albuquerque, G. S. C. de, Silva, M. J. de S. e, & Petterle, R. R. (2018). Sofrimento mental de professores do ensino público. Saúde Em Debate, 42(116), 87–99. https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-1104201811607

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