Resumen

Background: Shift work is a very common characteristic in healthcare and has been associated with work-related stress. Objective: This study aimed to research about the relationship between current shift work and work-related stress symptoms presented in healthcare workers in a clinical setting in Medellin, Colombia. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted from January to July in 2014. A total of 50.5% of participants performed their work activities in rotating shifts and 49.5% worked only during the day. Most of the professionals who participated in the survey were nurses and administrative staff. Participants completed demographic, occupational and lifestyle questionnaire, and a self-reported work-related stress symptoms instrument. Results: The study sample consisted of 160 (80%) females and 40 (20%) males. The average age was 35.1 ± 9.1. Generally, no significant differences were found in relation to psychological and emotional symptoms of social, intellectual and occupational behavior in shift workers compared to daytime workers. In a stratified analysis, among the nurses and nursing assistants group, those engaging in shift work reported significantly lower/fewer physiological symptoms and higher/more intense psycho emotional symptoms than the daytime workers (p = 0.030 and p = 0.047 respectively). Conclusions: In the stratified analysis, this cross-sectional study found a difference in work-related stress between daytime workers and shift workers in regards to nurses and nursing assistants. It was noticed that nurses and nursing assistants engaging in shift work reported higher psycho emotional and lower physiological stress symptoms compared to their daytime working counterparts. Probably, this corresponds to the numerous job demands during shift working or the different coping mechanisms.

Palabras clave: Workday shifts work-related stress occupational stress allied health workers healthcare nurses.

2018-11-05   |   106 visitas   |   Evalua este artículo 0 valoraciones

Vol. 9 Núm.2. Julio-Diciembre 2016 Pags. 28-39 Rev CES Psicol 2016; 9(2)