The Relationships Amongst Pediatric Nurses' Work Environments, Work Attitudes, and Experiences of Burnout
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Pediatric nurses care for some of the most vulnerable patients in our healthcare system. Research on health care provider organizational behavior shows that the quality of care nurses provide is directly related to their well-being, influenced by Burnout and job stress, in the workplace. However, most of the research conducted on nursing populations neglects to separately study nurses who care for children. In a resource limited system where health care provider well-being is recognized as a priority, it is important for administrators to understand the environmental and attitudinal work factors most influential to pediatric nurse work outcomes in order to target optimization strategies. The aim of the study was to identify which modifiable work environment factors, e.g., [Incivility, Perceived Organizational Support, Quality of Work-life] make the greatest contribution to the work outcome of Burnout (i.e., Personal Accomplishment, Emotional Exhaustion, Depersonalization) in pediatric nurses. Methods: A cross-sectional survey design was used at a large quaternary care pediatric hospital in Toronto, Canada. We administered a survey to a convenience sample of all registered nurses with >3 months experience in the Pediatric, Cardiac, and Neonatal Intensive Care Units from January 2021–March 2021. Path analysis was used to test our proposed model which was specified a priori based on a review of the literature. Results: 143 nurses completed the survey. Path analysis of the tested model resulted in good fit. Quality of Work-life had the largest direct effect on Work Engagement (β = 0.582, S.E. = 0.111, p < 0.001). Work Engagement had the largest direct effect on Personal Accomplishment (β = 0.68, S.E. = 0.53, p < 0.001). Quality of Work-life had the largest indirect effect on Personal Accomplishment (β = 0.4, S.E. = 0.65, p < 0.001), Emotional Exhaustion (β = −0.33, S.E. = 0.87, p < 0.001), and Depersonalization (β =−0.17, S.E. = 0.41, p = 0.006), respectively. Work Engagement had the largest total effect on Personal Accomplishment (β = 0.68, S.E. = 0.64, p < 0.001) and the third largest total effect on Emotional Exhaustion (β = −0.57, S.E. = 0.83, p < 0.001). Quality of Work-life had the second largest total effect on Work Engagement (β = 0.58, S.E. = 0.11, p < 0.001) indicating that Quality of Work-life is mediated through Work Engagement for its effect on Burnout. Conclusions: Our results indicate work environment and work attitude factors that can provide organizational leadership with a targeted focus to reduce pediatric critical care nurse Burnout, and thus improve provider well-being, in a resource limited system.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».