Last update:

   03-Aug-2018
 

Arch Hellen Med, 35(4), July-August 2018, 472-480

ORIGINAL PAPER

Measurement of the health related quality of life in health sector personnel

M. Sarris,1 S. Soulis,1 G. Pierrakos,1 A. Goula,1 A. Petrakos,2 V. Gkioka,3 I. Nikolados,1 K. Speis,1 D. Latsou1
1Health and Social Care Management, Athens University of Applied Sciences, Athens,
2Administration,"Evangelismos" General Hospital, Athens,
3Institute of Biomedical Research, Academy of Athens, Athens, Greece

OBJECTIVE To assess the health related quality of life of the health care personnel in a public hospital.

METHOD The study was carried out at "Evangelismos" General Hospital of Athens during the period September 2016 to January 2017. The study sample of 545 comprised 149 doctors, 217 nurses, 134 administrators and 45 paramedical specialists. The data collection tool was the Health Survey SF-36, which is a structured questionnaire with physical and psychosocial health scales. The alpha (α) index of the physical health scale ranges from 0.914–0.735 and of the psychosocial health scale from 0.824–0.803, whereas the indicator was 0.832.

RESULTS On the physical health scale, the physicians recorded the highest scores, 84.18 and 74.18, respectively for physical functioning and bodily pain, but they recorded the lowest scores on the psychosocial health scales in vitality and mental health (52.15 and 58.31, respectively). The nurses recorded the highest score for physical functioning (71.01), followed by physical role (59.29) and physical pain (57.42), while on the psychosocial health scales, their scores were lower: emotional role 64.42, social functioning 57.89, mental health 56.32, and vitality (the lowest value) 46.24. The paramedical specialists recorded the highest scores in physical functioning (76.36) and physical role (75.56), and lower scores in vitality (49.78) and mental health (55.09). The administrative staff recorded the highest scores in physical functioning (78.51) and physical role (74.07). On the psychosocial health scales, their lowest scores were in vitality (52.11) and mental health (56.68).

CONCLUSIONS According to their scores on the SF-36 questionnaire, the psychosocial health of all categories of hospital staff lagged behind their physical health. Of particular note were the scores on the vitality and mental health scales, despite a more favorable picture on the social functioning and emotional role scales. The present study revealed fatigue and burnout on a continuous basis, as expressed by the vitality scale, on the one hand, and on the other the restrictions of mental equilibrium in everyday life, as expressed by the mental health scale. The low scores recorded on the vitality and mental health scales by the health care personnel raised the issue of work-related fatigue and burnout, which need to be addressed by designing and developing strategies for immediate response and preventive management.

Key words: Health related quality of life, Health sector, Human resources.


© Archives of Hellenic Medicine