• Users Online: 965
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 


 
 Table of Contents  
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2014  |  Volume : 1  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 241-244

Quality of life among nurses working in different health care setting in the state of Karnataka, India


Department of Health Information Management, School of Allied Health Sciences, Manipal University, Manipal, Karnataka, India

Date of Web Publication16-Oct-2014

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Pamila N R Jathanna
Department of Health Information Management, School of Allied Health Sciences, Manipal University, Manipal - 576 104, Karnataka
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/2348-3334.142986

Rights and Permissions
  Abstract 

Context: Nurses reactions on stressors can be physiological, psychological and behavioral leading to stress related to mental and physical diseases that decrease well-being, satisfaction and quality of life. Aim: To investigate the quality of life (QOL) among nurses working in different healthcare settings in hospitals of Karnataka State, India. Settings and Design: This is a cross-sectional study carried out in two regions of Karnataka State, India with a total sample size of 501. Subjects and Methods: WHO evaluation instrument on Quality of Life World Health Organization Quality of Life-Brief Version (WHOQOL-BREF) is the tool used for collecting and analysing data. It composed of four domains: Physical health, psychological health, social relationships and the environmental domain. Statistical Analysis Used: The mean score of items within each domain is used to calculate the domain score. Transformed scores were estimated using the tables for standardizing scores from 0-100. SPSS 16.0 Version is used for statistical analysis. Results: For overall physical health status of nurses was "ill" in both the hospitals (34%; 23%) with significance at 0.01 levels. The mean score for psychological domain was least (41.83). Overall perception of QOL result showed significance at 0.01 level for all domains except for psychological domain. Conclusions: Hospital authorities and health managers of any type of health care setting need to plan for enhancing better quality of life for nurses by planning for better working environment by providing facilities for coping mental demands, software systems and work-rest schedules to reduce the jobs physical demands. Thus, enhance QOL of nurses resulting in better healthcare services to the community.

Keywords: Hospital type, nurses, perception, quality of life, World Health Organization Quality of Life-Brief Version


How to cite this article:
Jathanna PN, D'Silva J. Quality of life among nurses working in different health care setting in the state of Karnataka, India. CHRISMED J Health Res 2014;1:241-4

How to cite this URL:
Jathanna PN, D'Silva J. Quality of life among nurses working in different health care setting in the state of Karnataka, India. CHRISMED J Health Res [serial online] 2014 [cited 2019 Oct 19];1:241-4. Available from: http://www.cjhr.org/text.asp?2014/1/4/241/142986


  Introduction Top


Quality of life (QOL) is a very complicated and abstract concept. Most have the idea that the quality of life means the suitability of the material circumstances and the perception of the people. [1]

Many people want to become nurse to help people but when they are confronted with the reality of the job they soon realize that is not what they thought. [2] Health care institutions are different in size and nature, and nurses are confronted with different work tasks and working hours, nightshifts, working conditions, understaffing. [3] Nurses' reactions on stressors can be physiological, psychological, and behavioral leading to occupational stress related to mental and physical diseases that decrease well-being, satisfaction and QOL. This may have a direct impact on quality of care provided to their clients. Several studies are carried out in developing countries for analyzing job satisfaction. [4],[5],[6] among nurses and QOL among nurses. [7],[8],[9]

Current study aims at investigating the QOL of life among nurses working in health care setting in urban and corporate hospitals of Karnataka State, India.


  Subjects and Methods Top


The present study was carried out in two different types of hospitals in Karnataka state. A 750 bedded District hospital situated in the urban area along the coastal Karnataka (Hospital A) and a 600 bedded corporate hospital situated in Bangalore (Hospital B).

This is a cross-sectional study. WHO evaluation instrument on Quality of Life World Health Organization Quality of Life-Brief Version (WHOQOL-BREF) [10] is the tool used for collecting and analysing data.

All the nursing staffs willing to participate were recruited into the study. Total sample size was 501 in that 200 nurses from Hospital A and 301 from Hospital B participated in the study.

Structure of the questionnaire: The brief version of the WHOQOL-BREF [10] was used and is composed of four domains: Physical health, psychological health, social relationships and the environmental domain. The domain scores are positive in direction that is, the higher scores denotes higher QOL. The mean score of items within each domain is used to calculate the domain score.

The questionnaire was categorized into two sections:

  1. Basic details includes gender, age, highest education, marital status, health status and working experience
  2. Second section consists of 25 questions to calculate the quality of life and their domains. Question number 3 and 4 are negatively phrased items.


Transformed scores were estimated using the tables [10] for standardizing scores from 0-100 with the lowest score of zero and the highest score of 100. Result and analyses were conducted using SPSS 16.0 Version.

Data collection procedures

After institution ethical clearance, prior permission was taken from medical officers of selected hospitals to carry out the study. The nurses working at the hospital were invited to participate in the study, and those who accepted were briefed about the study and were requested to fill the questionnaire. Written consent was taken from the participants.


  Results Top


In demographic components gender, age group, marital status [Table 1] and years of experience were considered and correlated with their current physical health status [Table 2] and [Table 3].
Table 1: Demographic details of selected population

Click here to view
Table 2: Correlation of physical health status with hospital type

Click here to view
Table 3: Physical health status and years of experience of sample

Click here to view


Male nurses were less compared to female nurses in both the hospitals. Most (86%) of nurses were from the age group of 21-30 years from hospital B and 57% from age group of 31-40 years in hospital A. Majority of nurses (79%) from hospital B were single compared to more than 95% married in Hospital A.

Hospital type and physical health status

Overall physical health status indicated by the nurses of both the hospitals was analyzed. In both the hospitals most of the nurses (34%; 23%) said they were ill. The result showed significance at 0.01 levels.

Years of experience and physical health status

Correlation was created for years of service and their physical health status. The result showed, more than 20% of nurses of Hospital A reported ill from the group of 6-10 years of experience and 24% from 1-5 years from Hospital B. Most (55%) nurses above 10 years of experience from Hospital A reported ill. The result showed significance at 0.01 levels for Hospital A.

Age and physical health status

Correlation with age showed [Table 4], most nurses from age group 51-60 years reported ill from Hospital A and one from hospital B. The result showed significance at 0.01 levels for Hospital A.
Table 4: Physical health status and age

Click here to view


Quality of Life

QOL was rated in 5-point Likert Scale from1-5. Total raw scores were calculated and raw scores were converted into transformed scores for each domain [Table 5]. ANOVA test was conducted to relate overall perceived QOL and satisfaction with overall health status with the four domains: Physical, psychological, social and environmental.
Table 5: Perception of overall QOL and health status of total sample

Click here to view


Perception of overall QOL and health status of total sample

The mean score for psychological domain was least (41.83) and social domain was highest (70.62). The result showed significance at 0.01 level for all domains except for psychological domain in overall perception of QOL.

Health status and perception of overall QOL-hospital A and B

Perception of overall QOL and health status score were analyzed for both hospitals [Table 6]. The mean scores for psychological Domain were least in both the hospitals (42.88, 41.13) and social domain the highest (72.24, 69.54). The findings that are significant at 0.05 were physical domain for perception of QOL and social domain for perception of health status at Hospital A. All other findings were significant at. 01 except for psychological domain for both components at Hospital A and for perceived QOL at Hospital B.
Table 6: Perception of overall QOL and health status in hospital A and hospital B

Click here to view



  Discussion Top


The present study investigates the factors affecting the physical health status, perceived QOL and overall satisfaction with health status by the nurses working in different health care settings. Firstly, the results pointed out the physical health status of the nurses who participated in the study as one of the significant findings. Reports from other population studies [11],[12],[13],[14] have shown that nursing professionals have the highest rates of work-related disorder in medical industry. At par with the previous studies current study also revealed that total of 138 nurses were ill and in that majority were from Hospital A where most of them were above 41 years of age. Correlation test revealed significant association between physical health status with age and number of years of experience. The contributing factors can be attributed to work-related tasks like lifting or transferring patients out of bed and other work demands.

Secondly, considering both study settings, the mean score of social domain 70.62 indicates a relatively high social support from their friends and family. The lowest mean score was for psychological domain. One of the previous Indian studies [15] had revealed that the workload and demands by patient and their families was one of the major factors of stressors in nurses with less than one year of experience as they were burdened with extra responsibilities that resulted in them not having enough time to meet the needs of patient and patient's family. Another study conducted in Indian hospital [16] also pointed that, dealing with patient and their families and work as the most frequent stressful events for the nurses working in Indian hospital.

Thirdly, the finding also confirms their perception of QOL and satisfaction with overall health is significantly associated with physical, social and environmental domains except for psychological domain in both settings. This indicates that, they are moderately happy in their work environment at the same time it also can be presumed that they are working under stress. As most of the nurses were from younger age-group from Hospital B, their response to satisfaction with overall health status was good. Except for this, all other findings were almost similar in both healthcare settings.

For young nurses, the jobs mental demand is a major influence to their work ability. Psychological strengths should be promoted and maintaining the work ability of nurses should include improving the ability to cope with the jobs mental and physical demands with special emphasis on elderly nurses. Hospital authorities and health managers of any type of health care setting need to plan for enhancing better quality of life for nurses by planning for better working environment by providing facilities for coping, software systems to reduce the jobs physical and mental demands, and to properly arrange work-rest schedules. Thus, the quality of working life for nurses and productivity can be enhanced.


  Limitations Top


Our study had limitations. Primarily this study is limited by using a very generic instrument for a specific population. We could have come to more specific conclusions using questionnaire suitable for Indian population. The study does not compare the QOL of different health care professionals of the same hospital that would have given more weightage to the study.

 
  References Top

1.
Tseng TZ, Wang RH. Quality of life and related factors among elderly nursing home resident in southern Taiwan. Public Health Nurs 2008;18:304-11.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Hudgins S. The Importance of Stress Management for Nurses. International council of nurses. 2008. Available from: http://www.statswsheet.com [Last accessed on 2008 Oct 01].  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Cooper CL. Introduction In: Cooper CL, editor, Theories of Organizational Stress. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1998. p. 1-5.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Shrestha GK, Singh B. Job satisfaction among nurses in a Hospital. J Nepal Health Res Counc 2010;8:82-5.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Eta VE, Atanga MB, Atashili J, D′Cruz G. Nurses and challenges faced as clinical educators: A survey of a group of nurses in Cameroon. Pan Afr Med J 2011;8:28.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Takashi O, Kamal A, Tomofumi S, Toshihiro I, Makoto U, Masumi M, et al. Night-shift work related problems in young female nurses in Japan. J Occup Health 2001;43:150-6.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Milosevic M, Golubic R, Knezevic B, Golubic K, Bubas M, Mustajbegovic J. Work ability as a major determinant of clinical nurses′ quality of life. J Clin Nurs 2011;20:2931-8.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Kane PP. Stress causing psychosomatic illness among nurses. Indian J Occup Environ Med 2009;13:28-32.  Back to cited text no. 8
[PUBMED]  Medknow Journal  
9.
Nirali P, Rashmi P. Study of quality of work life of nurses and its impact on their job satisfaction in selected private and government hospitals of Gujarat. Int J Bus Res 2010;10:88-95.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
The World Health Organization quality of life assessment (WHOQOL): Position paper from the World Health Organization. Soc Sci Med 1995;41:1403-9.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Holder NL, Clark HA, DiBlasio JM, Hughes CL, Scherpf JW, Harding L, et al. Cause, prevalence, and response to occupational musculoskeletal injuries reported by physical therapists and physical therapist assistants. Phys Ther 1999;79:642-52.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Lipscomb J, Trinkoff A, Brady B, Geiger-Brown J. Health care system changes and reported musculoskeletal disorders among registered nurses. Am J Public Health 2004;94:1431-6.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Collins JW, Owen BD. NIOSH research initiatives to prevent back injuries to nursing assistants, aides, and orderlies in nursing homes. Am J Ind Med 1996;29:421-4.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Smith DR, Leggat PA. Musculoskeletal disorders among rural Australian nursing students. Aust J Rural Health 2004;12:241-5.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Jathanna R, Latha KS, Prabhu S. Occupational stress and coping among nurses in a super specialty hospital. J Health Manag 2012;14:467-79  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Anchan PS, Jathanna R, Marla A. Evaluation of health insurance and claim process at tertiary care hospital, Mangalore: A case report. J Health Manag 2011;13:97-112.  Back to cited text no. 16
    



 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3], [Table 4], [Table 5], [Table 6]



 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
Access Statistics
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)

 
  In this article
Abstract
Introduction
Subjects and Methods
Results
Discussion
Limitations
References
Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed2442    
    Printed29    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded349    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal


[TAG2]
[TAG3]
[TAG4]