卫生专业人员中的技术压力——一个多层次模型和环境与专业之间的群体比较。

IF 2.5 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Informatics for Health & Social Care Pub Date : 2021-06-02 Epub Date: 2021-03-01 DOI:10.1080/17538157.2021.1872579
Christoph Golz, Karin A Peter, Sandra M G Zwakhalen, Sabine Hahn
{"title":"卫生专业人员中的技术压力——一个多层次模型和环境与专业之间的群体比较。","authors":"Christoph Golz,&nbsp;Karin A Peter,&nbsp;Sandra M G Zwakhalen,&nbsp;Sabine Hahn","doi":"10.1080/17538157.2021.1872579","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Health organizations increasingly digitize. However, studies reveal contradictory findings regarding the impact of healthcare information technology on health professionals. Therefore, the aim of this study is to describe the prevalence of technostress among health professionals and elaborate on the influencing factors.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>A secondary analysis was conducted utilizing cross-sectional data from the study, \"Work-related stress among health professionals in Switzerland\", which included 8,112 health professionals from 163 health organizations in Switzerland.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>ANOVA for group comparisons followed by post-hoc analyses, along with a Multilevel Model to identify influencing factors for technostress ranging from \"0\" (never/almost never) to \"100\" (always), were conducted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Health professionals experienced moderate technostress (mean 39.06, SD 32.54). Technostress differed between settings (p <.001) and health professions (p < .001). The model explains 18.1% of the variance with fixed effects, or 24.7% of the variance with fixed and random effects. Being a physician (β = 12.96), a nurse (β = 6.49), or the presence of an effort-reward-imbalance, increased technostress most (β = 6.11). A professional with no professional qualification (β = -7.94) showed the most reduction.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Health professionals experience moderate technostress. However, decision-makers should consider the cognitive and social aspects surrounding digitalization, to reach a beneficial and sustainable level of usage.</p>","PeriodicalId":54984,"journal":{"name":"Informatics for Health & Social Care","volume":"46 2","pages":"136-147"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17538157.2021.1872579","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Technostress Among Health Professionals - A Multilevel Model and Group Comparisons between Settings and Professions.\",\"authors\":\"Christoph Golz,&nbsp;Karin A Peter,&nbsp;Sandra M G Zwakhalen,&nbsp;Sabine Hahn\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17538157.2021.1872579\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Health organizations increasingly digitize. However, studies reveal contradictory findings regarding the impact of healthcare information technology on health professionals. Therefore, the aim of this study is to describe the prevalence of technostress among health professionals and elaborate on the influencing factors.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>A secondary analysis was conducted utilizing cross-sectional data from the study, \\\"Work-related stress among health professionals in Switzerland\\\", which included 8,112 health professionals from 163 health organizations in Switzerland.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>ANOVA for group comparisons followed by post-hoc analyses, along with a Multilevel Model to identify influencing factors for technostress ranging from \\\"0\\\" (never/almost never) to \\\"100\\\" (always), were conducted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Health professionals experienced moderate technostress (mean 39.06, SD 32.54). Technostress differed between settings (p <.001) and health professions (p < .001). The model explains 18.1% of the variance with fixed effects, or 24.7% of the variance with fixed and random effects. Being a physician (β = 12.96), a nurse (β = 6.49), or the presence of an effort-reward-imbalance, increased technostress most (β = 6.11). A professional with no professional qualification (β = -7.94) showed the most reduction.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Health professionals experience moderate technostress. However, decision-makers should consider the cognitive and social aspects surrounding digitalization, to reach a beneficial and sustainable level of usage.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54984,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Informatics for Health & Social Care\",\"volume\":\"46 2\",\"pages\":\"136-147\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17538157.2021.1872579\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Informatics for Health & Social Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17538157.2021.1872579\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/3/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Informatics for Health & Social Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17538157.2021.1872579","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/3/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

摘要

目标:卫生组织日益数字化。然而,关于医疗保健信息技术对卫生专业人员的影响,研究揭示了相互矛盾的发现。因此,本研究的目的是描述技术压力在卫生专业人员中的流行程度,并阐述其影响因素。参与者:利用"瑞士卫生专业人员的工作压力"研究的横截面数据进行了二次分析,该研究包括来自瑞士163个卫生组织的8 112名卫生专业人员。方法:采用方差分析进行分组比较,随后进行事后分析,并采用多层模型确定技术压力的影响因素,范围从“0”(从不/几乎从不)到“100”(总是)。结果:卫生专业人员经历中度技术应激(平均39.06,标准差32.54)。技术压力在不同环境之间存在差异(p结论:卫生专业人员经历适度的技术压力。然而,决策者应该考虑围绕数字化的认知和社会方面,以达到有益和可持续的使用水平。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Technostress Among Health Professionals - A Multilevel Model and Group Comparisons between Settings and Professions.

Objective: Health organizations increasingly digitize. However, studies reveal contradictory findings regarding the impact of healthcare information technology on health professionals. Therefore, the aim of this study is to describe the prevalence of technostress among health professionals and elaborate on the influencing factors.

Participants: A secondary analysis was conducted utilizing cross-sectional data from the study, "Work-related stress among health professionals in Switzerland", which included 8,112 health professionals from 163 health organizations in Switzerland.

Methods: ANOVA for group comparisons followed by post-hoc analyses, along with a Multilevel Model to identify influencing factors for technostress ranging from "0" (never/almost never) to "100" (always), were conducted.

Results: Health professionals experienced moderate technostress (mean 39.06, SD 32.54). Technostress differed between settings (p <.001) and health professions (p < .001). The model explains 18.1% of the variance with fixed effects, or 24.7% of the variance with fixed and random effects. Being a physician (β = 12.96), a nurse (β = 6.49), or the presence of an effort-reward-imbalance, increased technostress most (β = 6.11). A professional with no professional qualification (β = -7.94) showed the most reduction.

Conclusion: Health professionals experience moderate technostress. However, decision-makers should consider the cognitive and social aspects surrounding digitalization, to reach a beneficial and sustainable level of usage.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
4.20%
发文量
21
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Informatics for Health & Social Care promotes evidence-based informatics as applied to the domain of health and social care. It showcases informatics research and practice within the many and diverse contexts of care; it takes personal information, both its direct and indirect use, as its central focus. The scope of the Journal is broad, encompassing both the properties of care information and the life-cycle of associated information systems. Consideration of the properties of care information will necessarily include the data itself, its representation, structure, and associated processes, as well as the context of its use, highlighting the related communication, computational, cognitive, social and ethical aspects. Consideration of the life-cycle of care information systems includes full range from requirements, specifications, theoretical models and conceptual design through to sustainable implementations, and the valuation of impacts. Empirical evidence experiences related to implementation are particularly welcome. Informatics in Health & Social Care seeks to consolidate and add to the core knowledge within the disciplines of Health and Social Care Informatics. The Journal therefore welcomes scientific papers, case studies and literature reviews. Examples of novel approaches are particularly welcome. Articles might, for example, show how care data is collected and transformed into useful and usable information, how informatics research is translated into practice, how specific results can be generalised, or perhaps provide case studies that facilitate learning from experience.
期刊最新文献
Development and validation of the infodemic scale. Personalized medicine meets artificial intelligence: beyond “hype”, towards the metaverse Technological acceptance and features needed in mobile health apps development for people living with dementia and their caregivers in Indonesia Alzheimer’s in the modern age: Ethical challenges in the use of digital monitoring to identify cognitive changes Self-care intervention using mobile apps for sexual and reproductive health in the WHO Eastern Mediterranean Region.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1