切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华移植杂志(电子版) ›› 2018, Vol. 12 ›› Issue (03) : 121 -125. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-3903.2018.03.006

所属专题: 文献

论著

我国人体器官捐献协调员工作压力状况调查
司晶1, 黄伟1, 江中发2, 郑志1, 李志军1, 徐哲1, 张亮1, 舒涛1, 叶啟发3, 何重香1,()   
  1. 1. 430071 武汉大学中南医院 武汉大学肝胆疾病研究院 武汉大学移植医学中心 移植医学技术湖北省重点实验室
    2. 430079 武汉,湖北省疾病预防控制中心
    3. 430071 武汉大学中南医院 武汉大学肝胆疾病研究院 武汉大学移植医学中心 移植医学技术湖北省重点实验室;410013 长沙,中南大学湘雅三医院 卫生部移植医学工程技术研究中心
  • 收稿日期:2018-03-30 出版日期:2018-08-25
  • 通信作者: 何重香
  • 基金资助:
    湖北省卫生计生委药护技和管理项目(WJ2017H0017); 武汉大学中南医院科技创新培育基金药护技和管理专项(cxpy20160062)

Investigation of the working pressure level of coordinators for human organ donation in China

Jing Si1, Wei Huang1, Zhongfa Jiang2, Zhi Zheng1, Zhijun Li1, Zhe Xu1, Liang Zhang1, Tao Shu1, Qifa Ye3, Chongxiang He1,()   

  1. 1. Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Institute of Hepatobiliary Diseases of Wuhan University, Transplant Center of Wuhan University, Hubei Key Laboratory of Medical Technology on Transplantation, Wuhan 430071, China
    2. Hubei Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Wuhan 430079, China
    3. Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Institute of Hepatobiliary Diseases of Wuhan University, Transplant Center of Wuhan University, Hubei Key Laboratory of Medical Technology on Transplantation, Wuhan 430071, China; the Third Xiangya Hospital of Central South University, Research Center of National Health Ministry on Transplantation Medicine Engineering and Technology, Changsha 410013, China
  • Received:2018-03-30 Published:2018-08-25
  • Corresponding author: Chongxiang He
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: He Chongxiang, Email:
引用本文:

司晶, 黄伟, 江中发, 郑志, 李志军, 徐哲, 张亮, 舒涛, 叶啟发, 何重香. 我国人体器官捐献协调员工作压力状况调查[J]. 中华移植杂志(电子版), 2018, 12(03): 121-125.

Jing Si, Wei Huang, Zhongfa Jiang, Zhi Zheng, Zhijun Li, Zhe Xu, Liang Zhang, Tao Shu, Qifa Ye, Chongxiang He. Investigation of the working pressure level of coordinators for human organ donation in China[J]. Chinese Journal of Transplantation(Electronic Edition), 2018, 12(03): 121-125.

目的

了解我国人体器官捐献协调员(简称协调员)的工作压力现状并探究其影响因素,为今后实施可行的减压干预提供理论依据。

方法

整群随机抽取2016年全国范围已登记的专职或兼职协调员182名,采用问卷调查法(包括人口社会学资料调查表和工作压力量表)进行调查。采用两独立样本t检验、单因素方差分析比较年龄、性别等人口社会学因素不同的协调员工作压力量表及各维度得分;采用多元线性回归分析年龄、性别等指标对工作压力的影响。P<0.05为差异有统计学意义。

结果

共发放问卷182份,回收率100%,有效率100%。182名协调员工作压力量表得分平均为(68±12)分(26~92分)。正式工或人事代理、合同制调查员得分分别为(67±13)、(66±12)分,均低于其他(含临时工)调查员得分[(72±9)分],差异均有统计学意义(P均<0.05)。18~30岁组协调员工作本身压力维度得分低于其他两组,≥36岁组协调员自身发展压力维度得分高于18~30岁组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。高中及以下(含中专)协调员角色认知压力维度得分为(3.0±1.0)分,高于本科(含大专)、硕士及以上协调员[(2.5±1.0)、(2.3±1.0)分],差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。来自医院、红十字会的协调员,其人际关系压力和职业发展压力维度得分均低于来自其他工作单位的协调员,差异均有统计学意义(P均<0.05)。既往职业为医师、护师的协调员,其人际关系压力维度得分均低于其他组,差异均有统计学意义(P均<0.05)。既往职业为护师的协调员角色认知压力维度得分高于其他两组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。聘用方式为正式工或人事代理、合同制的协调员,其工作背景和氛围压力维度得分分别为(3.4±0.8)、(3.3±0.8)分,均低于其他(含临时工)的协调员得分[(3.7±0.6)分],差异均有统计学意义(P均<0.05)。多元线性回归结果显示,协调员年龄越大,工作压力得分越高。

结论

协调员工作压力水平整体较高,今后的研究应围绕开展有针对性地降低协调员工作压力的干预项目进行。同时医院管理者应采取有效措施,最大程度降低协调员工作压力,提高工作满意度,从而提升工作质量。

Objective

To understand the current situation of the work pressure of the human organ donation coordinator (referred to as coordinator) and explore its influencing factors, and provide a theoretical basis for the implementation of feasible decompression interventions in the future.

Methods

A total of 182 full-time or part-time coordinators registered nationwide in 2016 were randomly selected and surveyed using questionnaires, including general demographic sociology data and work stress scales. Two independent sample t-tests and one-way ANOVA were used to compare the coordinator′s work stress scale and the scores of different dimensions of sociology factors such as age and gender. Multivariate linear regression was used to analyze the influence of age, gender and other indicators on work stress. P<0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

A total of 182 questionnaires were distributed, with a recovery rate of 100% and effective rate is 100%. The average score of 182 coordinator work stress scales was (68±12) points (26-92 points). The scores of formal workers or personnel agents and contract investigators were (67±13) and (66±12) points respectively, which were lower than those of other (including temporary workers) (72±9) points, and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). The 18 to 30-year-old coordinator had the lowest stress dimension score, which was lower than the other two groups; the 36-year-old coordinator had a higher developmental stress dimension than the 18- to 30-year-old group, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). The high school and below (including secondary school) coordinator role cognitive pressure dimension score is (3.0±1.0), higher than the undergraduate (including junior college), master′s degree and above coordinator [(2.5±1.0), (2.3±1.0) points], the difference is statistical significance (P<0.05). The coordinators from the hospital and the Red Cross had lower scores on interpersonal relationship pressure and career development stress than those from other work units, and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). In the past occupations, the coordinators of physicians and nurses had lower scores of interpersonal relationship stress than other groups, and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). The cognitive stress dimension of the coordinator′s role as a nurse was higher than that of the other two groups, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). Other groups and formal workers or hiring methods are personnel agents and contract system coordinators. Their work background and atmosphere pressure dimension scores are (3.4±0.8) and (3.3±0.8) points respectively, which are lower than other (including temporary workers) coordination. The scores were (3.7±0.6) points, and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). Multiple linear regression results showed that the older the coordinator, the higher the work stress score they have.

Conclusions

The coordinator′s work stress level is generally high, and future research should focus on intervention projects that aim to reduce the coordinator′s work pressure. At the same time, hospital administrators should take effective measures to minimize their work pressure and improve job satisfaction, thus improving the quality of work.

表1 182名协调员工作压力量表得分结果(分,±s)
表2 不同年龄协调员工作压力量表各维度得分结果比较(分,±s)
表3 不同工作单位协调员工作压力量表各维度得分结果比较(分,±s)
表4 不同既往职业协调员工作压力量表各维度得分结果比较(分,±s)
1
郑志,司晶,李志军,等. 人体器官捐献协调员的现状与素质要求[J]. 武汉大学学报(医学版), 2016, 37(4):680-682.
2
郑志,叶啟发,司晶,等. 浅析中国人体器官捐献协调员的重要作用[J]. 武汉大学学报(医学版), 2017, 38(6):950-953.
3
Tausig M, Fenwick R. Job structures, job stress, and mental health[M]// Work and Mental Health in Social Context. New York: Springer, 2011:25-49.
4
路绪锋,张珊. 我国器官移植协调员作用发挥受限的原因与对策分析[J]. 中国社会医学杂志,2014, 31(4):228-230.
5
常亚男. 知识型员工工作压力、自我效能与工作绩效的关系研究[D]. 内蒙古财经大学企业管理,2016.
6
熊天威,张明,唐月娥,等. 器官捐献协调员心理状况调查研究[J]. 器官移植,2018, 8(5):371-375.
7
Blumenthal PA. "It′s not a job; it′s a lifestyle" :the experience of being a donation coordinator[J]. Prog Transplant, 2007, 17(1):8-22.
8
Dimond B. Stress at work[J]. Mod Midwife, 1995, 5(5):32-34.
9
Vagg PR, Spielberger CD. The job stress survey: Assessing perceived severity and frequency of occurrence of generic sources of stress in the workplace[J]. J Occup Health Psychol, 1999, 4(3):288.
10
罗力. 知识型员工工作压力、工作幸福感与离职倾向的关系研究[D]. 武汉:武汉理工大学,2011.
11
刘璞,谢家琳,井润田. 国有企业员工工作压力与工作满意度关系的实证研究[J]. 中国软科学,2005, (12):121-126.
12
张樨樨,王利华,生光旭. "全面二孩"背景下城镇女性就业压力与就业满意度的新变化[J]. 山东大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2017, (4):124-134.
13
宋国学. 工作压力源对反生产行为的影响机理:职业生涯韧性以情绪为中介的调节效应[J]. 商业经济与管理,2016, 292(2):26-35.
14
陈海珍. 临时工的压力与应对——社会工作实务介入的策略研究[D]. 杭州:浙江师范大学,2013.
15
李小妹,刘彦君. 护士工作压力源及工作疲溃感的调查研究[J]. 中华护理杂志,2000, 35(11):645-649.
16
王妤,孟宪璋. 中国护士工作压力源量表的初步修订[D]. 广州:暨南大学,2006.
17
徐奕旻,吴瑛,张艳,等. 全国医院护士工作状态的调查分析[J]. 中华护理杂志,2016, 51(8):947-950.
[1] 刘嘉嘉, 王承华, 陈绪娇, 刘瑗玲, 王善钰, 屈海花, 张莉. 经阴道子宫-输卵管实时三维超声造影中患者疼痛发生情况及其影响因素分析[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(09): 959-965.
[2] 高玲, 于哲, 范然, 臧银善. 外周血细胞计数比值评估类风湿关节炎疗效的价值[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 642-647.
[3] 王蓓蓓, 董启秀, 郗红燕, 于庆云, 张丽君, 式光. 早孕期孕妇药物流产失败的影响因素分析与构建相关预测模型及其对药物流产成功的预测价值[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(05): 588-594.
[4] 陈絮, 詹玉茹, 王纯华. 孕妇ABO血型联合甲状腺功能检测对预测妊娠期糖尿病的临床价值[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(05): 604-610.
[5] 王鹏, 肖厚安, 贾赤宇. 不同因素调控巨噬细胞极化在慢性难愈性创面中的研究进展[J]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2023, 18(05): 454-459.
[6] 付佳, 肖海敏, 武曦, 冯涛, 师帅. 年龄校正查尔森合并症指数对腹腔镜结直肠癌围手术期并发症的预测价值[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 336-341.
[7] 杨倩, 李翠芳, 张婉秋. 原发性肝癌自发性破裂出血急诊TACE术后的近远期预后及影响因素分析[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 33-36.
[8] 甄子铂, 刘金虎. 基于列线图模型探究静脉全身麻醉腹腔镜胆囊切除术患者术后肠道功能紊乱的影响因素[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 61-65.
[9] 黄汇, 朱信强. 131I治疗45岁以下分化型甲状腺癌的疗效及影响因素[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 627-630.
[10] 王帆, 马秋月, 刘小莉. 基于分位数回归模型的切口疝手术患者住院费用影响因素分析[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 522-529.
[11] 韩景钊, 脱红芳, 王泽普, 彭彦辉. 腹股沟疝修补术后尿潴留影响因素和防治策略[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 400-404.
[12] 顾娇娇, 邹燕, 陈奕辰, 黄师菊, 张慧玲, 林楠. 基于简易营养评价精法评估肝癌患者出院后营养状况及其影响因素[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(05): 534-539.
[13] 杨静, 顾红叶, 赵莹莹, 孙梦霞, 查园园, 王琪. 老年血液透析患者短期死亡的影响因素及列线图预测模型的预测作用[J]. 中华肾病研究电子杂志, 2023, 12(05): 254-259.
[14] 刘代江, 蒋俊艳, 万晓强, 马莎英. 结直肠癌肝转移患者生存状况及预后影响因素分析[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(05): 284-288.
[15] 杜振双, 胡清福, 林颖艺, 张月霞, 陈美丽, 李祎祺, 王振华. 社区全科医师激励机制的影响因素分析[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(08): 876-883.
阅读次数
全文


摘要