liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Key occupational stressors in the ED: an international comparison
Royal Brisbane and Womens Hosp, Australia; Queensland Univ Technol, Australia; Queensland Univ Technol, Australia.
Univ Sunshine Coast, Australia.
Princess Alexandra Hosp, Australia; Univ Queensland, Australia.
Univ Goteborgs, Sweden.
Show others and affiliations
2020 (English)In: Emergency Medicine Journal, ISSN 1472-0205, E-ISSN 1472-0213, Vol. 37, no 2, p. 106-+Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background The ED Stressor Scale outlines 15 stressors that are of importance for ED staff. Limited research has identified how commonly such stressors occur, or whether such factors are perceived with similar importance across different hospitals. This study sought to examine the frequency or perceived severity of these 15 stressors using a multicentre cohort of emergency clinicians (nurses and physicians) in EDs in two countries (Australia and Sweden). Method This was a cross-sectional survey of staff working in eight hospitals in Australia and Sweden. Data were collected between July 2016 and June 2017 (depending on local site approvals) via a printed survey incorporating the 15-item ED stressor scale. The median stress score for each item and the frequency of experiencing each event was reported. Results Events causing most distress include heavy workload, death or sexual abuse of a child, inability to provide optimum care and workplace violence. Stressors reported most frequently include dealing with high acuity patients, heavy workload and crowding. Violence, workload, inability to provide optimal care, poor professional relations, poor professional development and dealing with high-acuity patients were reported more commonly by Australian staff. Swedish respondents reported more frequent exposure to mass casualty incidents, crisis management and administrative concerns. Conclusions Workload, inability to provide optimal care, workplace violence and death or sexual abuse of a child were consistently reported as the most distressing events across sites. The frequency with which these occurred differed in Australia and Sweden, likely due to differences in the healthcare systems.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP , 2020. Vol. 37, no 2, p. 106-+
National Category
Health Care Service and Management, Health Policy and Services and Health Economy
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-164386DOI: 10.1136/emermed-2018-208390ISI: 000514645100011PubMedID: 31551289OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-164386DiVA, id: diva2:1415853
Note

Funding Agencies|Emergency Medicine Foundation [EMSS-410R22-2014]

Available from: 2020-03-20 Created: 2020-03-20 Last updated: 2020-03-20

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Wilhelms, Daniel
By organisation
Division of Drug ResearchFaculty of Medicine and Health SciencesDepartment of Emergency Medicine in Linköping
In the same journal
Emergency Medicine Journal
Health Care Service and Management, Health Policy and Services and Health Economy

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf