IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0240052.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Practice assistants´ perceived mental workload: A cross-sectional study with 550 German participants addressing work content, stressors, resources, and organizational structure

Author

Listed:
  • Jan Hoffmann
  • Christine Kersting
  • Birgitta Weltermann

Abstract

Introduction: Practice assistants represent a highly relevant occupational group in Germany and one of the most popular training professions in Germany. Despite this, most research in the health care sector has focused on secondary care settings, but has not addressed practice assistants in primary care. Knowledge about practice assistants’ workplace-related stressors and resources is particularly scarce. This cross-sectional study addresses the mental workload of practice assistants working in primary care practices. Methods: Practice assistants from a network of 185 German primary care practices were invited to participate in this cross-sectional study. The standardized `Short Questionnaire for Workplace Analysis’ (German: Kurzfragebogen zur Arbeitsanalyse) was used to assess practice assistants´ mental workload. It addresses eleven workplace factors in 26 items: versatility, completeness of task, scope of action, social support, cooperation, qualitative work demands, quantitative work demands, work disruptions, workplace environment, information and participation, and benefits. Sociodemographic and work characteristics were also obtained. A descriptive analysis was performed for sociodemographic data and “Short Questionnaire for Workplace Analysis” factors. The one-sided t-test and Cohen´s d were calculated for a comparison with data from 23 professional groups (n = 8,121). Results: A total of 550 practice assistants from 130 practices participated. The majority of practice assistants was female (99.3%) and worked full-time (66.5%) in group practices (50.6%). Compared to the other professional groups, practice assistants reported higher values for the factor social support (4.0 versus 3.7 [d 0.44; p

Suggested Citation

  • Jan Hoffmann & Christine Kersting & Birgitta Weltermann, 2020. "Practice assistants´ perceived mental workload: A cross-sectional study with 550 German participants addressing work content, stressors, resources, and organizational structure," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(10), pages 1-12, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0240052
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0240052
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0240052
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0240052&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0240052?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lukas Degen & Karen Linden & Tanja Seifried-Dübon & Brigitte Werners & Matthias Grot & Esther Rind & Claudia Pieper & Anna-Lisa Eilerts & Verena Schroeder & Stefanie Kasten & Manuela Schmidt & Julian , 2021. "Job Satisfaction and Chronic Stress of General Practitioners and Their Teams: Baseline Data of a Cluster-Randomised Trial (IMPROVE job )," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(18), pages 1-13, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0240052. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.