IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v105y2024i1p68-80.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Interprofessional collaboration and work stress among health‐care providers in China: A comparative study between physicians and nurses

Author

Listed:
  • Yuqi Guo
  • Jingyi Shi
  • Shanti Kulkarni
  • Fan Yang

Abstract

Background Interprofessional collaboration (IPC) is a key contributor to the health‐care organizational culture of wellness and health‐care provider (HCP) morale. Objective The purpose of this study is examining the impact of IPC on their work stress among HCPs in China and comparing the differences in associations between IPC and work stress between Chinese physicians and nurses. Methods With a survey research design, 1036 HCPs were electronically recruited. Five multiple linear regression models were developed to examine the association between IPC and work stress among general HCPs, physicians, and nurses. Results IPC can significantly reduce work stress among Chinese HCPs. Regarding IPC, achieving mutually satisfactory solutions, having a clear understanding of boundaries, and a sense of trust are negatively associated with HCPs’ work stress, but team reflective revision was positively associated with HCPs’ work stress during the 2019 Coronavirus Disease (COVID‐19) pandemic. However, IPC factors are associated with work stress differently between physicians and nurses in China. Conclusion Our findings have important implications for practice, research, and policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Yuqi Guo & Jingyi Shi & Shanti Kulkarni & Fan Yang, 2024. "Interprofessional collaboration and work stress among health‐care providers in China: A comparative study between physicians and nurses," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 105(1), pages 68-80, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:105:y:2024:i:1:p:68-80
    DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.13329
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.13329
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ssqu.13329?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
    ---><---

    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:bla:socsci:v:105:y:2024:i:1:p:68-80. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    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.