Author
Listed:
- Anastasios Tzenalis
(University of Patras, Greece)
- Maria Giouldouri
(Papageorgiou Hospital, Greece)
- George Kipourgos
(Virgin Mary Hospital, Greece)
- George Elesnitsalis
(Papageorgiou Hospital, Greece)
Abstract
Background: Job satisfaction of nurses is an issue that has focused intense attention in recent years, mainly due to the widespread reduction, worldwide, in the number of nursing personnel. Purpose to investigate the influence of the work environment of the intensive care unit on nurses and to identify the factors that play a decisive role in job satisfaction. Materials and Methods: Our study involved 100 intensive care unit nurses who completed a questionnaire focusing on nurses’ job satisfaction. Tests used are T-test, Mann-Whitney U (test of two independent samples), Anova, KruskalWallis to test distributions. The non-parametric tests analyzed with two independent variables T-test, Anova, Pearson, one-sample t-Test respectively. Results: Employees belonging to the age group of 40–49 are less satisfied with their work than employees from 30–39 years. Also, nurses with the most years of experience have statistically lower job satisfaction in terms of extrinsic job characteristics than groups with less work experience. Finally, nurses with more children are less satisfied with their work than those with fewer. Conclusion: Definitions of job satisfaction include a global affective approach with an approach to determine the overall level of job satisfaction while taking into account different individual and organizational factors that influence nurses’ job satisfaction. Contributions to Practice: The findings of this study can contribute to the improvement of working conditions and factors affecting the job satisfaction of intensive care unit nurses.
Suggested Citation
Anastasios Tzenalis & Maria Giouldouri & George Kipourgos & George Elesnitsalis, 2023.
"Professional Satisfaction of Nurses in the Intensive Care Unit Environment,"
European Journal of Clinical Medicine, European Open Science, vol. 4(5), pages 25-30, September.
Handle:
RePEc:epw:clinic:v:4:y:2023:i:5:id:12293
DOI: 10.24018/clinicmed.2023.4.5.293
Download full text from publisher
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:epw:clinic:v:4:y:2023:i:5:id:12293. 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: Support Team (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://eu-opensci.org/index.php/clinicmed .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.