Occupational Risks in Hospitals, Quality of Life, and Quality of Work Life: A Systematic Review

Abstract

This study systematically reviewed the relationship between occupational risks and quality of life (QoL) and quality of work life (QWL) in hospitals. A systematic review was performed according to the recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guide, and the protocol was submitted on the PROSPERO website (CRD 2019127865). The last search was performed in June 2021 by two independent reviewers in the main databases, a gray literature database, and a manual search (LILACS, MEDLINE/PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Scopus, Embase, Brazilian Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations, Ovid). As eligibility criteria, we included observational studies, with adult hospital workers, with no restrictions on date and language, any type of instrument to assess QoL and QWL, any definition of QoL and QWL, and studies that presented the relationship between exposure and outcome. Newcastle–Ottawa was used to assess the methodological quality and RTI-Item Bank to assess the risk of bias. Given the impossibility of performing a meta-analysis, a qualitative synthesis was used to present the results. Thus, 11 studies met the criteria and were included in the review, with 6923 individuals aged 18 to 64 years. The studies were mainly carried out with health professionals (81.81%), women (63.60%), and in Asian countries (63.63%). All studies used different instruments and ways to categorize the QoL and QWL, and occupational risks. Only one study assessed occupational noise and another the ergonomic risk. All of them presented a relationship between occupational risk and quality of work life. They pointed to the need for measures to improve the lives of these professionals in the work environment. Therefore, studies show a relationship between occupational risks (noise, ergonomics, and stress) and workers’ perception of low or moderate quality of work life. However, more homogeneous studies are necessary for instruments, conceptualization, and categorization of quality of work life.

Quality of working life of employees in public healthcare organization in Finland: A cross‐sectional study

“…Investment in the development of the QWL is profitable, as the utilization level of the intangible employee assets is moderate. QWL is associated with organizational performance and productivity (Kesti et al, 2016; Pot & Koningsveld, 2009), occupational stress (de Lira et al, 2021) and burnout (Wang et al, 2019). QWL interventions can influence employee commitment under effective leadership styles (Nanjundeswaraswamy et al 2020); thus, many benefits for the organizational performance could be gained through the development of QWL, where leaders are in a key role.…”

“…Moreover, anxiety related to COVID-19 has been shown to be associated with lower QWL (Aydın et al, 2021). Occupational stress is related to QWL, and managers play a key role in preventing occupational stress through modifying the work environment; this can be achieved by providing opportunities for skill development, enhancing work conditions, developing functions and offering psychological support (de Lira et al, 2021). Improvement of the QWL has been shown to positively impact workforce retention and psychological well-being (Hardjanti et al, 2017).…”

“…(Totawar & Nambudiri, 2014.) However, as QWL has many definitions and no clear consensus of the concept, there remains a lack of standard method to measure QWL (de Lira et al, 2021). It is crucial to improve QWL and organizational performance simultaneously.…”

Assessment of the quality of nursing work life and its related factors among critical care nurses

“…Their findings indicate a significant association between QNWL and sleep quality, with better QNWL associated with better sleep. Furthermore, research studies indicate an association between workplace hazards, such as noise, ergonomics, and stress, and hospital employees’ perceptions of a low or moderate quality of work life ( 42–44 ). In this regard, the improvement of working processes involving productivity, quality, service delivery, safety, employee morale, and cost control could improve healthcare work environment standards ( 45–48 ).…”

The Impact of Quality of Work Organization on Distress and Absenteeism among Healthcare Workers

“…The organizational climate has long been recognized as one of the risk factors for workers’ health [ 10 , 11 , 12 ]. Comprehensive literature reviews showed that work environment factors highly correlate to employees’ health and well-being [ 13 ] and to quality of life and quality of working life among healthcare workers [ 14 ]. There is strong evidence that low organizational justice, high job strain, high effort/reward imbalance, and low social support may increase the risk for musculoskeletal disorders [ 15 ], and that poor organization of work may be responsible for the emergence of mental and physical health problems [ 16 ], particularly in hospitals, due to the concurrence of workload, psychosocial, and ergonomic factors [ 17 ].…”