Work and personal well-being of nurses in Queensland: Does rurality make a difference?

Hegney, Desley, Eley, Robert, Osseiran-Moisson, Rebecca and Francis, Karen (2015) Work and personal well-being of nurses in Queensland: Does rurality make a difference?. Australian Journal of Rural Health, 23 6: 359-365. doi:10.1111/ajr.12206


Author Hegney, Desley
Eley, Robert
Osseiran-Moisson, Rebecca
Francis, Karen
Title Work and personal well-being of nurses in Queensland: Does rurality make a difference?
Journal name Australian Journal of Rural Health   Check publisher's open access policy
ISSN 1440-1584
1038-5282
Publication date 2015-12-19
Year available 2015
Sub-type Article (original research)
DOI 10.1111/ajr.12206
Open Access Status Not yet assessed
Volume 23
Issue 6
Start page 359
End page 365
Total pages 7
Place of publication Richmond, Victoria, Australia
Publisher Wiley-Blackwell Publishing
Collection year 2016
Language eng
Formatted abstract
Objective: This study aims to ascertain if differences exist in the perception of the professional practice environment and personal well-being of nurses across different geographical areas in Queensland.

Design: 
This paper was performed on a prospective, self-report cross-sectional on-line survey.

Setting: 
The study was conducted among the nurses employed in public and private health care settings: acute hospitals, community health and aged care in Queensland, Australia.

Participants: 
Participants of this study were 1608 registered and enrolled nurses and assistants in nursing, current members of the Queensland Nurses Union in 2013 and who provided a workplace postcode. One thousand eight of these participants worked in major cities, while 382 in rural locations and 238 in remote areas.

Interventions: None.

Main outcome measures: Scores of well-being as determined by the following scales: the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale, the Professional Quality of Life Scale version 5, the Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale and of the Professional Practice Environment using the Practice Environment Scale – Nursing Work Index Revised.

Results: Nurses employed in major cities perceived ‘nursing foundations for quality care’ more favourably than those from other settings. Remote area nurses had lower levels of secondary traumatic stress than nurses in major cities and rural areas. There was no difference between nurses across their geographical locations for stress, anxiety, depression, compassion satisfaction, burnout, resilience and the four other measures of the Practice Environment Scale.

Conclusions: 
The study findings provide new data suggesting that, with the exception of secondary traumatic stress, the personal well-being of nurses does not differ across geographical settings. Similarly, with the exception of the subscale of ‘nursing foundations for quality care’ there was no difference in perceptions of the professional practice environment. As secondary traumatic stress is associated with burnout, this finding needs to be investigated further.
Keyword Nursing
Practice environment
Rural and remote
Well-being
Q-Index Code C1
Q-Index Status Provisional Code
Institutional Status UQ

Document type: Journal Article
Sub-type: Article (original research)
Collections: Official 2016 Collection
School of Medicine Publications
 
Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 0 times in Thomson Reuters Web of Science Article
Scopus Citation Count Cited 0 times in Scopus Article
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Tue, 29 Dec 2015, 10:37:58 EST by System User on behalf of Scholarly Communication and Digitisation Service