Top

Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2020 | Research

Comparing perceived psychosocial working conditions of nurses and physicians in two university hospitals in Germany with other German professionals - feasibility of scale conversion between two versions of the German Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire (COPSOQ)

Authors: Anke Wagner, Matthias Nübling, Antje Hammer, Tanja Manser, Monika A. Rieger, on behalf of the WorkSafeMed Consortium

Published in: Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology | Issue 1/2020

Abstract

Background

In 2015, the WorkSafeMed study assessed, amongst others, perceived psychosocial working conditions in nurses (n = 567) and physicians (n = 381) from two German university hospitals using scales from the German standard version of the COPSOQ (Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire). This standard version is based on the international COPSOQ I and II. Since 2017, a further developed version of the German COPSOQ (G-COPSOQ III) has been available and data from this version are stored in the German COPSOQ database. The aim of the present study was to compare scales depicting perceived psychosocial workloads and strain in hospital staff from the WorkSafeMed study with reference data (hospital care nurses, general hospital physicians, reference values across all occupations) from the German COPSOQ database (2012–2017). As preliminary work, we explored whether a conversion of COPSOQ scales based on data from the WorkSafeMed study to the G-COPSOQ III scales was possible.

Methods

We applied a multistep approach for conversion. First, we compared 17 COPSOQ scales used in the WorkSafeMed study with the corresponding scales from the G-COPSOQ III according to content and then decided if a conversion was appropriate. If possible, we converted WorkSafeMed scales - the converted scales comprised the same content and number of items as in G-COPSOQ III. An explorative statistical analysis for each original and converted WorkSafeMed scale followed detecting possible statistical and relevant differences between the scales. We then compared converted WorkSafeMed scales with reference data from the German COPSOQ database.

Results

Based on the comparison undertaken according to content, a conversion was possible for 16 scales. Using the data from the WorkSafeMed study, the statistical analysis showed only differences between original and converted COPSOQ scales “control over working time” (mean 40.2 vs. 51.8, d_Cohen = 0.56) and “social relations” (mean 55.6 vs. 41.8, d_Cohen = − 0.55). Comparing converted WorkSafeMed scales with reference data revealed higher values for “quantitative demands”, “work-privacy-conflict”, and “job satisfaction” in the WorkSafeMed sample.

Conclusions

The conversion of WorkSafeMed scales was appropriate, allowed a comparison with three reference values in the German COPSOQ database and revealed some implications for improving psychosocial working conditions of nurses and physicians in university hospitals in Germany.

Kristensen TS, Hannerz H, Høgh A, Borg V. The Copenhagen psychosocial questionnaire—a tool for the assessment and improvement of the psychosocial work environment. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2005;31:438–49. https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.948 .CrossRefPubMed

Pejtersen JH, Kristensen TS, Borg V, Bjorner JB. The second version of the Copenhagen psychosocial questionnaire. Scand J Public Health. 2010;38:8–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/1403494809349858 .CrossRefPubMed

Burr H, Berthelsen H, Moncada S, Nübling M, Dupret E, Demiral Y, et al. The third version of the Copenhagen psychosocial questionnaire. Saf Health Work. 2019;10:482–503. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shaw.2019.10.002 .CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Berthelsen H, Westerlund H, Bergström G, Burr H. Validation of the Copenhagen psychosocial questionnaire version III and establishment of benchmarks for psychosocial risk Management in Sweden. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17093179 .

Şahan C, Baydur H, Demiral Y. A novel version of Copenhagen psychosocial Questionnaire-3: Turkish validation study. Arch Environ Occup Health. 2019;74:297–309. https://doi.org/10.1080/19338244.2018.1538095 .CrossRefPubMed

Berthelsen H, Hakanen JJ, Westerlund H. Copenhagen psychosocial questionnaire - a validation study using the job demand-resources model. PLoS One. 2018;13:e0196450. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0196450 .CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Rosário S, Azevedo LF, Fonseca JA, Nienhaus A, Nübling M, da Costa JT. The Portuguese long version of the Copenhagen psychosocial questionnaire II (COPSOQ II) - a validation study. J Occup Med Toxicol. 2017;12:24. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12995-017-0170-9 .CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Moncada S, Utzet M, Molinero E, Llorens C, Moreno N, Galtés A, Navarro A. The Copenhagen psychosocial questionnaire II (COPSOQ II) in Spain--a tool for psychosocial risk assessment at the workplace. Am J Ind Med. 2014;57:97–107. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.22238 .CrossRefPubMed

Nübling M, Stößel U, Hasselhorn HM, Michaelis M, Hofmann F. Methoden zur Erfassung psychischer Belastungen: Erprobung eines Messinstrumentes (COPSOQ) [methods for the assessment of mental work load – testing of a measuring procedure (COPSOQ)]. Wirtschaftsverl. NW Verl. für Neue Wiss: Bremerhaven; 2005.

10.

Nübling M, Hasselhorn HM. The Copenhagen psychosocial questionnaire in Germany: from the validation of the instrument to the formation of a job-specific database of psychosocial factors at work. Scand J Public Health. 2010;38:120–4. https://doi.org/10.1177/1403494809353652 .CrossRef

11.

Nübling M, Vomstein M, Haug A, Nolle I, Lindner A, Lincke HJ. COPSOQ 3: Internationale Weiterentwicklung und deutsche Standardversion [COPSOQ 3: international development and German standard version]. Psychother Psych Med. 2018;68:e41. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0038-1667980 .CrossRef

12.

COPSOQ.de (2020). Scientific research and risk assessment with the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire (COPSOQ) in Germany. 21.05.2020. https://www.copsoq.de/en/.

13.

GDA. Recommendations of the institutions of the Joint German Occupational Safety and HealthStrategy (GDA) for implementing psychosocial risk assessment. Berlin: Management of the GDA Mental Health Working Programme; 2014.

14.

Kiss P, de Meester M, Kruse A, Chavée B, Braeckman L. Comparison between the first and second versions of the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire: psychosocial risk factors for a high need for recovery after work. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-012-0741-0 .

15.

Wagner A, Hammer A, Manser T, Martus P, Sturm H, Rieger MA. Do occupational and patient safety culture in hospitals share predictors in the Field of psychosocial working conditions? Findings from a cross-sectional study in German University hospitals. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15102131 .

16.

Wagner A, Rieger MA, Manser T, Sturm H, Hardt J, Martus P, et al. Healthcare professionals’ perspectives on working conditions, leadership, and safety climate: a cross-sectional study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019;19:53. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-3862-7 .CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

17.

Hammer A, Wagner A, Rieger MA, Manser T. Assessing the quality of medication documentation: development and feasibility of the MediDocQ instrument for retrospective chart review in the hospital setting. BMJ Open. 2019;9:e034609. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034609 .CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Sturm H, Rieger MA, Martus P, Ueding E, Wagner A, Holderried M, Maschmann J. Do perceived working conditions and patient safety culture correlate with objective workload and patient outcomes: A cross-sectional explorative study from a German university hospital. PLoS One. 2019;14:e0209487. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0209487 .CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Nübling M, Stößel U, Hasselhorn HM, Michaelis M, Hofmann F. Measuring psychological stress and strain at work: evaluation of the COPSOQ questionnaire in Germany. GMS Psycho Soc Med. 2006;3:Doc05.

20.

Schafer JLGJ. Missing data: our view of thes state of the art. Psychol Methods. 2002;7:147–77.CrossRef

21.

Wirtz M. Uber das problem fehlender Werte: Wie der Einfluss fehlender Informationen auf Analyseergebnisse entdeckt und reduziert werden kann [on the problem of missing data: how to identify and reduce the impact of missing data on findings of data analysis]. Rehabilitation (Stuttg). 2004;43:109–15.CrossRef

22.

Field A. Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington DC: SAGE Publications Ltd; 2013.

23.

Kline RB. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford; 2005.

24.

Hemmerich W. Rechner zur Adjustierung des α-Niveaus: StatistikGuru [calculator for adjusting the α level]. 2019. https://statistikguru.de/rechner/adjustierung-des-alphaniveaus.html. Accessed 18 Nov 2019.

25.

Bühner MZM. Statistik für Psychologen und Sozialwissenschaftler [statistics for psychologists and social scientists]. München: Pearson Studium; 2009.

26.

Kersten M, Kozak A, Wendeler D, Paderow L, Nübling M, Nienhaus A. Psychological stress and strain on employees in dialysis facilities: a cross-sectional study with the Copenhagen psychosocial questionnaire. J Occup Med Toxicol. 2014;9:4.CrossRef

27.

Nübling M, Vomstein M, Schmidt SG, Gregersen S, Dulon M. Psychosocial work load and stress in the geriatric care. BMC Public Health. 2010;10:428.CrossRef

28.

Cortina JM. What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. J Appl Psychol. 1993;78:98–104.CrossRef

29.

Büssing A, Falkenberg Z, Schoppe C, Recchia DR, Poier D. Work stress associated cool down reactions among nurses and hospital physicians and their relation to burnout symptoms. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017;17:551. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-017-2445-3 .CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

30.

Sehlen S, Vordermark D, Schäfer C, Herschbach P, Bayerl A, Pigorsch S, et al. Job stress and job satisfaction of physicians, radiographers, nurses and physicists working in radiotherapy: a multicenter analysis by the DEGRO quality of life work group. Radiat Oncol. 2009;4:6. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-4-6 .CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

31.

Degen C, Li J, Angerer P. Physicians’ intention to leave direct patient care: an integrative review. Hum Resour Health. 2015;13:74. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12960-015-0068-5 .CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

32.

Fuss I, Nübling M, Hasselhorn H-M, Schwappach D, Rieger MA. Working conditions and work-family conflict in German hospital physicians: psychosocial and organisational predictors and consequences. BMC Public Health. 2008;8:353. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-8-353 .CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

33.

Mache S, Bernburg M, Vitzthum K, Groneberg DA, Klapp BF, Danzer G. Managing work-family conflict in the medical profession: working conditions and individual resources as related factors. BMJ Open. 2015;5:e006871. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006871 .CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

34.

Aiken LH, Clarke SP, Sloane DM, Sochalski J, Silber JH. Hospital nurse staffing and patient mortality, nurse burnout, and job dissatisfaction. JAMA. 2002;288:1987–93.CrossRef

35.

Aiken LH, Sloane DM, Bruyneel L, van den Heede K, Sermeus W. Nurses’ reports of working conditions and hospital quality of care in 12 countries in Europe. Int J Nurs Stud. 2013;50:143–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2012.11.009 .CrossRefPubMed

36.

Aiken LH, Sloane DM, Bruyneel L, van den Heede K, Griffiths P, Busse R, et al. Nurse staffing and education and hospital mortality in nine European countries: a retrospective observational study. Lancet. 2014;383:1824–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62631-8 .CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

37.

McHugh M, Rochman M, Sloane D, Berg R, Mancini M, Nadkarni V, Merchant R, Aiken LH. Better nurse staffing and nurse work environments associated with increased survival of in-hospital cardiac arrest patients. Med Care. 2016;54:74–80. https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0000000000000456 .CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

38.

Weissman J, Rothschild J, Bendavid E, Sprivulis P, Cook E, Evans R, Kaganova Y, Bender M, David-Kasdan J, Haug P, Lloyd J, Selbovitz L, Murff H, Bates D. Hospital workload and adverse events. Med Care. 2007;45:448–55. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.mlr.0000257231.86368.09 .CrossRefPubMed

39.

Friese CR, Lake ET, Aiken LH, Silber JH, Sochalski J. Hospital nurse practice environments and outcomes for surgical oncology patients. Health Serv Res. 2008;43:1145–63. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6773.2007.00825.x .CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

40.

Sozialgesetzbuch (SGB). Elftes Buch (XI) – Soziale Pflegeversicherung – (SGB XI) [Book eleven (XI) - Long-term care social insurance] (Artikel 1 des Gesetzes vom 26. Mai 1994 – BGBl. I S. 1014, ber. S. 2797).

41.

Maschmann J, Holderried M, Blumenstock G, Bamberg M, Rieger MA, Tatagiba M, Roser F, et al. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2012;154:1935–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-012-1405-2 .CrossRef

42.

Maschmann J, Holderried M, Blumenstock G, Rieger MA, Bamberg M, Rosenberger P, Wagner T. Neues Dienstzeitenmodell für Ärzte in der Anästhesie : Eine analyse 3 Jahre nach Implementierung [a new working shift model for anesthesiologists: an analysis 3 years after implementation]. Anaesthesist. 2012;61:941–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00101-012-2099-9 .CrossRefPubMed

43.

Maschmann J, Holderried M, Blumenstock G, Bamberg M, Rieger M, Wallwiener D, Brucker S. Impact of new shift models for doctors working at a German University hospital for Gynaecology and obstetrics four years after implementation. Can they meet the European working time directive without increasing costs? Geburtsh Frauenheilk. 2013;73:713–9. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0032-1328751 .CrossRefPubMed

44.

Hiemisch A, Stöbel-Richter Y, Grande G, Brähler E, Kiess W. Sind wir wirklich so glücklich, wie wir es glauben? Eine kritische Untersuchung der Arbeitszufriedenheit an einer Universitätskinderklinik [are we really as happy as we think we are? A critical examination of work satisfaction in a university pediatric hospital]. Gesundheitswesen. 2019;81:309–18. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-121873 .CrossRefPubMed

45.

Schmidt S, Bartholomeyczik S, Dieterle WE, Wittich A, Donath E, Rieger MA. Arbeitsbedingungen für die Pflege in Krankenhäusern als Herausforderung. Eine Sekundäranalyse der Basiserhebung im Forschungsprojekt “Arbeitsbedingungen im Krankenhaus” (ArbiK) [working conditions of nurses in hospitals as a challenge. A secondary analysis of the baseline data collection of the ArbiK-project]. Pflege & Gesellschaft. 2008;13:102–18.

46.

Bernburg M, Vitzthum K, Groneberg DA, Mache S. Physicians’ occupational stress, depressive symptoms and work ability in relation to their working environment: a cross-sectional study of differences among medical residents with various specialties working in German hospitals. BMJ Open. 2016;6:e011369. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011369 .CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

47.

Mache S, Vitzthum K, Nienhaus A, Klapp BF, Groneberg DA. Physicians’ working conditions and job satisfaction: does hospital ownership in Germany make a difference? BMC Health Serv Res. 2009;9:148. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-9-148 .CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

48.

Leape L, Berwick D, Clancy C, Conway J, Gluck P, Guest J, et al. Transforming healthcare: a safety imperative. Qual Saf Health Care. 2009;18:424–8. https://doi.org/10.1136/qshc.2009.036954 .CrossRefPubMed

Title: Comparing perceived psychosocial working conditions of nurses and physicians in two university hospitals in Germany with other German professionals - feasibility of scale conversion between two versions of the German Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire (COPSOQ)
Authors: Anke Wagner
Matthias Nübling
Antje Hammer
Tanja Manser
Monika A. Rieger
on behalf of the WorkSafeMed Consortium
Publication date: 01-12-2020
Publisher: BioMed Central
Published in: Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology / Issue 1/2020
Electronic ISSN: 1745-6673
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12995-020-00277-w

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Comparing perceived psychosocial working conditions of nurses and physicians in two university hospitals in Germany with other German professionals - feasibility of scale conversion between two versions of the German Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire (COPSOQ)

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2020

Global use of asbestos - legitimate and illegitimate issues

Cross sectional analysis of depression amongst Australian rural business owners following cyclone-related flooding

Prospective randomized study evaluating the usefulness of a surgical smoke evacuation system in operating rooms for breast surgery

Physical activity during COVID-19 induced lockdown: recommendations

Work related cardiovascular load in professional dance teachers – a pilot study

Effects of six month personalized endurance training on work ability in middle-aged sedentary women: a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial