| ObjectivesThe study aims at assessing quality of life of clinicians at different clinical sections in big hospital in China, and evaluateing the reliability and validity of SF-36 Questionnaire (Chinese version) in application of QOL assessment among Chinese clinicians. The quality of life of clinicians were compared cross different clinical sections. And variables which influence QOL were analyzed with multiple factor regression methods.MethodsAll subjects were selected from the First Affiliated Hospital of Guang Xi Medical University with stratified-clustering sample technique based on the criteria: employed period in the hospital is no short than one year, ages are between 20-65 years. The clinicians worked in emergency center, internal medicine, surgery department, Obstetrics and gynecology department, pediatric department and radiology department were choosed respectively.The SF-36 was a self-assessment questionnaire that was fill up by all subjects. In addition, the general demographic data, basic information on each individuals were also collected during the study. The standard of IQLA Project was take into reference to item scores measurement.Two crucial aspects of correctness about questionnaire were evaluated. The reliability was determed with split-half and internal consistent method , and the validity was determined by means of content, construct, criterion and responsiveness. Content validity was assessed by convergent and discriminative validity checks. Construct validity was assessed by factor analytic test. The clinicians' self-reported quality of life were looked as the criterion.The quality of life in clinicians were assessed. The scores of the SF-36 scales were ranging from 0 to 100 .Highter scores respentde better quality of life. Mean and standard deviation on the eight domain of health (including physical functioning, role limitations due to physical health, bodily pain, general health perceptions, vitality, social functioning, role limitations due to emotional problems, and mental health) in the questionnaire was calculated. A comparison study on age, department and gender cross different clinical were carried out based on factor analysis. The eight domain of health in the questionnaire can be transferred into physical and mental components. Then, univariate analyses and multivariate regression were applied to determine the effect of the explored variables such as section office, gender, age, chronic disease, appetite and sleep on the quality of life.T-test, variance analysis, Kruscal-Walis test, principal component analysis, factor analysis, correlation analysis and multiple linear regressions were used for statistic analysis. All statistical analyses were performed with SPSS 13.0 .ResultsTotal 500 questionnaires were submitted and 460 (92%) were completed during the self-administrated survey. Among them, male and female are 282 and 178. The Emergency doctor, physician, surgeon, accoucheur, pediatrician and other clinicians are 44, 137, 134, 37, 29 and 79 respectively. 215 subjects were younger than 30, 176 subjects aged between 31 and 40, 38subjects aged 41-50 and 31 were older than 51. The split-half reliability coefficient of the SF-36 was 0.926 and the Cronbach' a coefficients of the eight domain were 0.81, 0.79, 0.80, 0.80,0.79, 0.79,0.84 and 0.79 respectively. The correlation between an item and its hypothesized scale was 0.4 or above for all. The scaling success rate on convergent validity and discriminative validity were 100%. Factor analysis identified two principal components, which could be used to explain 63.29% of the total variance. PF and RE had moderate validity as measures of physical health, while VT had low validity as that. GH and VT had had substantial validity for measuring mental health. PF and SF had moderate validity as measures of mental health, while VT had low validity as that. The other results of factor analysis were consistent with hypothesized model. The correlation coefficient of the total score between the SF-36 and the clinicians' self-reported quality of life was 0.70.The scores of the eight domains in the sampled hemodialysis patients were 89.64±15.23,78.54±35.11,79.30±18.70,62.19±20.13,63.93±19.17,86.83±18.71,63.09±42.26,68.00±18.30. Clinicians with different section offices, gender, and ages showed different QOL values. The scores of PF,RP,GH,VT,SF and MH in different section offices had discriminatory(P<0.05).Physician and other clinicians got higher scores, while pediatrician got lower scores. Surgeon got the lowest scores in PF,SF.Emergency doctor got the lowest scores in RP. Except GH, SF and RE,the scores of other 5 scale of SF-36 in male elders were all higher than female (P<0.05) .Among different ages, the scores of PF, BP, VT and MH presented downtrend while getting older (p<0.05).In the multiple linear stepwise regression model of Physical Component Summary, the six variables of section office, gender, age, sleep, chronic disease, sleep and appetite were included. The adjusted Rc~2 was 0.449. in the multiple linear stepwise regression model of Mental Component Summary, the eight variables of section office, gender, age, sleep, the title of a technical post, length of service , chronic disease, sleep and appetite were included. The adjusted Rc~2 was 0.434.ConclusionsThe investigation show that SF-36 used for quality of life assessment among Chinese clinicians was reliable, validated and sensitive. The clinicians' QOL were discriminatory in different section offices, gender and ages. The physician' QOL were better, while the pediatrician's were worse. The male's QOL were better than the female's .Younger's was better than older's. The eight variables of section office, gender, age, sleep, the qualification title, Years of being employed, chronic disease, sleep and appetite were found to be important determinants of physical health and metal health. Greater attention should be given to interventions that could improve quality of life.
|
PDF Full Text Request