Cited by 3Occupational Health and BurnoutCOVID-19 and Mental HealthHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnout

Anxiety, depression, work-related stress and psychological flexibility in nurses: A correlational-comparative study

Open access
Blanca Cuenca, Maria, García-Martín, María Belén, Calero García, María José·2021·European Journal of Health Research

Abstract

Nursing is exposed to a variety of occupational stress affecting their psychological health and productivity. Psychological flexibility has been shown to have beneficial effects on mental health of general population. The aims of this study were to analyze in nursing staff the relationship between the exposure to work-related stressors and psychological flexibility; and between emotional symptomatology and psychological flexibility; and the differences of the exposure to work-related stressors and emotional symptomatology among different work areas and different shift work. A correlational-comparative study has been developed. In addition to sociodemographic and work variables, the NSS, DASS-21, AAQ-II questionnaires were used to measure the work-related stressors, stress, anxiety, depression, and psychological flexibility, respectively. The prevalence of moderate-very severe levels of depression, anxiety and stress was 17.6%, 29.9% and 23.3%, respectively. A significant negative correlation was observed between work-related stressors and psychological flexibility; between occupational stress and psychological flexibility; between emotional symptomatology and psychological flexibility; between anxiety, stress and age; between work-related stressors and age. Nurses working rotating shifts reported significantly higher levels of emotional symptomatology, stress and anxiety than those working day shifts. Psychological flexibility seems to explain a significant prevalence of emotional symptomatology in nurses. Community nurses showed the lowest levels of anxiety, depression and stress when compared to hospital nurses working in different areas.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.32457/ejhr.v7i3.1713

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Blanca Cuenca, M., García-Martín, M. B., & Calero García, M. J.
Affiliations
  • PhD candidate of the Health Sciences Research Program. University of Jaén, Spain
  • Head of Psychology Evaluation and Intervention Department, Universidad de La Sabana, Colombia
  • Department of Nursing, University of Jaén, Jaén, Spain
Venue
European Journal of Health Research
Published
2021-12-13
Volume
7
Issue
3
Pages
1-21
ISSN
  • 2444-9067 (ISSN-L)
  • 2445-0308
OpenAlex
W4200185972
Cited by
3
References
43
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2023: 1
FWCI
0.41
Type
journal article
Language
es
Open access
Locations
  • European journal of health research (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Dialnet (Universidad de la Rioja) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Occupational Health and Burnout
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › COVID-19 and Mental Health
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
Keywords
psychological flexibility, anxiety, depression, occupational stress, occupational stressors, nurses, shift work, rotating shifts, day shift, community nurses, hospital nurses, workplace mental health

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review