论文部分内容阅读
目的探讨上海市静安区商务楼职员职业紧张与心理健康的关系,以期为进一步采取干预措施提供科学依据。方法抽取静安区11个商务楼,对1 033名职员进行问卷调查,问卷内容包括职员一般情况、工作内容(JCQ)问卷、一般心理状况(GHQ)量表和抑郁量表(CES-D),对职员的职业紧张和心理健康状况进行调查,资料采用方差分析、等级相关、逐步回归和非条件logistic回归方法进行统计分析。结果内部一致性分析结果显示JCQ问卷、GHQ量表和CES-D量表在本次调查中有较高的信度;调查对象高职业紧张、心理问题倾向和抑郁倾向的现患率分别为32.33%、12.49%和57.89%。方差分析结果表明,JCQ各维度中工作要求和工作自主性得分在不同个体特征差异有统计学意义(P<0.05或P<0.01)。等级相关结果显示,职业紧张与GHQ、CES-D的spearm an等级相关系数分别为0.18和0.24,差异有统计学性意义(P<0.01),社会支持与GHQ、CES-D的spearm an等级相关系数分别为-0.08和-0.21,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05或P<0.01)。逐步回归分析结果表明,对心理状况的预测变量为年龄、性别、教育程度、工作要求、自主性,对抑郁状况的预测变量为年龄、工作要求和社会支持,其中以工作要求预测强度较高。logistic回归分析结果显示,高职业紧张所致职员的心理问题风险和抑郁倾向风险分别是低职业紧张的4.46倍(OR95%CI=2.36~8.46)和3.38倍(OR95%CI=2.36~4.85),而社会支持对职员的心理问题风险和抑郁倾向风险有缓冲效应,OR值为0.61和0.44(P<0.01),但社会支持对心理健康状况的影响受混杂因素的干扰明显。结论职业紧张受个体特征因素影响,高职业紧张,尤其高工作要求是导致高心理问题风险和抑郁倾向风险重要因素,应当在个人层面和组织机构层面采取措施,降低职业紧张水平,达到提高职员心理健康水平的目的。
Objective To explore the relationship between occupational stress and mental health in commercial buildings in Jing'an District, Shanghai, with a view to providing a scientific basis for further interventions. Methods A total of 11 commercial buildings in Jing'an District were sampled and 1033 staff members were surveyed. The questionnaire included general staff status, JCQ questionnaire, general psychological status (GHQ) scale and depression scale (CES-D) Staff occupational stress and mental health were investigated. The data were analyzed by variance analysis, rank correlation, stepwise regression and non-conditional logistic regression. Results The results of internal consistency analysis showed that the JCQ questionnaire, GHQ scale and CES-D scale had higher reliability in this survey. The prevalence of high professional stress, psychological problems and depression tended to be 32.33% , 12.49% and 57.89% respectively. Analysis of variance showed that there were significant differences in job requirements and work autonomy scores among different personality traits in all dimensions of JCQ (P <0.05 or P <0.01). The rank correlation results showed that the correlation coefficient between occupational stress and the spearm an of GHQ and CES-D were 0.18 and 0.24, respectively, and the difference was statistically significant (P <0.01). The social support was related to the rank of spearm an of GHQ and CES-D The coefficients were -0.08 and -0.21 respectively, the difference was statistically significant (P <0.05 or P <0.01). The results of stepwise regression analysis showed that the predictors of psychological status were age, sex, educational attainment, job requirements and autonomy. The predictors of depression status were age, job requirements and social support. The results of logistic regression analysis showed that the psychological risks and the depression-prone risks of staff members due to high occupational stress were 4.46 times (OR 95% CI = 2.36 ~ 8.46) and 3.38 times (OR 95% CI 2.36 ~ 4.85), respectively, Social support had a buffering effect on staff's risk of psychological problems and risk of depressive tendency, with OR values of 0.61 and 0.44 (P <0.01). However, the impact of social support on mental health status was disturbed by confounding factors. Conclusion Occupational stress is affected by individual characteristics and high occupational stress. In particular, high work requirement is an important factor leading to high psychological risk and depression risk. Measures should be taken at the individual level and the organizational level to reduce occupational stress so as to improve staff psychological The purpose of health level.