Author
Listed:
- Susanne M Maassen
- Catharina van Oostveen
- Hester Vermeulen
- Anne Marie Weggelaar
Abstract
Introduction: The work environment of healthcare professionals is important for good patient care and is receiving increasing attention in scientific research. A clear and unambiguous understanding of a positive work environment, as perceived by healthcare professionals, is crucial for gaining systematic objective insights into the work environment. The aim of this study was to gain consensus on the concept of a positive work environment in the hospital. Methods: This was a three-round Delphi study to establish consensus on what defines a positive work environment. A literature review and 17 semi-structured interviews with experts (transcribed and analyzed by open and thematic coding) were used to generate items for the Delphi study. Results: The literature review revealed 228 aspects that were clustered into 48 work environment elements, 38 of which were mentioned in the interviews also. After three Delphi rounds, 36 elements were regarded as belonging to a positive work environment in the hospital. Discussion: The work environment is a broad concept with several perspectives. Although all 36 elements are considered important for a positive work environment, they have different perspectives. Mapping the included elements revealed that no one work environment measurement tool includes all the elements. Conclusion: We identified 36 elements that are important for a positive work environment. This knowledge can be used to select the right measurement tool or to develop interventions for improving the work environment. However, the different perspectives of the work environment should be considered.
Suggested Citation
Susanne M Maassen & Catharina van Oostveen & Hester Vermeulen & Anne Marie Weggelaar, 2021.
"Defining a positive work environment for hospital healthcare professionals: A Delphi study,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(2), pages 1-14, February.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pone00:0247530
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0247530
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0247530. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.