Can organizational justice mitigate the negative effects of shift work and fixed-term employment?

Association between organizational justice and serious psychological distress among hospital nursing staff during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study

AIM

Amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, the association between organizational justice and psychological distress among hospital nursing staff is underexplored. Thus, this cross-sectional study, conducted in Fukuoka Prefecture, Japan, examined the relationship between organizational justice and serious psychological distress (SPD) among hospital nursing staff during COVID-19.

METHODS

The study surveyed 783 hospital nursing staff using the Organizational Justice Questionnaire and Effort-Reward Imbalance Questionnaire. The Kessler K6 scale was used to measure SPD. Sociodemographic and occupational characteristics were controlled for as potential confounders.

RESULTS

The prevalence of SPD was 14.4%, with a mean K6 score of 6.5. Moderate procedural justice (odds ratio [OR] = 2.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.14-4.94, p = .021) and low distributive justice (effort-reward imbalance) (OR = 3.66, 95% CI = 2.01-6.67, p < .001) were associated with SPD, even after adjustment for confounders. Interactional justice showed significance only in the crude model. Effort-reward imbalance had the strongest association with SPD.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings showed that moderate procedural justice and low distributive justice were associated with SPD, highlighting the need for organizational interventions to address these factors. Imbalances in effort/reward had the greatest impact, highlighting the critical role of distributive justice in mental health. Thus, in the context of a pandemic, extreme procedural justice is not necessarily associated with mental health, and efforts to ensure distributive justice are critical to improving the mental health of hospital nursing staff. Moreover, organizational stressors should be addressed during disruptive conditions such as infectious disease outbreaks.

Organizational Justice and Health: Reviewing Two Decades of Studies

Organizational justice refers to employees’ perceptions of the fairness of decision-making rules and policies in the workplace. Lack of justice is suggested to be a significant psychosocial risk factor that affects employees’ attitudes and health. The aim of this narrative review was to compile the evidence available about the effects of organizational justice on health. To this end, a literature search was carried out using the Web of Science, PubMed, and PsycINFO databases. The final sample consisted of 103 articles that studied the effects of justice on mental health (40 results), job stress (26), sickness absence (15), physical health (14), absenteeism/presenteeism (3), safety at work (3), and health of third parties (2). The results show that perceptions of workplace justice predict employees’ mental health, stress-related health problems, and lower levels of sickness absence were relatively compelling. Future studies should focus on less-researched outcomes and on how these associations are modified by other variables for a better understanding of how justice affects health, with a view to being able to carry out preventive measures more efficiently.

The role of perceived organisational justice in the experience of pain among male and female employees

This study examined the association of organisational justice with pain among employees of a large organisation. Employees (n = 1829) completed measures of pain, fair pay, organisational justice, job satisfaction and stress. Logistic regression analyses found that organisational justice was unrelated to pain among women, but men with higher perceptions of fair pay were more likely to report chronic pain as were men with lower perceptions of distributive justice. This is the first study indicating that fair pay and distributive justice are both unique predictors of chronic pain in men. The findings have implications for supporting employees with chronic pain.

Association Between Deviation of Fairness Perceptions from Group Average and Serious Psychological Distress in Japanese Worksites: a Cross-Sectional Study

Background

Workers with deviating fairness perceptions are likely to be excluded and become isolated at worksites, leading to psychological distress. The study aimed to examine the cross-sectional association between deviation of fairness perception from the group average and serious psychological distress in Japanese worksites.

Methods

Secondary data analysis of an existing Japanese occupational cohort data using a multilevel logistic regression model was conducted for 8701 workers from 12 companies in Japan who participated in the baseline survey (from April 2010 to March 2012). Individual perception of interactional and procedural fairness was measured with the Japanese version of the Organizational Justice Scale. Group averages were calculated within workers’ reference groups, categorized by company affiliation, age group, gender, and occupational class. Psychological distress was measured using the K6 scale, and serious psychological distress was defined as a total K6 score of 13 or more.

Results

Both low deviation and high deviation of interactional fairness perception were significantly and positively associated with serious psychological distress (odds ratio (OR) = 1.24, 95% confidence intervals (CI); 1.03–1.49 and OR = 1.57, 95% CI; 1.12–2.19), independently of individual-level fairness perception, group-level mean fairness perception, demographic characteristics, and health-related behaviors. Only high deviation of procedural fairness perception was significantly and positively related to serious psychological distress (OR = 1.51, 95% CI; 1.11–2.06).

Conclusions

The results indicated that divergent perceptions of fairness at worksites may deserve further exploration for equal achievement of workers’ psychological well-being.

Work-Related Stress Factors in Nurses at Slovenian Hospitals - A Cross-sectional Study

BACKGROUND

Surveys conducted among healthcare workers revealed that nursing staff often face various stressors associated with occupational activities, which reduce their work efficiency. The aim of the study was to establish the level of stress in nurses working at hospitals in Slovenia and to identify stress-related factors.

METHODS

A cross-sectional epidemiological design and a standardized instrument called the "Nursing stress scale" were used. The sample included 983 nurses from 21 Slovenian hospitals. The research was conducted in 2016.

RESULTS

Prevalence of high level of stress was 56.5% of respondents (M (median)=75). Prevalence of high level of stress and stress factors may be statistically significant attributable to dissatisfaction at work (p<0.001), disturbing factors at work (p<0.001), inability to take time off in lieu after working on weekend (p=0.003), shorter serving (p=0.009), fixed-term work (p=0.007), and an increased number of workdays on Sunday (p=0.030).

CONCLUSION

The stress rate and stress factors are substantially influenced by variables reflecting work organization, competences and skills of healthcare management to work with people. Results reflect the need for nursing management and policy makers to design strategies to ensure adequate staffing, efficient organization and an encouraging work environment.

Is working in culturally diverse working environment associated with physicians' work-related well-being? A cross-sectional survey study among Finnish physicians

International mobility of health care professionals is increasing, though little is known about how working in a culturally diverse team affects the native physicians' psychosocial work environment. We examined Finnish physicians' perceptions of work-related wellbeing according to whether they had foreign-born colleagues (FBCs) in their work unit. We also examined whether work-related resources moderate the potential association between work-related wellbeing and working alongside FBCs. A cross-sectional survey was conducted for a random sample of physicians in Finland in 2010 (3826 respondents, response rate 55%). Analyses were restricted to native Finnish physicians working in public health care. The results were analyzed by ANCOVA. In unadjusted analyses, having FBCs was related to poor team climate (p<0.001) and poor job satisfaction (p=0.001). Those physicians who reported high procedural justice and high job control perceived also higher job satisfaction even if they had many FBCs in the work unit (p=0.007 for interaction between FBCs and procedural justice and p<0.001 for interaction between FBCs and job control). These associations were robust to adjustments for age, sex, health care sector, specialization, on-call duty, employment contract, full-time employment and leadership position. The results indicate that culturally diverse work units face challenges related to team climate and job satisfaction. The results also show that leadership plays an important role in culturally diverse work units. The potential challenges of culturally diverse teams for native physicians may be reduced by fair decision-making and by increasing physicians' job control.