Observational studyBMJ open2020
Cross-sectional study of aggression against Spanish nursing personnel and effects on somatisation of physical symptoms.
Observational study in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- A scoping review of nursing interventions for reducing the negative impacts of domestic violence among women.BMC nursing · 2024Article
- Cognitive Behavior Therapy by Nurses in Reducing Symptoms of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder on Children as Victims of Violence: A Scoping Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Workplace aggression against healthcare workers in a Spanish healthcare institution between 2019 and 2021: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Interventions for Reducing Negative Impacts of Workplace Violence Among Health Workers: A Scoping Review.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2023Article
- (Un)Broken: Lateral violence among hospital nurses, user violence, burnout, and general health: A structural equation modeling analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionViolence against nursing personnel in their place of work is a severe problem generating important consequences for these workers. Even though there is a large body of research on the subject, the emotional impact of aggression against healthcare workers continues to be debated.
objectivesThe objective of this quantitative, observational cross-sectional study was to analyse the effects of aggression against nursing personnel and the mediating role of anxiety in somaticising physical symptoms.
methodThe sample was made up of 1357 nursing professionals who answered questionnaires evaluating their sensitivity to anxiety and the presence of somatic symptoms.
resultsOf the professionals who indicated that they had been the victims of aggression by family members or patients in the previous year, 52.8% said it had happened to them on one occasion, 25.2% had experienced two episodes, while 6.9% and 15.1% said they had undergone three or more aggressions, respectively. Although 89.3% of the professionals affected by acts of indicated that they had not undergone physical or psychological consequences, there was a higher prevalence of somatic alteration among workers who had been victims of violence in the workplace. Furthermore, aggression at work had a direct effect on physical somatisation, which in turn acted as a mediator in the level of anxiety of nursing professionals. Thus, aggression increased the level of anxiety of nurses through the appearance of somatic symptoms.
conclusionsThe results are discussed based on some of the consequences that appeared after episodes of aggression in the healthcare sector and their relationship.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.