ArticleCureus2026
Assessment of Psychosocial Determinants of Quality of Life Among Healthcare Professionals at a Tertiary Care Hospital in Chennai, India.
Article in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWork-related pressures among healthcare workers (HCWs) are substantial and can adversely affect their quality of life (QoL). Understanding the psychosocial and occupational factors influencing QoL is crucial for developing effective strategies to enhance the healthcare workforce's well-being and performance. This study aimed to assess the QoL of healthcare professionals at a tertiary care hospital in Chennai, India, and to examine the impact of occupational and psychological factors on their overall well-being.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted among 242 healthcare professionals in a tertiary care hospital in Chennai (111 medical doctors, 131 nurses) using convenience sampling. Data were collected on sociodemographic characteristics, occupational variables (working hours, length of employment, workplace support), and QoL using standardized based on Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10) for stress measurement, the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) for sleep quality, the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) for alcohol consumption, and the Fagerström Test for Nicotine Dependence (FTND) for smoking behavior across four domains (physical health, psychological health, social relationships, and environmental health). Comparative analyses between subgroups were performed using independent t-tests, while Pearson correlation assessed relationships between occupational factors and QoL domains.
resultsNurses reported significantly lower QoL scores than doctors across all domains (total QoL: 57.16 vs. 63.6; p < 0.001). Healthcare professionals working more than 48 hours per week had notably reduced QoL, particularly in social relationships (12.5 vs. 14.88) and physical health (13.14 vs. 15.11), with strong negative correlations observed (social: r = -0.577; physical: r = -0.492). Participants with more than one year of employment demonstrated higher QoL in physical (14.15 vs. 12.78) and psychological domains (12.83 vs. 11.56), suggesting adaptation and professional stability. Workplace support showed a modest positive association with psychological health (r = 0.179).
conclusionQoL among healthcare professionals is strongly influenced by occupation, working hours, employment duration, and workplace support. Nurses and those with longer working hours are particularly vulnerable to lower QoL. Interventions promoting work-life balance, workload management, mentorship, and mental health support are essential to enhance the well-being and professional satisfaction of healthcare personnel in tertiary care settings.
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.