護理人員專業承諾與工作滿意度之探討

全文

(1)100. 1. 1. 1. 2. 1. 1,3. 2 3. (N = 273). SPSS/PC 13.00 (p < 0.01) (R 2 = 35.35%) (R 2 = 69.54%) 2007;12:100-8. [4,5]. [6,7] ( c a r e e r commitment). (organization commitment). (professional commitment) [8-12]. (1) (2). [1] [2,3]. 404. 91. 2006. 11. 10. 2007. 4. 19. 2007. 3. 1. [11,13-15]. (3).

(2) 101. 19 Likert scale 1 5 KMO (Kaiser-Meyer-01Kim). [16,17]. ? 3 (7. 0.92 Varimax (9 ). (3 ) Cronbach's alpha 0.59~0.93 0.91 18 Likert scale 1 5 KMO (KaiserMeyer-01Kim) 0.90 Varimax 4 (7 ) (5 ) (3 ) (3 ) [19] Cronbach's alpha 0.77 0.93 0.74 [19]. [4,18]. ) ). ). 54. 54 810. SPSS/PC13.0. (simple random sampling) 412 274. 66.5% (99.63%). (73.99%). (70.70%) (SD = 4.82). 28 8. 30. 3-5 (. ). 11. 10. (11.70%). (21.51%) 5-10. (34.72%). 3. 5.92. (SD =. (32.08%) 4.27) (. N2. ). 13% 22.79% 57.48%. 21 scale 100%). 3. (< 39%). 1. Likert's (70% ( ). 2.18 (SD = 0.34) ( ).

(3) 102. 11 5. 3.08 3. (. ). (4.29) (r = 0.37. p < 0.01). (3.04) 3.66 (SD = 0.49) 100 73.2. 60. (3.66. 5. 100). ( p > 0.05) (bivariate analysis) t 3. (one-way ANONA) (3.65). (p < 0.05). 4 8 3.01 (SD = 0.49). 8 100 60.2. 60 (3.01. (dummy) 5. 11. (multiple linear regression model). 100). (VIF < 10). (%). (%). (n = 273). (n = 265) 272 (99.63) 1 ( 0.37). (n = 273) 202 (73.99) 71 (26.01) 27.90 4.82* 87 (33.08) 127 (48.29) 28 (10.65) 21 ( 7.98). (n = 263) 25 25-30 ( 25 30-35 ( 30 35 (n = 273) ( ( (n = 268). ( (n = 261) N0-N2 N3-N4 *. ) ). ) ). ). 3 3-5 ( 5-10 ( 10. 3. ) 5. ). (n = 269) 20001-40000 40001-60000 (n = 270). 5.92 4.27* 85 (32.08) 57 (21.51) 92 (34.72) 31 (11.70) 206 (76.58) 63 (23.42) 102 (37.78) 132 (48.89) 36 (13.33). 193 (70.70) 80 (29.30). (n = 272). 11 ( 4.10) 239 (88.81) 18 ( 6.72). (n = 268). 179 (68.58) 82 (31.42). (n = 268). 62 (22.79) 210 (77.21) 77 (28.73) 155 (57.48) 36 (13.54) 2.18 b0.34*.

(4) 103. (N = 268 ). 3.48 3.32 3.88 3.04 3.41 3.13 3.53 4.03 4.32 4.19 4.15 4.29 4.19 4.02 4.06 4.16 4.14 3.98 3.31 3.39 3.19 3.35 3.66. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19.. 0.63 0.94 0.70 1.04 0.84 0.84 0.83 0.65 0.63 0.61 0.47 0.58 0.58 0.59 0.63 0.58 0.53 0.62 0.68 0.91 0.84 0.86 0.48. (p < 0.05)(. ). Likert. 35.35%. 4 6 2. ( Perryman. ). Cox. [2,20]. (2.79. 0.68). 69.54% (. ). 0.45. [1] (2.61. (4.15. 0.47) (. ). 0.87). (. 0.87) ). (2.52.

(5) 104. (N = 268). 3.23 3.06 3.29 3.33 3.47 3.65 3.49 3.52 3.53 3.38 3.31 3.43 2.93 3.08 2.96 2.90 2.85 2.86 2.80 2.61 2.52 2.66 3.01. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.. (. ). 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18.. 0.59 0.67 0.73 0.70 0.58 0.65 0.67 0.74 0.74 0.71 0.76 0.67 0.64 0.76 0.67 0.73 0.75 0.78 0.68 0.87 0.87 0.80 0.49. (N = 268). 0.86 0.71 0.81 0.37 0.26 0.34 0.25 0.30. 0.52 0.52 0.36 0.24 0.34 0.23 0.31. 0.32 0.11 0.14* 0.19 0.01 0.04. 0.36 0.24 0.25 0.29 0.34. 0.76 0.73 0.79 0.83. 0.46 0.47 0.46. *p < 0.05; p < 0.01. Wagner [21] ( Lu. [17]. ). 0.37 0.50. 0.58.

(6) 105. (N=268). (. ) (. β (SE) 67.24 (5.62) 0.49 (0.20)*. VIF. 3.06. 4.85 (1.36) 0.74 (0.21). 1.33 2.83. 6.81 (1.33). 1.05. 3.54 (1.74)*. 1.02. 2.87 (1.31)*. 1.07. 4.85 (1.22) 8.71 (1.94) 0.34 (0.07) -. 1.01 1.06 1.03. 3.01 (0.94). 1.00. 1.11 (0.06) 0.13 (0.04). 1.11 1.11. ) (. ) (. ). (. ). (. ). R2 *p < 0.05; p < 0.01. (. β (SE) 7.25 (4.04). VIF. 35.35%. 69.54%. ) (. ). (p > 0.05). ( ). (13.5%). 36. 157.5%. 155. 30 (reliable) Ma [22-24] (. ). [3] 22.8%(62 72.2% (reliable). ) 30 [25].

(7) 106. 4. Aiken LH, Clarke SP, Sloane DM, et al. Hospital n u r s e s t a f f i n g a n d p a t i e n t m o r t a l i t y, n u r s e burnout, and job dissatisfaction. JAMA 2002;288: 1987-93.. (. 5. Albaugh JA. Resolving the nursing shortage: nursing. ). job satisfaction on the rise. Urol Nurs 2005;25:293-84.. [25]. [22-24]. 6. Chu CI, Hsu HM, Price JL, et al. Job satisfaction of hospital nurses: an empirical test of a causal model in Taiwan. Int Nurs Rev 2003;50:176-82. 7. Larrabee JH, Janney MA, Ostrow CL, et al. Predicting registered nurse job satisfaction and intent to leave. J Nurs Adm 2003;33:271-83. 8. Mowday RT, Steers RM, Porter LW. The measurement of organizational commitment. J Vocat Behav 1979;14:22447. 9. Gardner DL. Assessing career commitment: The role of staff development. J Nurses Staff Dev 1991;7:263-7. 10. Gardner DL. Career commitment in nursing. J Prof Nurs 1992;8:155-60. 11. 1997;6:109-20 12.Altschul, AT. Commitment of nursing. J Adv Nurs 1979;4:123-35. 13. 2000;4:11526 14. 2001;12:294-304 15. 2002;1:7-11 16. McCloskey JC, McCain BE. Satisfaction, commitment, and professionalism of newly employed nurses, IMAGE. J Nurs Sch 1987;19:20-4. 17. Lu KY, Lin PL, Wu CM, et al. The relationships among turnover intentions, professional commitment, and job satisfaction of hospital nurses. J Prof Nurs 2002;18:. CMU92-GNS-01. DMR-92-109. 214-9. 18. Waldman JD, Kelly F, Arora S, et al. The shocking cost of turnover in health care. Health Care Manage Rev 2004;29:2-7. 19. Lin CJ, Huang LC, Wang HC, et al. Reliability and. 1. http://www.doh.gov.tw/ ufile/Doc/ 26doh94_nh_36.doc 2. Cox KS, Teasley SL, Zeller RA, et al. Know staff's intent to stay.[Review] Nurs Manage 2006;37:13-5. 3. Wilson C. Why stay in nursing? [Review] Nurs Manage 2006;12:24-32.. validity of measurement on professional commitment and job satisfaction among hospital nurses, College of Nursing Centennial International Conference, Korea: Seoul, 2006/5/10-2006/5/11. 20. Perryman S. Down the line. Health Serv J 2003;113: 26-8..

(8) 107. 21. Wagner SE. From satisfied to engaged. Nurs Manage 2006;37:25-9. 22. 1988;14:479-504 23. 1995;14:78-87. 24. Ma CC, Samuels ME, Alexander JW. Factors that influence nurses' job satisfaction. JONA 2003;33:293-9. 25. 2005;1:132-8.

(9) 108. Nurses' Professional Commitment and Job Satisfaction 1. 1. 1. Hui-Chiao Tsai, Li-Chi Huang , Shu-Chuan Liu , Hsiao-Chiao Wang , 2. 1,3. Tsai-Chung Li , Chouh-Jiaun Lin. 1. Department of Nursing, China Medical University Hospital; School of Nursing, 2 3. Graduate Institute of Chinese Medical Science, China Medical University;. Department of Nursing, China Medical University Beigang Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan.. P u r p o s e . To explore the relationship between professional commitment and job Satisfaction. Methods. A survey of 273 nurses from a medical center in central Taiwan was conducted to collect data. The instrument surveyed demographics, working environment, professional commitment, and job satisfaction. Data were analyzed with SPSS13.0 software. Results. The results showed a positive correlation between professional commitment and job satisfaction. Multiple linear regression revealed seven factors that were associated with nurses' professional commitment: marital status, age, years of working, r e a s o n s fo r e n r o l l m e n t , e c o n o m i c s t a t u s , r e l i g i o u s a ff i l i a t i o n , a n d wo r k i n g environment (R2 = 35.35%). Factors that could explain the variance of job satisfaction were economic status, religious affiliation, working environment, and professional 2 commitment (R = 69.54%). Conclusion. Greater awareness of nurses' professional commitment and job satisfaction. among nursing administrators may indirectly help increase the quality of nursing care in Taiwan. ( Mid Taiwan J Med 2007;12:100-8 ). Key words job satisfaction, nurses, professional commitment. Received : 10 November 2006.. Revised : 1 March 2007.. Accepted : 19 April 2007. Address reprint requests to : Chouh-Jiaun Lin, Department of Nursing, China Medical University, 91 Hsueh-Shih Road, Taichung 404, Taiwan..

(10)