Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 76

FINAL PROJECT REPORT

ON

“TO COMPARE THE LEVEL


OF STRESS AMONG THE
DOCTORS OF PUBLIC AND
PRIVATE SECTOR”
A PROJECT REPORT SUBMITTED IN THE
PARTIAL FULFILLMENT FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTERS OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION.

YEAR 2006-08

SUBMITTED TO:
PUNJAB TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY
JALANDHAR.

SUBMITTED BY:
SHIVDEEP VIRK
ROLL NO.632222418

RIMT-INSTITUTE OF MANGEMENT &


COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY, MANDI
GOBINDGARH.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

This report has been drawn from the works of many other persons. The contribution of
the person lies in a skillful presentation of the material with the help of figures so that the
subject matter is clearly grasped by the reader. I have no words to express my gratitude
towards them.

First of all I want to express my deep sense of gratitude to my project guide Miss. Shilpi
Goyal (Lecturer, RIMT-IMCT, Mandi Gobindgarh) for her invaluable guidance and
constructive suggestions, without whose help the completion of the project would not
have been possible. She was a guiding force behind this project and a constant source of
inspiration for me.

I also want to thank all those known and unknown persons who directly and indirectly
helped me in the completion of my project.

However, I am solely responsible for any possible error and omission.

Shivdeep Virk
CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the project work entitled” To compare the level of stress among
the doctors of public and private sector” is a bonafide work carried out by Shivdeep
Virk, Roll no.632222418, student of MBA, RIMT-IMCT, Mandi Gobindgarh, affiliated
to PTU, Jalandhar under my supervision and that no part of the report has been submitted
for any other degree. The hard work and dedication during the execution of the project
have been fully acknowledged.

MISS. SHILPI GOYAL


PROJECT GUIDE
RIMT-IMCT.
TABLE OF CONTENTS

S.NO. CONTENT PAGE NO.

1. LIST OF TABLES 1-2

2. LIST OF FIGURES 3-4

3. REVIEW OF LITERATURE 5-17

4. INTRODUCTION TO TOPIC 18-28

5. NEED OF THE STUDY 29

6. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY 30

7. SCOPE OF THE STUDY 31

8. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 32-33

9. LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY 34

10. ANALYSIS OF THE DATA 35-63

11. FINDINGS 64-65

12. CONCLUSION 66

13. APPENDICES 67-68

14. BIBLIOGRAPHY 69

LIST OF TABLES

S.NO. TABLE NO. PAGE NO.


1. TABLE NO.1- SHOWING THE DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF 36
THE RESPONDENTS.

2. TABLE NO.2- SHOWING THE STRESS LEVEL AMONG THE 39


DOCTORS OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTOR HOSPITALS.

3. TABLE NO.3- SHOWING THE STRESS LEVEL AMONG THE 40


MALE AND FEMALE DOCTORS.

4. TABLE NO.4- SHOWING THE STRESS LEVEL AMONG THE 41


MALE AND FEMALE DOCTORS OF BOTH PUBLIC AND
PRIVATE SECTORS.

5. TABLE NO.5- SHOWING THE STRESS LEVEL AMONG THE 42


DOCTORS OF DIFFERENT AGE GROUPS.

6. TABLE NO.6- SHOWING THE STRESS LEVEL AMONG THE 43


DOCTORS OF DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS.

7. TABLE NO.7- SHOWING THE RESPONSES OF THE RESPONDENTS 44


ABOUT THEIR WORKLOAD.

8. TABLE NO.8- SHOWING THE VIEWS OF THE RESPONDENTS 45


ON THE STATEMENT’ SOMETIMES I HAVE TO WORK AT ODD
HOURS ALSO’.

9. TABLE NO.9- SHOWING THE VIEWS OF THE RESPONDENTS 46


ON THE MONETARY FACTOR OF THEIR PROFESSION.

10. TABLE NO.10- SHOWING THE RESPONSES OF THE RESPONDENTS 47


TO THE GROWTH FACTOR IN THEIR PROFESSION.

11. TABLE NO.11-SHOWING THE VIEWS OF THE RESPONDENTS ON 48


THE STATEMENT’ THE IMPATIENCE ON THE PART OF THE
PATIENTS IS SOMETIMES VERY IRRITATING’.

12. TABLE NO.12- SHOWING THE VIEWS OF THE RESPONDENTS 49


ON THEIR LONG WORKING HOURS.

13. TABLE NO.13- SHOWING THE VIEWS OF THE RESPONDENTS 50


ON THE STATEMENT’ WHEN I HAVE TO DEAL WITH PATIENTS
HAVING INCURABLE DISEASES, I GET UPSET’.

14. TABLE NO.14- SHOWING THE RESPONSES OF THE RESPONDENTS 51


ON THE STATEMENT’ PATIENTS HAVE VERY HIGH EXPECTATIONS
OF ME.’

15. TABLE NO.15- SHOWING THE RESPONSES OF THE RESPONDENTS 52


ON THE STATEMENT’ I AM NOT ABLE TO DO MANY THINGS FOR
WHICH I HAVE A GREAT LIKING.’

16. TABLE NO.16- SHOWING THE RESPONSES OF THE RESPONDENTS 53


ON THE STATEMENT’ I DO NOT FEEL GOOD WHEN I SEE LACK
OF TRUST IN MY PATIENTS TOWARDS ME.’
17. TABLE NO.17- SHOWING THE ANSWERS OF THE RESPONDENTS 54
ON THE LACK OF PROPER MEDICAL EQUIPMENTS IN THE HOSPITALS.

18. TABLE NO.18- SHOWING THE RESPONSES OF THE RESPONDENTS ON 55


THE STATEMENT’. WHEN I AM NOT ABLE TO MAKE MY PATIENTS
UNDERSTAND WHAT I WANT TO SAY, I GET VERY IRRITATED’.

19. TABLE NO.19- SHOWING THE VIEWS OF THE RESPONDENTS ON THE 56


LACK OF TIME TO UPGRADE THEIR KNOWLEDGE.

20. TABLE NO.20- SHOWING THE RESPONSES OF THE DOCTORS TO THE 57


FACT THAT MORE PATIENTS GO TO OTHER DOCTORS UPSETS THEM.

21. TABLE NO.21- SHOWING THE VIEWS OF THE REPONDENTS ON THE 58


STATEMENT’ LACK OF COOPERATION ON THE PART OF MY
COLLEAGUES TOWARDS MY PATIENTS DISTURB ME’.

22. TABLE NO.22- SHOWING THE RESPONSES OF THE RESPONDENTS ON 59


THE FEAR OF GETTING INFECTED WITH SOME DISEASES FROM THE
PATIENTS.

23. TABLE NO.23- SHOWING THE RESPONSES OF THE RESPONDENTS ON 60


THE STATEMENT’ WHEN I AM NOT ABLE TO HELP MY PATIENTS EVEN
AFTER MY BEST EFFORTS, I FEEL VERY UPSET.’

24. TABLE NO.24- SHOWING THE VIEWS OF THE DOCTORS ON THE LACK 61
OF TIME FOR THEIR FAMILIES DUE TO THEIR PROFESSION.

25. TABLE NO.25- SHOWING THE RESPONSES OF THE RESPONDENTS ON 62


THE STATEMENT’ SOMETIMES I HAVE TO COMPROMISE WITH MY
VALUES AND STANDARDS TO FULFILL THE NEEDS OF MY PROFESSION’.

26. TABLE NO.26- SHOWING THE RESPONSES OF THE RESPONDENTS ON 63


THE STATEMENT’ SOMETIMES IGNORANCE ON THE PART OF THE
PATIENTS IRRITATE ME’.

LIST OF FIGURES

S.NO. FIGURE NO. PAGE NO.

1. FIGURE NO.1- SHOWING THE STRESS LEVEL AMONG THE 39


DOCTORS OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTOR HOSPITALS.

2. FIGURE NO.2- SHOWING THE STRESS LEVEL AMONG THE 40


MALE AND FEMALE DOCTORS.

3. FIGURE NO.3- SHOWING THE STRESS LEVEL AMONG THE 41


MALE AND FEMALE DOCTORS OF BOTH PUBLIC AND
PRIVATE SECTORS.

4. FIGURE NO.4- SHOWING THE STRESS LEVEL AMONG THE 42


DOCTORS OF DIFFERENT AGE GROUPS.

5. FIGURE NO.5- SHOWING THE STRESS LEVEL AMONG THE 43


DOCTORS OF DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS.

6. FIGURE NO.6- SHOWING THE RESPONSES OF THE RESPONDENTS 44


ABOUT THEIR WORKLOAD.

7. FIGURE NO.7- SHOWING THE VIEWS OF THE RESPONDENTS 45


ON THE STATEMENT’ SOMETIMES I HAVE TO WORK AT ODD
HOURS ALSO’.

8. FIGURE NO.8- SHOWING THE VIEWS OF THE RESPONDENTS 46


ON THE MONETARY FACTOR OF THEIR PROFESSION.

9. FIGURE NO.9- SHOWING THE RESPONSES OF THE RESPONDENTS 47


TO THE GROWTH FACTOR IN THEIR PROFESSION.

10. FIGURE NO.10-SHOWING THE VIEWS OF THE RESPONDENTS ON 48


THE STATEMENT’ THE IMPATIENCE ON THE PART OF THE
PATIENTS IS SOMETIMES VERY IRRITATING’.

11. FIGURE NO.11- SHOWING THE VIEWS OF THE RESPONDENTS 49


ON THEIR LONG WORKING HOURS.

12. FIGURE NO.12- SHOWING THE VIEWS OF THE RESPONDENTS 50


ON THE STATEMENT’ WHEN I HAVE TO DEAL WITH PATIENTS
HAVING INCURABLE DISEASES, I GET UPSET’.

13. FIGURE NO.13- SHOWING THE RESPONSES OF THE RESPONDENTS 51


ON THE STATEMENT’ PATIENTS HAVE VERY HIGH EXPECTATIONS
OF ME.’

14. FIGURE NO.14- SHOWING THE RESPONSES OF THE RESPONDENTS 52


ON THE STATEMENT’ I AM NOT ABLE TO DO MANY THINGS FOR
WHICH I HAVE A GREAT LIKING.’

15. FIGURE NO.15- SHOWING THE RESPONSES OF THE RESPONDENTS 53


ON THE STATEMENT’ I DO NOT FEEL GOOD WHEN I SEE LACK
OF TRUST IN MY PATIENTS TOWARDS ME.’
16. FIGURE NO.16- SHOWING THE ANSWERS OF THE RESPONDENTS 54
ON THE LACK OF PROPER MEDICAL EQUIPMENTS IN THE HOSPITALS.

17. FIGURE NO.17- SHOWING THE RESPONSES OF THE RESPONDENTS ON 55


THE STATEMENT’. WHEN I AM NOT ABLE TO MAKE MY PATIENTS
UNDERSTAND WHAT I WANT TO SAY, I GET VERY IRRITATED’.

18. FIGURE NO.18- SHOWING THE VIEWS OF THE RESPONDENTS ON THE 56


LACK OF TIME TO UPGRADE THEIR KNOWLEDGE.

19. FIGURE NO.19- SHOWING THE RESPONSES OF THE DOCTORS TO THE 57


FACT THAT MORE PATIENTS GO TO OTHER DOCTORS UPSETS THEM.

20. FIGURE NO.20- SHOWING THE VIEWS OF THE REPONDENTS ON THE 58


STATEMENT’ LACK OF COOPERATION ON THE PART OF MY
COLLEAGUES TOWARDS MY PATIENTS DISTURB ME’.

21. FIGURE NO.21- SHOWING THE RESPONSES OF THE RESPONDENTS ON 59


THE FEAR OF GETTING INFECTED WITH SOME DISEASES FROM THE
PATIENTS.

22. FIGURE NO.22- SHOWING THE RESPONSES OF THE RESPONDENTS ON 60


THE STATEMENT’ WHEN I AM NOT ABLE TO HELP MY PATIENTS EVEN
AFTER MY BEST EFFORTS, I FEEL VERY UPSET.’

23. FIGURE NO.23- SHOWING THE VIEWS OF THE DOCTORS ON THE LACK 61
OF TIME FOR THEIR FAMILIES DUE TO THEIR PROFESSION.

24. FIGURE NO.24- SHOWING THE RESPONSES OF THE RESPONDENTS ON 62


THE STATEMENT’ SOMETIMES I HAVE TO COMPROMISE WITH MY
VALUES AND STANDARDS TO FULFILL THE NEEDS OF MY PROFESSION’.

25. FIGURE NO.25- SHOWING THE RESPONSES OF THE RESPONDENTS ON 63


THE STATEMENT’ SOMETIMES IGNORANCE ON THE PART OF THE
PATIENTS IRRITATE ME’.
REVIEW OF
LITERATUR
E
Stress, burnout and doctors' attitudes to work are
determined by personality and learning style: A twelve year
longitudinal study of UK medical graduates.

Background

Sir William Osler (1849–1919), one of the most distinguished physicians of the
nineteenth and early twentieth century, recognized that only some doctors are happy in
their professional lives:

"To each one of you the practice of medicine will be very much as you make it – to one a
worry, a care, a perpetual annoyance; to another, a daily joy and a life of as much
happiness and usefulness as can well fall to the lot of man."

The modern medical workplace is a complex environment, and doctors respond


differently to it, some finding it stimulating and exciting, whereas others become stressed
and burned out from the heavy workload. The medical workplace also provides an
environment where new skills are continually being learned, both as a result of medical
knowledge evolving and because a doctor's work changes, in part due to career
development and progression through different jobs.

In an important study, Delva et al used earlier research to develop two separate


instruments for studying how doctors work, the Approach to Work Questionnaire (AWQ)
and the Workplace Climate Questionnaire (WCQ). In Canadian physicians the AWQ
showed three separate factors, which were called Surface- Rational, Surface-
Disorganized, and Deep. These approaches related to different methods and motivations
for continuing medical education. Those with a deep approach preferred independent and
problem-based learning and motivation was internal. Surface-rational and surface-
disorganized approaches were primarily driven by external motivation, with the preferred
mode of continuing education learning being independent for the surface-rational, and in
consultations for the surface-disorganized.

The WCQ showed three dimensions, called Choice-Independence, Supportive-Receptive,


and Workload, which correlated with the AWQ. Doctors reporting Choice-Independence
and Supportive-Receptive work environments had a deeper approach, whereas those
describing an environment dominated by Workload tended to be more Surface-
Disorganized.

Some doctors are unhappy with their work, which can manifest as stress (usually assessed
by the General Health Questionnaire) or burnout, which has three separate components of
emotional exhaustion, depersonalization and reduced personal accomplishment. Greater
stress and burnout in doctors are related to the personality trait of neuroticism or 'negative
affectivity'.

The AWQ and WCQ provide a snapshot of a doctor's learning environment and approach
to work at one particular time, as also do measures of stress and burnout. A key question,
as Deary et al recognized when considering stress, is the extent to which different
approaches to work and the climate of the workplace are consequences of the workplace
or of the doctor. At first sight it might seem that the workplace itself has to be the
primary force driving both workplace learning and workplace climate. However, it is also
possible that approaches to learning and work mainly depend upon pre-existing
differences among doctors, differences that may already have manifested earlier in the
doctors' careers. The AWQ bears a strong formal similarity to the surface, deep and
strategic study habits and learning styles identified by the Study Process Questionnaire
(SPQ), which assesses the motivations and approaches used by students in higher
education. The similarity is not accidental since the AWQ was developed by adapting
items from Entwistle and Ramsden's Approaches to Study Inventory, which has a similar
factor structure to that of the Study Process Questionnaire.

In this paper we describe a large cohort of UK doctors, typically aged 29 or 30 at the time
of the study, who have been qualified for five or six years, who are practicing as SHOs or
SpRs in hospital or are in general practice, and who previously had been studied when
aged 17 or 18 at application to medical school in autumn 1990, in their final year at
medical school and as PRHOs. The main interest here will be in the extent to which a
doctor's present approaches to work and their workplace climate, as well as their stress
and burnout, relate to earlier measures of study habits and personality at application to
medical school and subsequently.

Method

Participants
In the autumn of 1990 a questionnaire was sent to all individuals with European
Community postal addresses who had applied to any of the five UK medical schools
taking part in the study ; they represented about 70% of all applicants and acceptances for
medical school in that year. The response rate was 93%. Students who were accepted for
entry in 1991, 1992 or 1993 were followed up in their final year at medical school (1995–
1998), when the response rate was 56%, and at the end of their PRHO year (1996–1999),
when the response rate was 58%. In 2002 a tracing exercise searched the Medical
Register and Medical Directory from 1995 to 2002 to find the addresses of as many
doctors as possible who were in the original survey, and who were known not to have
died, left medical school during basic medical sciences, or otherwise to be no longer in
the survey.

Questionnaire
Questionnaires were sent to all individuals with current or recent GMC addresses. The
questionnaire consisted of a single folded A3 sheet of paper (4 A4 sides). Included in the
present questionnaire (described in the results as '2002') were the 12-item General Health
Questionnaire (GHQ); an abbreviated version of the Maslach Burnout Inventory (aMBI),
which has three sub-scales, Emotional Exhaustion, Depersonalization, and Personal
Accomplishment ;a three-item scale modeled on the aMBI, which assesses Happiness
with a Medical Career ;an abbreviated version of the Study Process Questionnaire, which
has three sub-scales of Surface, Strategic and Deep learning; an abbreviated questionnaire
assessing the 'Big Five' personality dimensions of Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness
to Experience, Agreeableness and Conscientiousness; and abbreviated versions of the
Approach to Work Questionnaire (aAWQ) and the Workplace Climate Questionnaire
(aWCQ) , each of which has three sub-scales. The GHQ, aMBI and personality
questionnaire had also been administered previously in the PRHO survey, and the SPQ
had been administered in the Applicant and Final year surveys.

Procedure
Questionnaires, along with a postage-paid return envelope, were posted at the beginning
of December 2002. Two reminders were sent to non-respondents. Although the official
closing date was 25th March 2003, a few questionnaires were returned up until the end of
August 2003.

Statistical analysis used SPSS version 10.5, and structural equation modeling used
LISREL 8.52.

Results

The tracing exercise looked for 2,912 individuals thought to have completed basic
medical sciences and entered a clinical course. Eighty-nine had never been on the UK
Medical Register, and either had failed finals, had never registered, or had emigrated. Of
2,823 individuals who were traced, 2,754 doctors were on the 2002 Register, 7 returned
to the Register during 2002 and 64 were on an earlier Register. Of 2,823 questionnaires
sent, 176 were returned by the Post Office as undeliverable, 10 doctors were traveling
and hence uncontestable, and 2 had died. Of the remaining 2,635 doctors, 1,668 returned
questionnaires, giving a response rate of 63.3%. There was no evidence of response bias.

Respondents
The mean age of respondents on 1st December 2002 was 30.4 years (SD 1.86, range 28.3
– 49.2). There was substantial variation in the scores on the aAWQ and the aWCQ, and
the factor structures of the aAWQ and aWCQ were similar to those reported elsewhere.
There was also substantial variation on the measures of stress, burnout and satisfaction
with medicine as a career, with 21.3% of doctors (345/1617) reporting GHQ scores of 4
or more, the conventional level of 'case ness'.

Approaches to work and learning were correlated with climate in the workplace, and as in
the Delva et al study, the highest correlations were for a surface-disorganized approach
correlating with high workload, and a deep approach correlating with a supportive-
receptive environment and with choice-independence.

Approaches to work
The largest correlations were of a surface-rational approach with a strategic learning
style, and a deep approach to work with a deep learning style. In each case the
correlations were not only highly significant when study habits were measured in the
final year at medical school, six or seven years earlier, but were also very significantly
correlated with study habits measured at selection, twelve years earlier. Correlations of
approaches to work and stress, burnout and satisfaction with medicine were generally
small, and generally were only with measures taken in 2002, and not with measures taken
as a PRHO, five or six years earlier. The sole exception was that a surface-disorganized
approach correlated with high stress as measured by the GHQ, both in 2002 and with
stress when the doctors were PRHOs.

Workplace climate
In contrast to the associations with approaches to work, the workplace climate showed
only small correlations with study habits, but showed strong correlations with stress,
burnout and satisfaction with medicine. In particular, high stress in the PRHO year
showed very significant correlations with measures in 2002 of a perceived high
workload, a less supportive-receptive environment, and less choice-independence. In
addition, emotional exhaustion both in 2002 and in the PRHO year was related to a high
perceived workload in 2002.
Personality
The surface-disordered approach to work is associated with high neuroticism and low
conscientiousness, the PRHO correlations also being highly significant in each case.
Neuroticism, both in 2002 and as a PRHO, is also associated with a perceived high
workload (although in contrast to its prediction of a surface-disordered approach,
conscientiousness is not a significant correlate of workload). The deep approach to work
and learning is associated with being extravert and with greater openness to experience,
and again the measures taken six years earlier are predictive. Finally a supportive-
receptive work climate is associated with greater reported agreeableness, both in 2002
and six years earlier as a PRHO. There were no substantial correlations between
personality and the surface-rational approach to work or choice-independence in work
climate.

Multiple regressions
Multiple regressions were used to clarify the relationships. Each individual measure of
the aAWQ and aWCQ was regressed on the measures of study habits at application (n =
3) and in the final year (n = 3), of stress and burnout during the PRHO year (n = 4) and in
2002 (n = 4), and of personality in the PRHO year (n = 5) and in 2002 (n = 5). Alpha for
entry was set at p < 0.0001 in view of the large sample size and the number of
independent variables. Of particular interest are variables that show not only show
significant contemporaneous correlations but also significant correlations when measured
five or more years previously.

A surface-disorganized approach to work is predicted by surface learning in medical


school and by higher neuroticism scores and lower conscientiousness. The surface-
rational approach to work is predicted by strategic learning in medical school, and by less
openness to experience and higher conscientiousness. The deep approach to work is
predicted by a deep approach to learning at medical school, by greater extraversion, by
greater openness to experience, and by lower emotional exhaustion.

A workplace climate dominated by a high workload is predicted by higher stress and


emotional exhaustion measures five years earlier, and by lower openness to experience. A
supportive-receptive workplace is predicted by lower stress and depersonalization, and a
higher sense of personal accomplishment when measured previously, and by a more
agreeable personality. Choice-independence in the work environment is predicted only by
lower previous measures of stress.

Stress, burnout and satisfaction with medicine


Although in the previous analyses, stress and burnout have been used as predictors of
approaches to work and workplace climate, they are also important outcome measures in
their own right. Personality correlates with each of the measures, as do study habits.
Because of the complex inter-correlations between the dependent variables, multiple
regressions were used, as before, to find the most important relationships. Doctors who
are most stressed showed higher levels of neuroticism, both currently and previously, and
those reporting most emotional exhaustion also had higher neuroticism levels, as well as
being more introvert. High levels of depersonalization related to lower levels of
agreeableness. A greater sense of personal accomplishment related to previous deep
approaches to study and learning, as well as to being more extraverts. Overall satisfaction
with medicine as a career related to lower levels of neuroticism.

Path analysis
The complex relationships described by the various correlations are best analyzed and
described by means of path analysis or causal modeling, which analyses the entire set of
correlations between variables, using plausible assumptions about causality and removing
non-significant paths. The path diagram, which was analyzed using LISREL 8.52.
Measures to the left can causally influence measures to their right. Based on the time-
lagged correlations reported previously, we assumed that stress causes different
approaches to work, and we also assumed that approaches to work cause differences in
workplace climate rather than vice-versa. (Further longitudinal data will be required to
test that hypothesis). Study habits are temporally and causally prior to stress, approaches
to work and workplace climate. Personality, being a trait, was prior to all other measures.
Although several of our variables are measured at different time points, we have chosen
not to present a model in which each variable has been included on each occasion that it
is measured, as the resulting diagram becomes unmanageably complex.
Stress in our model is caused by personality differences, being greatest in those having
high neuroticism scores, low extraversion scores, and low conscientiousness scores. It is
unrelated to learning style.

Learning styles at medical school relate to different personality measures, in particular


showing no relationship to neuroticism. Deep learning is highest in extraverts who are
open to experience, whereas strategic learning is highest in highly conscientious
individuals with low openness to experience. Surface learning style is higher in introverts
who are low in openness to experience. These findings are similar to those of others.

Approaches to work are mainly but not entirely driven by learning styles. A deep
approach to work occurs in extraverts who are open to experience and have a deep
learning style. The surface-rational and surface-disorganized approaches to work are both
greater in those with a surface learning style. However, a surface-disorganized approach
occurs in individuals with higher neuroticism scores, in those with lower
conscientiousness scores, and in those who have been stressed, whereas the surface-
rational approach to work occurs in strategic learners and in those who are low in
openness to experience.

Workplace climate has a range of influences. High perceived workload occurs in those
with a surface-disorganized approach to work, which has been stressed and is more
neurotic. In contrast, choice-independence and a supportive-receptive environment both
occur in individuals who have not previously been stressed, the choice-independence
approach occurring in those with a deep approach to work, whereas the supportive-
receptive approach occurs in those who have higher scores on the personality trait of
agreeableness.

Discussion

Many doctors at the age of 30 are unhappy in their jobs, and a fifth of our sample reached
the conventional GHQ criterion of psychiatric 'case ness'. In contrast, many doctors
reported high levels of personal accomplishment, choice and independence in their work
environment, satisfaction with medicine as a career, and intellectual and emotional
satisfaction from their work. That is not new; Sir William Osler in 1905 contrasted
doctors "whose stability of character and devotion to duty make one proud of our
profession" with those who find it difficult to keep "the flame alive, smothered as it is apt
to be by the dust and ashes of the daily routine".

In 2001, Richard Smith asked "Why are doctors so unhappy?" and concluded that "The
most obvious cause of doctors' unhappiness is that they feel overworked and under
supported". Certainly many doctors in our study report a high workload and a work
climate that is neither supportive nor receptive, and those doctors also report more stress,
burnout and dissatisfaction with medicine as a career. It is tempting therefore to
conclude, as did an article in a special edition of BMJ Careers devoted to "Doctors'
Wellbeing", that excessive workload and absence of support are directly caused by poor
working conditions: "the way in which the NHS is run generates stress for members of
the workforce every day". However, such an interpretation is not straightforward in
general. It is particularly difficult for the doctors in our study because the study is
longitudinal, and workload and lack of support correlate with stress and burnout related
reported five or six years earlier, when the doctors were PRHOs and carrying out entirely
different jobs. High perceived workload and poor support are therefore determined as
much by doctors themselves as by specific working conditions. That view was expressed
in another article in the special edition of BMJ Careers: "A critical element contributing
to the stress that many conscientious doctors experience is internal...". A similar
conclusion was reached in a previous study of ours when these doctors were PRHOs, and
multi-level modeling showed that stress is not a characteristic of jobs but of doctors,
different doctors working in the same job being no more similar in their stress and
burnout than different doctors in different jobs.

If differences in reported workload are partly explained by differences among doctors,


what in turn explains those differences? Doctors reporting a high workload also have
what Delva et al describe as a Surface-Disorganized approach to work, which in turn is
correlated with being a surface learner at application to medical school, a dozen years
previously. Surface-disorganized doctors are also high on the personality trait of
neuroticism and low on the trait of conscientiousness; and again those correlations are
with measures taken six years earlier when the doctors were PRHOs. Doctors reporting a
work climate low in support were lower on the personality scale of agreeableness in the
measures collected when they were PRHOs.

Some doctors may be stressed and burned out, but what predicts those others who are
happy in their work? Doctors reporting high satisfaction with medicine as a career have a
deep approach to work, and that approach is more common in those who also had a deep
learning style when they applied to medical school. Satisfaction with medicine also
relates directly to the personality traits of greater extraversion and lower neuroticism, and
the deep approach to work correlates with greater extraversion and more openness to
experience. Doctors who describe their colleagues as receptive and supportive score more
highly on the personality trait of agreeableness; and as in many other correlations
reported here, that correlation is stable across time – those who are more agreeable at the
age of 24 have a more receptive and supportive work environment when aged 30.

An overview of our findings is that approaches to work are predicted by earlier measures
of study habits and learning styles, whereas perceived work climate, and its pathologies
such as stress and burnout, is predicted mainly by personality. Although unfortunately
our study did not measure personality during selection, the high stability of the Big Five
measures across the life-span (and across our two measures six years apart), as well as
their heritable component, means that we have little doubt that personality at selection
would also have been predictive, particularly given that a similar pattern of correlations
was found in a different cohort of doctors in mid-career. Other studies on very different
groups of students have also found, like us, that both strategic and deep learning correlate
with conscientiousness, and that deep learning also correlates with extraversion and
openness to experience. Our study has, for various reasons, not looked at academic
performance in relation to study habits, learning styles and personality, although previous
work of ours has found clear correlations between learning styles and examination
performance. In contrast we have not found any correlation of undergraduate or
postgraduate academic achievement with personality, and although some studies have
found correlations of conscientiousness with academic achievement. This does seem to
vary according to the learning context. Although we will be looking at this question again
in more detail in a further analysis, it does seem probable that personality mostly has an
indirect effect upon academic achievement via approaches to learning.

If, as William Wordsworth said, "The child is father to the man", then the seeds of
subsequent job satisfaction and dissatisfaction in doctors may be visible in the
personality, motivations and learning styles of medical school applicants. This argument
may provide some justification for using such measures in selection, particularly given
the general association of job performance and satisfaction with personality and
motivation, and learning styles with personality.

However, just as genes are not destiny, so neither personality nor learning style is
destiny. Nurture interacts with nature, the environment building upon the genes, and the
genes using what is provided by the environment; the poetic complement to William
Wordsworth is therefore Alexander Pope, who said, "This education forms the common
mind: Just as the twig is bent, the tree's inclined." Extreme introverts can, with sufficient
insight, preparation and appropriate training become effective public speakers, less
conscientious individuals can learn to be more organized and efficient, and those who are
more neurotic can transcend their anxieties (and indeed neuroticism may be beneficial if
sublimated into a professional concern for detail in critical situations, rather than merely
being undifferentiated personal anxiety). .

Formal education, particularly effective formal education, can also alter study habits and
learning styles, which are less fixed and 'trait-like' than personality measures. Intercalated
degrees increase deep and strategic learning and decrease surface learning at medical
school, making it likely that they also encourage surface-rational and deep approaches to
work. Deep and strategic learning also relate to the clinical experience gained by medical
students, making it possible that greater patient involvement during undergraduate
clinical training, rather than mere reliance on textbook learning to pass exams, a
characteristic of surface learners, will also reduce surface-disorganized approaches to
work.

Conclusions
Longitudinal data suggest that personality and learning style are not merely correlates of
approaches to work, workplace climate, stress, burnout and satisfaction with a medical
career, but are causes, events later in time being predicted by events earlier in time.
Doctors with greater stress and emotional exhaustion, who were less satisfied with
medicine as a career, had higher neuroticism scores and were more likely to be surface-
disorganized,. Lower conscientiousness on the personality measure also predicted greater
stress. Extraverts reported more personal accomplishment and were more satisfied with
medicine. The personality measure of agreeableness predicted a more supportive-
receptive work environment.

These results imply that differences in approach to work and workplace climate in our
study result from differences among doctors themselves, as much as they do from
differences in working conditions.
INTRODUCTION
TO
TOPIC
STRESS
Modern life is full of stress. Stress on individuals ranges from personal day-to-day life to
their organizational activities. Urbanization, industrialization and increase in scale of
operations in the society are causing increasing stresses. In this changing environment,
participation, interaction, transaction, planning, and regulation become key issues, each
with its own frustrations attached. People feel stress as they can no longer have complete
control over what happens in life. There is no escape from stress in modern life.
Therefore, our attempt should be to understand stress, its causes and adopting strategies
for minimizing the impact of stress.

CONCEPT AND FEATURES OF STRESS

There are several terms that are used synonymously with similar in meaning as stress.
Four such terms are: stress, strain, conflict and pressure. These words are used to denote
the effect of stress on the individual, though there may be thin differences in these terms.
Stress is a term basically used in engineering which means pressure on an object by
another. This term was introduced into the social sciences by Hans Seyle in 1936. He
views stress as the ‘non-specifically induced changes within a biological system.’ It is
non-specific because any adaptation to a problem faced by the body, irrespective of the
nature of the problem, is included. Ivancevich and Matteson define stress as ‘an adaptive
response, mediated by individual characteristics and/or psychological processes, that is
consequence of any external action, situation, or event that places special physical and/or’
psychological demands upon a person.’ In a simplified way, stress can be defined as an
adaptive response to an external factor that results in physical, psychological, or
behavioral deviations in an individual. Based on this definition, following features of
stress can be identified.

1. Stress may in result any kind of deviation – physical, psychological, or behavioral


– in the person. This deviation is from the usual state of affairs. From this point of
view, stress is different than anxiety which operates solely in the emotional and
psychological sphere. Thus, stress may be accompanied by anxiety but it is more
comprehensive than the latter.
2. Stress may be result of individual’s interaction with environmental stimuli. Such
stimuli may be in any form, interpersonal interaction, event, and so on. The
impact of stimuli produces deviation in the individual.
3. It is not necessary stress is always dysfunctional. On the contrary, there may be
some stresses, called eustress, like stress for creative work, entrepreneurial
activities, keen competition, etc., which stimulate better productivity. It is only the
dysfunctional stress, called distress, which is bad and must be overcome.
4. Stress can be either temporary or long term, mild or severe, depending mostly on
how long its causes continue, how powerful they are, and how strong the
individual’s powers are. If stress is temporary and mild, most people can handle it
or at least recover from its effect rather quickly. Similarly, persons who have
strong power for tolerating stress can cope with stress more quickly.

CAUSES OF STRESS
There may be numerous conditions in which people may feel stress. Conditions that tend
to cause stress are called stressors. Although even a single stressor may cause major
stress, like death of near one, usually stressors combine to press an individual in a variety
of ways until stress develops. The various stressors can be grouped in four categories:
individual, group, organizational, and extra organizational. Within each category, there
may be several stressors. Though, stressors have classified into these categories, all
eventually get down to the individual level and put stress on individuals.

Individual Stressors
There are many stressors at the level of individual which may be generated in the context
of organizational life or his personal life. These are several such events which may work
as stressors. These are life and career change, personality type, and role characteristics.
1. Life and career changes. Stress is produced by several changes in life and
career. Research studies show that in general, every transition or change produces
stress. People in newer places experience such state of transition of stress. Young
adults between 20 and 30 years of age have been found to report twice as many
stressful events, compared to older people. Stress has been found more amongst
urban population than rural, and greater in higher educational categories. Any
change in life of an individual puts him in disequilibrium state of affairs and he is
required to bring a new equilibrium. In this process, he experiences stress.
Depending upon change and new equilibrium required as a consequence, the
impact of stress would be. Life’s changes may be slow and gradual (getting older)
or sudden (death of spouse). In both cases, intensity of stress would be different.
Like life changes, there may be changes in career, in the form of promotion,
demotion, transfer, separation. With each change, some kind of stress is
experienced.
2. Personality Type. Personality characteristics also become source of stress.
Personality A type people are always in hurry and show behavior of always
moving, walking rapidly, eating rapidly, talking rapidly, doing two or more things
at a time, constantly feeling pressure of time, measuring success in terms of
quantity, more aggressive and competitive, feeling boredom during leisure period.
These people experience more stress.
3. Role Characteristics. There may be role stress either because of role conflict or
role ambiguity. Role conflict arises because of incompatibility of two or more
roles. When people become members of several systems like family, club,
voluntary organization, work organization, etc., they are expected to fulfill certain
obligation to each system and to fit into defined places in that system. In many
situations, the various roles may have conflicting demands and people
experiences stress as they are not able to fulfill the conflicting role requirements.
In organizational context, role conflict arises because of incompability between
job tasks, resources, rules and politics, and other people. Another source of role
stress is the role ambiguity in which people are not clear about the actual
expectations from a role. This may be because of inadequate knowledge or
information to do a job.

Group Stressors

Group interaction affects human behavior. Therefore, there may be some factors in group
processes which act as stressors. Following are the major group stressors.
1. Lack of group cohesiveness. Group cohesiveness is important for the satisfaction
of individuals in group interaction. When they are denied the opportunity for this
cohesiveness, it becomes very stressing for them as they get negative reaction
from group members.
2. Lack of social support. When individuals get social support from members of
the group, they are able to satisfy their social needs and they are better off. When
this social support does not come, it becomes stressing for them.
3. Conflict. Any conflict arising out of group interaction may become stressing for
the individuals, be it interpersonal conflict among the group members or
intergroup conflict.

Organizational stressors
An organization is composed of individuals and groups and, therefore, individual and
group stressors may also exist in organizational context. However, there are macro level
dimensions of organizational functioning which may work as stressors. The major
organizational stressors are as follows:
1. Organizational policies. Organizational policies provide guidelines for action.
Unfavorable and ambiguous policies may affect the functioning of the individuals
adversely and they may experience stress. Thus, unfair and arbitrary performance
evaluation, unrealistic job description, frequent reallocation of activities, rotating
work shifts, ambiguous procedures, inflexible rules, inequality of incentives, etc.,
work as stressors.
2. Organization structure. Organization structure provides formal relationships
among individuals in an organization. Any defect in organization structure like
lack of opportunity of participation in decision making, lack of opportunity for
advancement, high degree of specialization, excessive interdependence of various
departments, line and staff conflict, etc., works as stressors as relationships among
individuals and groups do not work effectively.
3. Organizational processes. Organizational processes also affect individual
behavior at work. Faulty organizational processes like poor communication, poor
and inadequate feedback of work performance, ambiguous and conflicting roles,
unfair control systems, inadequate information flow cause stress for people in the
organization.
4. Physical conditions. Organizational physical conditions affect work
performance. Thus, poor physical conditions like crowding and lack of privacy,
excessive noise, excessive heat or cold, pressure of toxic chemicals and radiation,
air pollution, safety hazards, poor lighting, etc., produce stress on people.

Extra organizational stressors

Since an organization interacts continuously with its environment, events happening


outside the organization also work as stressors. Thus, social and technical changes,
economic and financial conditions, social class conflicts, community conditions, etc.,
work as stressors.

EFFECTS OF STRESS

Generally, stress is considered to be negative, thereby meaning that it has negative


consequences. However, not all stresses can be put in the negative category. In fact, low
level stress contributes positively to the work performance. Mild stress such as working
under new supervisor, transfer from one place to another may result in an increased
search for information in the job. This may lead employees to new and better ways of
doing their jobs. In certain jobs such as sales or creativity (newspaper journalism,
radio/television announcement where time pressure is significant), a mild level of stress
contributes positively to productivity. However, it is the dysfunctional aspect of stress
which has received greater attention. If the level of stress is high, performance drops off
sharply. Stress affects human beings physically, psychologically, and behaviorally, and
they face problems on these three levels.

PHYSICAL PROBLEMS
Stress causes physical reactions, including autonomic, excitability of nerves, increased
heart rate, and a decrease in body temperature. A research finding suggests that high level
stress is accompanied by high blood pressure and high level of cholesterol and can result
in heart disease, ulcer and arthritis. There may even be link between stress and cancer.
Such serious ailments, however, are not caused exclusively by stress alone; physical
characteristics of the individuals have their own contributions. These ailments have a
drastic effect on the individuals, their families and organizations.

PSYCHOLOGICAL PROBLEMS
High level of stress may be accompanied by psychological reactions such as anger,
anxiety, depression, nervousness, irritability, tension, and boredom depending upon the
nature of stress and the capacity of individuals to bear stress. The effects of psychological
reactions of individuals may be changes in mood and other emotional states, lowered self
esteem, resentment of supervision, inability to concentrate and make decisions, and job
dissatisfaction. These affect productivity in the organization adversely.

BEHAVIOURAL PROBLEMS
People show dysfunctional behavior because of stress of high level. Such behavior may
be in the form of alcoholism, drug addiction, increased smoking, sleeplessness,
under/overeating, etc. In extreme cases, when the individual is not able to bear stress, it
may result into suicide. At the work place, people may show behavior like tardiness,
absenteeism, and turnover. In all these cases, organization is going to suffer.

COPING STRATEGIES FOR STRESS

Any high level of stress affects the individual directly and through him, his family and
organization. Therefore, efforts should be made to overcome the negative consequences.
Such efforts can be made at two levels: individual level and organizational level.

INDIVIDUAL COPING STARTEGIES

Stress may cause within organizational context and outside as discussed earlier.
Therefore, coping strategies may be adopted by individuals without reference to the
organization. Individual coping strategies tend to be more reactive in nature. That is, they
tend to be ways of coping with stress that has already occurred. Some individual
strategies, such as physical exercises, can be both reactive and proactive, but most are
geared towards helping the person who is already suffering from stress. Following are the
major individual coping strategies:
1. Physical Exercise: Physical exercise is a good strategy to get body fit and to
overcome stress. Physical exercises of different types such as walking, jogging,
swimming, playing, etc. are good methods of overcoming stress. The role of
Yoga, a scientific technique of physical exercise to keep body fit and to overcome
stress, has been recognized in most parts of the world. Physical exercise helps
people to better cope with stress generally as a side effect, such as relaxation,
enhanced self-esteem, and simply getting one’s mind off work for a while.
2. Relaxation: Impact of stress can be overcome by relaxation. The relaxation can
be simple one or some specific techniques of relaxation such as biofeedback and
meditation. In biofeedback, the individual learns the internal rhythms of a
particular body process through electronics signals fed back that is wired to the
body area (for example, skin, brain, or heart). From this feedback, the person can
learn to control body process in question. Meditation involves quite concentrated
inner thought in order to rest the body physically and emotionally. Transcendental
meditation is one of the more popular practices of meditation. In this practice, the
meditator tries to meditate for two periods of fifteen to twenty minutes a day,
concentrating on the repetition of some mantra. Any meditation essentially
involves a relatively quiet environment, a comfortable position, a repetitive
mental stimulus, and a passive attitude. Whether a person takes one or specific
relaxation technique, the intent is to eliminate the immediately stressful situation
more effectively.
3. Work –Home Transition. Work – home transition is also like a relaxation
technique. In this technique, a person may attend to less pressure inducting type
or routine work during the last 30 to 60 minutes of work time. For instance,
during the last hour of work, the person can review the day’s activities; list the
priorities of the activities that need to be attended to the next day. Thus, he can
finish his day’s work and come back home in more relaxed manner.
4. Cognitive theory. Because of increasing stress, special cognitive therapy
techniques have been developed by psychologists. In these techniques, lectures
and interactive discussion sessions are arranged to help participants (i) recognize
events at work and what cognitions they elicit; (ii) become aware of the effects of
such cognitions on their physiological and emotional responses; (iii)
systematically evaluate the objective consequences of events at work; and (iv)
replace self-defeating cognitions that unnecessarily arouse strain.
5. Networking. Networking is the formation of close associations with trusted,
empathetic coworkers and colleagues who are good listeners and confidence
builders. Such persons provide mental support to get the person through stressful
situation.

ORGANIZATIONAL COPING STRATEGIES

Organizational strategies are more of proactive nature, that is, they attempt at removing
existing or potential stressors and prevent the onset of stress for individual jobholders.
The organizational coping strategies revolve around those factors which produce or help
producing stresses. Following are organizational coping techniques and efforts:
1. Supportive Organizational Climate. Many of the organizational stressors
emerge because of faulty organizational processes and practices. To a very great
extent, these can be controlled by creating supportive organizational climate.
Supportive organizational climate depends upon managerial leadership rather than
the use of power and money to control organizational behavior. The focus is
primarily on participation and involvement of employees in decision making
process. Such a climate develops belongingness among people which helps them
reduce their stress.
2. Job Enrichment. A major source of stress is the monotonous and disinteresting
jobs performed by employees in the organization. Through more rational
designing of jobs, jobs can be enriched. Improving content factors such as
responsibility, recognition, opportunity for achievement and advancement, or
improving core job characteristics such as skill variety, task identity, task
significance, autonomy, and feedback may lead to motivation, feeling sense of
responsibility, and utilizing maximum capability at the work. Such a phenomenon
helps in reducing stress.
3. Organizational Role Clarity. People experience stress when they are not clear
about what they are expected to do in the organization. This may happen because
either there is ambiguity in the role or there is role conflict. Such a situation can
be overcome by defining role more clearly. Role analysis technique helps both
managers and employees to analyze what the job entails and what the
expectations are. Breaking down the job to its various components clarifies the
role of the job incumbent for the entire system. This helps to eliminate imposing
unrealistic expectations on the individual. Role ambiguity, role conflict, and role
overload can be minimized, consequently leading to reduced stress.
4. Career Planning and Counseling. Career planning and counseling helps the
employees to obtain professional advice regarding career paths that would help
them to achieve personal goals. It also makes them aware of what additional
qualifications, training, and skills they should acquire for career advancement. A
variety of career counseling programs can be adopted: (i) devices designed to aid
the individuals in self-assessment and increased self-understanding; (ii) devices
designed to communicate opportunities available to individuals; (iii) career
counseling through interviews by managers, counseling professionals, and
personal and educational specialists; (iv) workshops and educational activities
designed to assist the individuals in goal setting and establishing action plan for
change; (v) educational and experimental programmes to prepare individuals with
skills and knowledge for new activities and new careers; (vi) programmes for
enhancing the individuals’ opportunities to make job and career changes. Various
career planning and counseling programs for individuals go a long way in
providing them satisfaction and reducing the stress.
5. Stress Control Workshops and Employee Assistance Programmes. The
organization can hold periodical workshops for control and reduction of stress.
Such workshops may help individuals to learn the dynamics of stress and methods
of overcoming their ill effects. Similarly, the organization can make arrangement
for assisting individuals in overcoming their personal and family problems. This
arrangement may include managing personal finance, dealing with family
problems, and dealing with other kind of personal and family stresses.
NEED OF STUDY
Modern life is full of stress. Stress on individuals ranges from personal day-to-day life to
their work life. People feel stress as they can no longer have complete control over what
happens in their lives. Today high level of stress is being experienced by almost every
individual, having any profession such as engineers, company managers, scientists,
doctors, etc. Even students and house wives experience high level of stress. I have chosen
doctors as my subject of study who are also known as life- savers. This is the only
profession where lives of the people are involved with the work of the doctors. So doctors
have this additional stress with their routine stresses. There are certain other factors also
involved which cause high level of stress to the doctors but very less attempt have been
made till date to study those factors which cause high level of stress among the doctors.
There are very less no. of studies undertaken to analyze level of stress among the medical
practitioners especially in a particular area as I have chosen the entire area of and around
Patiala to conduct my study. There is no study which has been especially done in the area
of Patiala.
After choosing the doctors as my subject of study, I found it very
important to compare the level of stress among the doctors of public and private sector
because it is always perceived by the people and even the doctors who work privately
that government employees has less stress than them so I decided to do a compa rative
study so that I can analyze those factors which make the stress level high in private sector
doctors. Hence, these are some of the reasons which inspired me to choose this topic as
my major research project.
OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

.To study the factors causing stress among the medical practitioners.

.To compare the level of stress among the doctors of public and private sector.

.To analyze the factors which cause comparatively more stress among the doctors.
SCOPE OF STUDY
In order to accomplish the objectives of the project, I conducted a survey in and around
the area of city Patiala, PUNJAB. The survey was restricted to the doctors of Patiala only.
The doctors employed in government hospitals like Government Rajindra Hospital and
Mata Kaushalya Hospital and private hospitals like Amar Hospital, Giani Lal Singh
Memorial Hospital, Patiala Heart Institute and various other private nursing homes were
asked to fill the questionnaires designed for the purpose of survey.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

RESEARCH DESIGN

After research objectives the second stage of research calls for developing the most
efficient plan for gathering the needed information. Designing a research plan includes
decisions on data sources, research approaches, research instrument & sampling plan.

SOURCE OF DATA

Source of data used by me is the primary one. Primary data is a kind of first hand
information and thus happens to be original. I personally went to all the respondents and
got their views in the questionnaire designed for this purpose.

RESEARCH APPROACH

Primary data can be collected in four ways: Observation. Focus groups, Surveys &
Experiments. My approach to the research is survey based as it is best suited to know the
views of the respondents by contacting them personally.

SAMPLING DESIGN

The first step in developing any sample design is to clearly define the set of objects, as
my study is exploratory, the sampling design includes three decisions i.e. sampling unit,
Sample size & Sampling procedures.

SAMPLING UNIT

Sampling unit used to carry the research is the doctors of both public and private sector.
SAMPLING SIZE

The sample size of my research is 100 doctors from various hospitals. Out of which 50
doctors are from private sector and 50 from public sector. Large samples give more
reliable results that is why I tried my best to cover more no. of doctors.

SAMPLING TECHNIQUES

For this project, the sampling technique used to choose the samples for survey is simple
and convenient method.

DATA COLLECTION TECHNIQUE


To conduct the survey, the data is collected through questionnaire method. A
questionnaire was structured and the doctors were asked to fill the same.
LIMITATIONS
Though I tried my best to conduct the study in proper manner but there may be some
limitations of the study:

1. The size of the research may not be substantial.


2. There was lack of time on the part of respondents.
3. There may be some bias information provided by the doctors.
4. It is very much possible that some of the respondents may have given the
incorrect information.
5. As the questionnaire was prepared as per my own knowledge so it may not be
appropriate and some important aspects may be missing fro m it.
ANALYSIS OF
THE DATA
TABLE 1: DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF THE
RESPONDENTS

S.NO. FACTOR NO.OF PERCENTAGE OF


RESPONDENTS RESPONDENTS
1. GENDER
MALE 64 64%
FEMALE 36 36%

2. SECTOR
GOVERNMENT 50 50%
PRIVATE 50 50%

3. AGE GROUP
30-40 46 46%
40-50 26 26%
50-60 28 28%
ANALYSIS ON THE BASIS OF MEAN.

For the results obtained from the questionnaires filled by the respondents, mean has been
calculated. The results of the calculated mean shows that the most stress causing factor
among the doctors of government hospitals is the time factor. Doctors of government
sector complain that they do not get enough time to do things for which they have great
liking. They think that they are not able to give enough time to their families. The
calculated value of mean for the time factor is 3.94. The second most stress causing
factors are impatience on the part of the patients, expectations of the patients from the
doctors and the duty at odd hours also. The mean value for these factors is 3.76. These
stress causing factors are followed b y other factors like the fear of getting infected with
some diseases from the patients, lack of proper medical equipments in the hospitals,
unable to help patients even after their best efforts etc. The respective values of mean for
these factors are 3.70, 3.68, 3.64 etc. The least stress causing factors among the doctors
of government sector is when they have to deal with patients having incurable diseases,
the mean value for which is 2.70.

On the other hand, the analysis of the data shows that the most stress causing factor
among the doctors of private hospitals is that they have at work at odd hours also. The
calculated value of mean for which is 4.28 which is much higher than any other stress
causing factor among the doctors of government sector. The second most stress causing
factor is that when they are not able to help patients even after their best efforts. The
mean value for this factor is 4.20 which is very close to the most stress causing factor
among the doctors of public sector. The other factors like the impatience on the part of
the patients, lack of trust in the patients towards them, high expectations of the patients
etc. are responsible for high level of stress among the doctors of private hospitals. The
respective values of means for these factors are 4.12, 4.02, 4.0 etc. The least stress
causing factor among the doctors of private hospitals is the fact that more patients go to
other doctors, the mean value for which is 2.52.
After the calculation of mean for the responses given by the doctors of both private and
public sector, it is also revealed that the private sector doctors are living more stressful
life than the doctors of public sector. Doctors working in private hospitals have more
stress from their profession than the doctors working in government hospitals. The total
mean value for all the stress causing factors for the private sector doctors is 70.1 whereas
this value for public sector doctors is 66.6.
TABLE 2: SHOWING THE STRESS LEVEL AMONG THE
DOCTORS OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTOR HOSPITALS .

SECTOR LEVEL OF STRESS


Low Moderate High
No. Of % Of No. Of % Of No. Of % Of
respondents respondents respondents respondents respondents respondents
Public 2 4 33 66 15 30
Private 0 0 22 44 28 56

Level of Stress Among the Public and Private


Doctors

70
60
% of Respondents

50
40 public
30 private
20
10
0
low moderate high
FIGURE 1 : SHOWING THELevel
STRESS LEVEL AMONG THE
of Stress
DOCTORS OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTOR HOSPITALS.

INTERPRETATION : The above table shows that only public sector doctors have low
level of stress. It also shows that the private sector doctors have more of high level of
stress than the public sector doctors whereas public sector doctors have more of moderate
stress.
TABLE 3: SHOWING THE STRESS LEVEL AMONG THE
MALE AND FEMALE DOCTORS.

GENDER LEVEL OF STRESS


Low Moderate High
No. Of % Of No. Of % Of No. Of % Of
respondents respondents respondents respondents respondents respondents
Male 2 3.1 32 50 30 46.8
Female 0 0 22 61.1 14 38.8

Level of Stress among the Male and Female


Doctors

70
% of Respondents

60
50
40 Male
30 Female
20
10
0
low moderate high
Level of Stress

FIGURE 2: SHOWING THE STRESS LEVEL AMONG THE


MALE AND FEMALE DOCTORS.

INTERPRETATION: The above table shows that the female doctors have more of
moderate level of stress but on the other hand male doctors have more of high level of
stress.
TABLE 4: SHOWING THE STRESS LEVEL AMONG THE
MALE AND FEMALE DOCTORS OF BOTH PUBLIC AND
PRIVATE SECTORS.

SECTOR GENDER LEVEL OF STRESS


Low Moderate High
No. Of % Of No. Of % Of No. Of % Of
respondents respondents respondents respondents respondents respondents
Pubic Male 2 6.25 19 59.3 11 34.3
Female 0 0 14 77.7 4 22.2
Private Male 0 0 14 43.7 18 56.2
Female 0 0 8 44.4 10 55.5

Level of stress among the Male and Female Doctors


of Both Public and Private Sector
% of respondents

100
80 low
60
moderate
40
20 high
0
Male Female Male Female

public Private
Level of Stress

FIGURE 3: SHOWING THE STRESS LEVEL AMONG THE


MALE AND FEMALE DOCTORS OF BOTH PUBLIC AND
PRIVATE SECTORS.

INTERPRETATION: The above table shows that both male and female doctors of
private sector have high level of stress whereas the doctors of public sector suffer from
more of moderate level of stress.
TABLE 5: SHOWING THE STRESS LEVEL AMONG THE
DOCTORS OF DIFFERENT AGE GROUPS.

AGE
GR
OU
P LEVEL OF STRESS
Low Moderate High
No. Of % Of No. Of % Of No. Of % Of
respondents respondents respondents respondents respondents respondents
30-40 0 0 26 56.5 20 43.4
40-50 0 0 15 57.6 11 42.3
50-60 2 7.14 14 50 12 42.8

Level of Stess among the doctors of Different Age


Groups

70
% of Respondents

60
50 30-40
40
40-50
30
20 50-60
10
0
low moderate high
Level of Stress

FIGURE 4: SHOWING THE STRESS LEVEL AMONG THE


DOCTORS OF DIFFERENT AGE GROUPS.

INTERPRETATION: It is clear from the above table that the doctors of age group 50-
60 have comparatively low level of stress than the doctors of other age groups. Moreover,
the doctors of age groups 30-40 and 40-50 have almost same level of stress in them.
TABLE 6: SHOWING THE STRESS LEVEL AMONG THE
DOCTORS OF DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS.
DEPARTMENT LEVEL OF STRESS
Low Moderate High
No. Of % Of No. Of % Of No. Of % Of
respondents respondents respondents respondents respondents respondents
Plastic Surgery 0 0 6 100 0 0
Skin 2 33.3 0 0 4 66.6
ENT 0 0 6 50 6 50
Dental 0 0 8 57.1 6 42.8
Psychiatry 0 0 6 100 0 0
Physiotherapy 0 0 2 20 8 80
Gynecology 0 0 8 80 2 20
Eye 0 0 0 0 6 100
Medicine 0 0 12 75 4 25
Urology 0 0 0 0 6 100
Surgery 0 0 2 50 2 50
Neurology 0 0 4 100 0 0

Level of Stress among the Doctors of different


Departments
% of Respondents

120
100 low
80
60 moderate
40
20 high
0
al

o
Su gy
De T

y
e
in

Ur ne
io

ed e
PS

Ph .
y

er

ur
EN

yn

y
nt
Sk

ys
Ps

o
E

Ne
ic

rg
ol
G

Level of Stress

PS=Plastic Surgery
PSY. = Psychiatry
PHYSIO= Physiotherapy
GYNE= Gynecology
NEURO=Neurology

FIGURE 5: SHOWING THE STRESS LEVEL AMONG THE


DOCTORS OF DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS.
FACTOR-WISE ANALYSIS

TABLE 7: SHOWING THE RESPONSES OF THE RESPONDENTS


ABOUT THEIR WORKLOAD.

NO.OF % OF
SCALE RESPONDENTS RESPONDENTS
Strongly Agree 22 22
Agree 28 28
Neutral 32 32
Disagree 14 14
Strongly Disagree 4 4

35

30
% of respondents

25

20 % OF
15 RESPONDENTS

10

0
SA A N DA SDA
Scale

FIGURE 6: SHOWING THE RESPONSES OF THE RESPONDENTS


ABOUT THEIR WORKLOAD.

INTERPRETATION: The above table shows that maximum respondents agree to this
fact that their workload is too heavy and 32% of the total respondents take this fact as
neutral.
TABLE 8: ’Sometimes I have to work at odd hours also’. The views of
the respondents on this statement are shown in the below table:

NO.OF % OF
SCALE RESPONDENTS RESPONDENTS
Strongly Agree 32 32
Agree 46 46
Neutral 18 18
Disagree 0 0
Strongly Disagree 4 4

50
45
40
% of respondents

35
30
% OF
25
RESPONDENTS
20
15
10
5
0
SA A N DA SDA
Scale

FIGURE 7: SHOWING THE RESPONSES OF THE RESPONDENTS


ON THE ABOVE STATEMENT.

INTERPRETATION: The above table depicts that almost every respondent agreed to
this fact that they have to work at odd hours also and only 4% of them disagree to this
fact.
TABLE 9: SHOWING THE VIEWS OF THE RESPONDENTS ON
THE MONETARY FACTOR OF THEIR PROFESSION.

NO.OF % OF
SCALE RESPONDENTS RESPONDENTS
Strongly Agree 12 12
Agree 32 32
Neutral 26 26
Disagree 17 17
Strongly Disagree 13 13

35

30
% of respondents

25

20 % OF
15 RESPONDENTS

10
5

0
SA A N DA SDA
Scale

FIGURE 8: SHOWING THE VIEWS OF THE RESPONDENTS ON


THE MONETARY FACTOR OF THEIR PROFESSION.

INTERPRETATION: The above table clearly shows that 32% of the doctors agree that
they are not being paid according to their work and 26% of them gave a very neutral
reaction for this factor.
TABLE 10: SHOWING THE RESPONSES OF THE RESPONDENTS
TO THE GROWTH FACTOR IN THEIR PROFESSION.

NO.OF % OF
SCALE RESPONDENTS RESPONDENTS
Strongly Agree 13 13
Agree 41 41
Neutral 15 15
Disagree 17 17
Strongly Disagree 14 14

45
40
35
% of respondents

30
25 % OF
20 RESPONDENTS
15
10
5
0
SA A N DA SDA
Scale

FIGURE 9: SHOWING THE RESPONSES OF THE RESPONDENTS


TO THE GROWTH FACTOR IN THEIR PROFESSION.

INTERPRETATION: The above table depicts that maximum doctors agree that they are
not growing and developing in their profession whereas 17% of them disagree and 14%
of them strongly disagree to this fact.
TABLE 11: ‘The impatience on the part of the patients is sometimes
very irritating’. The views of the respondents on this statement are
shown in the below table:

NO.OF % OF
SCALE RESPONDENTS RESPONDENTS
Strongly Agree 23 23
Agree 55 55
Neutral 16 16
Disagree 5 5
Strongly Disagree 1 1

60

50
% of respondents

40
% OF
30
RESPONDENTS
20

10

0
SA A N DA SDA
Scale

FIGURE 10: SHOWING THE RESPONSES OF THE RESPONDENTS


ON THE ABOVE STATEMENT.

INTERPRETATION: The above shown table tells us that almost every doctor gets
irritated because of the impatience shown by the patients and only 5% of them disagree to
this fact.
TABLE 12: SHOWING THE VIEWS OF THE RESPONDENTS ON
THEIR LONG WORKING HOURS.

NO.OF % OF
SCALE RESPONDENTS RESPONDENTS
Strongly Agree 16 16
Agree 29 29
Neutral 38 38
Disagree 10 10
Strongly Disagree 7 7

40
35
% of respondents

30
25
% OF
20
RESPONDENTS
15
10
5
0
SA A N DA SDA
Scale

FIGURE 11: SHOWING THE VIEWS OF THE RESPONDENTS ON


THEIR LONG WORKING HOURS.

INTERPRETATION: The above table shows that 16% of the respondents strongly
agree and 29% agree to this fact that working for long hours continuously becomes tiring
for them whereas 38% of them gave neutral response to it.
TABLE 13: ‘When I have to deal with patients having incurable
diseases, I get upset’. The views of the respondents on this statement are
shown in the below table:

NO.OF % OF
SCALE RESPONDENTS RESPONDENTS
Strongly Agree 12 12
Agree 42 42
Neutral 16 16
Disagree 19 19
Strongly Disagree 11 11

45
40
35
% of respondents

30
25 % OF
20 RESPONDENTS
15
10
5
0
SA A N DA SDA
Scale

FIGURE 12: SHOWING THE RESPONSES OF THE RESPONDENTS


ON THE ABOVE STATEMENT.

INTERPRETATION: The above table predicts that maximum doctors get upset when
they have to deal with patients having incurable diseases and only 19% of them disagree
to this statement.
TABLE 14: ‘Patients have very high expectations of me’. The
agreement or disagreement shown by the respondents to this statement
is shown in the below table:

NO.OF % OF
SCALE RESPONDENTS RESPONDENTS
Strongly Agree 28 28
Agree 46 46
Neutral 15 15
Disagree 8 8
Strongly Disagree 3 3

50
45
40
% of respondents

35
30
% OF
25
RESPONDENTS
20
15
10
5
0
SA A N DA SDA
Scale

FIGURE 13: SHOWING THE RESPONSES OF THE RESPONDENTS


ON THE ABOVE STATEMENT.

INTERPRETATION: The above table clearly depicts that almost half of the
respondents agree to this fact that expectations of the patients from them act as a source
of stress for them. In fact 28% of the respondents strongly agree to this fact.
TABLE 15: Showing the responses of the respondents for the statement
‘I am not able to do many things for which I have a great liking.’

NO.OF % OF
SCALE RESPONDENTS RESPONDENTS
Strongly Agree 20 20
Agree 51 51
Neutral 21 21
Disagree 8 8
Strongly Disagree 0 0

60

50
% of respondents

40
% OF
30
RESPONDENTS
20

10

0
SA A N DA SDA
Scale

FIGURE 14: SHOWING THE RESPONSES OF THE RESPONDENTS


ON THE ABOVE STATEMENT.
INTERPRETATION: The table shown above tells us that almost every doctor agrees to
this fact that they are not able to do many things for which they have a great liking
because of the demands of their profession and only 8% of the respondents disagree to
this fact.

TABLE 16: Showing the responses of the respondents for the statement
‘I do not feel good when I see lack of trust in my patients towards me.’

NO.OF % OF
SCALE RESPONDENTS RESPONDENTS
Strongly Agree 30 30
Agree 40 40
Neutral 14 14
Disagree 10 10
Strongly Disagree 6 6
45
40
35

% of respondents
30
25 % OF
20 RESPONDENTS
15
10
5
0
SA A N DA SDA
Scale

FIGURE 15: SHOWING THE RESPONSES OF THE RESPONDENTS


ON THE ABOVE STATEMENT.

INTERPRETATION: The above drawn table depicts that around 70% of the doctors get
disturbed when they see lack of trust in their patients towards them and only 16% of them
disagree to this statement.

TABLE 17: SHOWING THE ANSWERS OF THE RESPONDENTS


ON THE LACK OF PROPER MEDICAL EQUIPMENTS IN THE
HOSPITALS.

NO.OF % OF
SCALE RESPONDENTS RESPONDENTS
Strongly Agree 17 17
Agree 30 30
Neutral 23 23
Disagree 22 22
Strongly Disagree 8 8
35

30

% of respondents
25

20 % OF
15 RESPONDENTS

10

0
SA A N DA SDA
Scale

FIGURE 16: SHOWING THE ANSWERS OF THE RESPONDENTS


ON THE LACK OF PROPER MEDICAL EQUIPMENTS IN THE
HOSPITALS.

INTERPRETATION: The above table shows that 30% of the doctors agree to this fact
that lack of proper medical equipments in the hospitals act as a hindrance in their work
whereas almost same number of doctors, that is, 22% does not agree to this fact.

TABLE 18: ‘When I am not able to make my patients understand what


I want to say, I get very irritated’. The views of the respondents on this
statement are shown in the below table:

NO.OF % OF
SCALE RESPONDENTS RESPONDENTS
Strongly Agree 14 14
Agree 38 38
Neutral 19 19
Disagree 18 18
Strongly Disagree 11 11
40
35

% of respondents
30
25
% OF
20
RESPONDENTS
15
10
5
0
SA A N DA SDA
Scale

FIGURE 17: SHOWING THE RESPONSES OF THE RESPONDENTS


ON THE ABOVE STATEMENT.

INTERPRETATION: The above shown table tells us that almost half of the doctors get
irritated when they are not able to make their patients understand what they want to say
and 29% of them say that this factor does not affect them.

TABLE 19: SHOWING THE VIEWS OF THE RESPONDENTS ON


THE LACK OF TIME TO UPGRADE THEIR KNOWLEDGE.

NO.OF % OF
SCALE RESPONDENTS RESPONDENTS
Strongly Agree 4 4
Agree 29 29
Neutral 29 29
Disagree 32 32
Strongly Disagree 6 6
35

30

% of respondents
25

20 % OF
15 RESPONDENTS

10

0
SA A N DA SDA
Scale

FIGURE 18: SHOWING THE VIEWS OF THE RESPONDENTS ON


THE LACK OF TIME TO UPGRADE THEIR KNOWLEDGE.

INTERPRETATION: It is clearly shown in the above table that 32% of the doctors do
not agree to this that they do not get enough time to upgrade their knowledge whereas
almost same number of doctors agrees to it. At the same time same number of doctors
gave a neutral response to this factor.

TABLE 20: The responses of the doctors to the fact that more patients
go to other doctors upsets them is shown in the below drawn table:

NO.OF % OF
SCALE RESPONDENTS RESPONDENTS
Strongly Agree 6 6
Agree 26 26
Neutral 14 14
Disagree 38 38
Strongly Disagree 16 16
40
35

% of respondents
30
25
% OF
20
RESPONDENTS
15
10
5
0
SA A N DA SDA
Scale

FIGURE 19: SHOWING THE RESPONSES OF THE DOCTORS ON


THE ABOVE WRITTEN FACT.

INTERPRETATION: The above table depicts that most of the doctors disagree to this
fact that they get upset when more patients go to other doctors while there are around
30% of the doctors who get upset due to this.

TABLE 21: ‘Lack of cooperation on the part of my colleagues towards


my patients disturbs me’. The views of the respondents on this
statement are shown in the below table:

NO.OF % OF
SCALE RESPONDENTS RESPONDENTS
Strongly Agree 10 10
Agree 38 38
Neutral 14 14
Disagree 12 12
Strongly Disagree 26 26
40
35
% of respondents

30
25
% OF
20
RESPONDENTS
15
10
5
0
SA A N DA SDA
Scale

FIGURE 20: SHOWING THE VIEWS OF THE RESPONDENTS ON


THE ABOVE STATEMENT.

INTERPRETATION: The above table shows that 38% of the respondents get disturbed
when they see lack of cooperation in their colleagues towards their patients. On the other
hand 26% of the doctors strongly disagree with this statement.

TABLE 22: Showing the responses of the respondents on the fear of


getting infected with some diseases from the patients.

NO.OF % OF
SCALE RESPONDENTS RESPONDENTS
Strongly Agree 12 12
Agree 53 53
Neutral 21 21
Disagree 14 14
Strongly Disagree 0 0

60

50
% of respondents

40
% OF
30
RESPONDENTS
20

10

0
SA A N DA SDA
Scale

FIGURE 21: Showing the responses of the respondents on the fear of


getting infected with some diseases from the patients.

INTERPRETATION: It is shown in the above table that maximum number of doctors has
fear of getting infected with some diseases from their patients and only 14% of them do
not have this fear in their minds.

TABLE 23: Showing the responses of the respondents for the statement
‘When I am not able to help my patients even after my best efforts, I
feel very upset.’
NO.OF % OF
SCALE RESPONDENTS RESPONDENTS
Strongly Agree 36 36
Agree 32 32
Neutral 24 24
Disagree 4 4
Strongly Disagree 4 4

40
35
% of respondents

30
25
% OF
20
RESPONDENTS
15
10
5
0
SA A N DA SDA
Scale

FIGURE 22: SHOWING THE VIEWS OF THE RESPONDENTS ON


THE ABOVE WRITTEN STATEMENT.

INTERPRETATION: It can be seen in the above table that only 8% of the doctors show
their disagreement with the given statement whereas 36% of the doctors strongly agree
and 32% of them agree to this fact that they get upset when they are not able to help their
patients even after their best efforts.
TABLE 24: Showing the views of the doctors on the lack of time for
their families due to their profession.

NO.OF % OF
SCALE RESPONDENTS RESPONDENTS
Strongly Agree 14 14
Agree 34 34
Neutral 30 30
Disagree 18 18
Strongly Disagree 4 4

40
35
% of respondents

30
25
% OF
20
RESPONDENTS
15
10
5
0
SA A N DA SDA
Scale

FIGURE 23: Showing the views of the doctors on the lack of time for
their families due to their profession.

INTERPRETATION: It is shown in the above table that 34% of the respondents gave
their agreement that they do not get enough time for their families whereas 18% of them
said that they have enough time for their families. About 30% of the doctors said that
they manage their time according to their needs.

TABLE 25: ‘Sometimes I have to compromise with my values and


standards to fulfill the needs of my profession’. The responses of the
doctors on this statement are shown in the below table:
NO.OF % OF
SCALE RESPONDENTS RESPONDENTS
Strongly Agree 6 6
Agree 32 32
Neutral 22 22
Disagree 14 14
Strongly Disagree 26 26

35

30
% of respondents

25

20 % OF
15 RESPONDENTS

10
5

0
SA A N DA SDA
Scale

FIGURE 24: Showing the responses of the doctors on the above written
statement.

INTERPRETATION: It is clearly shown in the above table that 38% of the doctors
agree to this that sometimes they have to compromise with their values and standards to
fulfill the needs of their profession whereas 40% of the doctors show their disagreement
on this statement.

TABLE 26: ‘Sometimes ignorance on the part of the patients irritates


me’. The responses of the doctors on this statement are shown in the
below table:
NO.OF % OF
SCALE RESPONDENTS RESPONDENTS
Strongly Agree 15 15
Agree 53 53
Neutral 18 18
Disagree 12 12
Strongly Disagree 2 2

60

50
% of respondents

40
% OF
30
RESPONDENTS
20

10

0
SA A N DA SDA
Scale

FIGURE 25: Showing the responses of the doctors on the above written
statement.

INTERPRETATION: The above table shows that more than half of the doctors agree that
the ignorance on the part of the patients irritates them sometimes and only 12% of them
do not agree to it.
FINDINGS
After doing the analysis, the findings so arrived are:
• The most stress causing factor among the doctors of government hospitals is the
time factor. They complain that they do not get enough time to do things for
which they have great liking. On the other hand, the most stress causing factor
among the doctors of private hospitals is that they have at work at odd hours also.
• The least stress causing factor among the doctors of government sector is when
they have to deal with patients having incurable diseases whereas the least stress
causing factor among the doctors of private hospitals is the fact that more patients
go to other doctors.
• The private sector doctors are living more stressful life than the doctors of public
sector. Doctors working in private hospitals have more stress from their
profession than the doctors working in government hospitals.
• The female doctors have more of moderate level of stress but on the other hand
male doctors have more of high level of stress.
• Both male and female doctors of private sector have high level of stress whereas
the doctors of public sector suffer from more of moderate level of stress.
• The doctors of age group 50-60 have comparatively low level of stress than the
doctors of other age groups like 30-40 and 40-50.
• The maximum number of doctors agrees to this fact that their workload is too
heavy and they have to work at odd hours also which acts as a major source of
stress among them.
• Almost every doctor gets irritated because of the impatience shown by the
patients.
• Maximum doctors get upset when they have to deal with patients having incurable
diseases.

• Almost half of the doctors agree to this fact that expectations of the patients from
them act as a source of stress for them.
• Around 70% of the doctors get disturbed when they see lack of trust in their
patients towards them.
• Lack of proper medical equipments act as a hindrance in working effectively and
efficiently for doctors but this factor is a cause of stress only for the doctors of
government hospitals because doctors working in private hospitals do not face
such problems.
• Almost half of the doctors get irritated when they are not able to make their
patients understand what they want to say.
• Most of the doctors disagree to this fact that they get upset when more patients go
to other doctors.
• Maximum number of doctors has fear of getting infected with some diseases from
their patients in their minds which cause stress for them.
• 70% of the doctors strongly agree to this fact that they get upset when they are
not able to help their patients even after their best efforts.
• Doctors of public sector have more complaints regarding the time factor. Most of
the doctors complain that they do not get enough time for their families.
• 38% of the doctors agree that sometimes they have to compromise with their
values and standards to fulfill the needs of their profession.
• More than half of the doctors agree that the ignorance on the part of the patients
irritates them sometimes.
CONCLUSION

To conclude a project work does not mean the end of that study. The conclusion of every
project gives rise to a number of questions and to answer those questions, other studies
have to be conducted. The objectives to conduct this study were to analyze the stress
causing factors among the medical practitioners and to do a comparative study of level of
stress among the doctors of public and private sector. For this purpose, a questionnaire
including all the stress causing factors among the doctors was prepared and the various
doctors working in number of private and government hospitals were asked to fill the
same. Then the analysis of these questionnaires was done by using different methods and
taking into consideration various distinctive factor s. The analysis of the data has revealed
the facts that the private sector doctors live more stressful life than the government sector
doctors. Almost every factor cause more stress to private medical practitioners than the
government employees. The most s tress causing factor among the doctors of government
hospitals is the time factor but the private sector doctors suffer most stress because they
have to work at odd hours also. The factor which causes least stress among the
government doctors is that they have to deal with patients having incurable diseases but
the private sector doctors are least bothered about the fact that more patients go to other
doctors. This study also reveals that the female doctors suffer from more of moderate
level of stress and on the other hand the male doctors suffer from more of high level of
stress.
So in the nutshell, we can say that the doctors, who are also known as life savers, should
take care of their health also. They should adopt certain stress coping strategies to red uce
stress from their lives because this high level of stress can turn into burnout also which
can harm their lives. Infact, everyone in this world has some level of stress in his/her life
so everyone should adopt stress coping strategies and live their lives happily.

QUESTIONNAIRE
Dear Sir/Madam,
I am a student of MBA. I am undertaking a project for which I need your help so kindly
tick the appropriate answer for following questions.
(SA-Strongly Agree, A-Agree, N-Neutral, SDA-Strongly Disagree, DA-Disagree)

1. My workload is too heavy.

SA A N SDA DA
2. Sometimes I have to work at odd hours also.

SA A N SDA DA
3. I feel I am not being paid according to my work.

SA A N SDA DA
4. Sometimes I feel I am not growing and developing in my profession.

SA A N SDA DA
5. The impatience on the part of the patients is sometimes very irritating.

SA A N SDA DA
6. Working for long hours continuously becomes tiring for me.

SA A N SDA DA
7. When I have to deal with patients having incurable diseases, I get
Upset.

SA A N SDA DA
8. Patients have very high expectations of me.

SA A N SDA DA
9. I am not able to do many things for which I have a great liking.

SA A N SDA DA
10. I do not feel good when I see lack of trust in my patients towards me.

SA A N SDA DA

11. Lack of proper medical equipments does not allow me to work effectively and
efficiently.

SA A N SDA DA
12. When I am not able to make my patients understand what I want to say I get very
irritated.

SA A N SDA DA
13. I do not get enough time to upgrade my knowledge.

SA A N SDA DA
14. The fact that more patients go to other doctors upsets me.

SA A N SDA DA
15. Lack of cooperation on the part of my colleagues towards my patients disturbs
me.

SA A N SDA DA
16. The fear of getting infected with some diseases from the patients disturbs me.

SA A N SDA DA
17. When I am not able to help my patients even after my best efforts, I feel very
upset.

SA A N SDA DA
18. My profession does not allow me enough time for my family.

SA A N SDA DA
19. Sometimes I have to compromise with my values and standards to fulfill the
needs of my profession.

SA A N SDA DA
20. Sometimes ignorance on the part of the patients irritates me.

SA A N SDA DA

NAME- SPECIALIZATION-

AGE- SEX-

THANKS FOR SPARING YOUR VALUABLE TIME.


BIBLIOGRAPHY
• Robbins, P, Stephen, Organizational Behavior (2002) : Prentice Hall India pvt.
Ltd, New Delhi.
• Gupta, C.B., Human Resource Management (5th edition): Sultan Chand & Sons,
New Delhi.
• Osler, W, Aequanimitas (3 rd Edition) London: HK Lewis 1932.
• Delva MD, Kirby JR, Knapper CK, and Birtwhistle RV: Postal survey of
approaches to learning among Ontario physicians: implications for continuing
medical education. Brit Med J 2002, 325:1218.
• Deary IJ, Blenkin H, Agius RM, Endler NS, Zealley H, and Wood R: Mo dels of
job related stress and personal achievement among consultant doctors. British
Journal of Psychology 1996, 87: 3-29.
• Maslach C, Jackson SE: Maslach Burnout Inventory (1986): Consulting
Psychologists Press.
• McManus IC, Winder BC, Gordon D: The causal links between stress and
burnout in a longitudinal study of UK doctors. Lancet 2002, 359: 2089 -2090.
• Smith R: why are doctors so unhappy? Brit Med J 2001, 322: 1073 -1074.
• Menninger R: Stress: defining the personal equation. Brit Med J 2003, 326: s107 -
s108.

Вам также может понравиться