Riscos ocupacionais em hospitais e qualidade de vida no trabalho: Uma revisão sistemática

Abstract

This study aimed to systematically review the results of observational studies that assessed a relationship of occupational hazards and quality of life at work in a hospital setting. Methodology: The review was developed following the recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyzes (PRISMA) guide, registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) under number CRD2019127865. The entire search, selection, and quality evaluation process of the studies was performed by two independent reviewers. The search databases were Medline/PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Lilacs, PsycoInfo, CINAHL, Brazilian Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations and Ovid. The search strategy was structured according to the acronym PECO (Population: adult hospital workers; Exposure: occupational risks; Comparison: adequate control of occupational risks; Result: quality of life at work). The selection phases followed the exclusion of duplicates, reading titles and abstracts to exclude irrelevant articles, full reading of the articles selected and evaluated according to the eligibility criteria. The reference lists of the selected articles were also searched. The included articles were read in full and the extracted information were recorded in a standardized spreadsheet. Methodological quality was assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and risk of bias by the Research Triangle Institute Item Bank. Results: A total of 49,911 articles were identified and after the entire selection process, six met the eligibility criteria, and were mostly performed with health professionals (83.33%), women (66.70%) and in countries Asians (66.66%). All studies presented use of different instruments and ways of categorizing quality of life at work and occupational risks. Only one study evaluated occupational noise and all of them presented a relationship between occupational risk and quality of life at work and pointed to the need for measures that improve the lives of these professionals in the workplace. Conclusion. Further studies are needed, especially those that are more homogeneous in the use of instruments, conceptualization and categorization of quality of life at work, and studies that assess the causal relationship between occupational risk and quality of life at work.