Skip to main content

Table 3 Association of effort-reward imbalance with perceived poor quality of care (logistic regression; secondary analyses)a

From: Effort-reward imbalance and perceived quality of patient care: a cross-sectional study among physicians in Germany

  

Model Ib

Model IIc

Model IIId

  

ORe

95 % CIf

OR

95 % CI

OR

95 % CI

Effort

Low

1

ref

1

ref

1

ref

 

High

2.19

1.41, 3.41

2.31

1.42, 3.76

2.06

1.26, 3.39

 

z-score

1.75

1.37, 2.22

1.83

1.40, 2.40

1.75

1.33, 2.31

Reward

Low

1

ref

1

ref

1

ref

 

High

0.51

0.30,0.86

0.50

0.11,0.89

0.63

0.35,1.16

 

z-score

0.65

0.51, 0.84

0.64

0.49, 0.84

0.71

0.53, 0.96

Effort-reward imbalance

Low

1

ref

1

ref

1

ref

High

2.08

1.26,3.45

2.06

1.20,3.54

1.74

1.00,3.06

 

z-score

1.87

1.43, 2.45

1.92

1.43, 2.57

1.79

1.32, 2.43

Overcommitment

Low

1

ref

1

ref

1

ref

High

1.37

0.88,1.12

1.43

0.90,2.28

1.09

0.65,1.81

 

z-score

1.32

1.06, 1.64

1.36

1.07, 1.72

1.18

0.91, 1.54

  1. aEffort, reward, overcommitment, and quality of care were dichotomized based on the top tertile of the respective score distribution and the ERI ratio based on its established cut-off (i.e., high = ERI score >1; low = ERI score ≤ 1.0)
  2. bUnadjusted
  3. cAdjusted for age, sex, working environment and leadership position
  4. dAdditional adjustment for depressive symptoms
  5. eOR = odds ratio
  6. fCI = confidence interval
Back to article page

BMC Public Health

ISSN: 1471-2458

Contact us