Journal of Global Infectious DiseasesOfficial Publishing of INDUSEM and OPUS 12 Foundation, Inc. Users online:362  
Print this pageEmail this pageSmall font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size     
Home About us Editors Ahead of Print Current Issue Archives Search Instructions Subscribe Advertise Login 
 


 
   Table of Contents     
ORIGINAL ARTICLE  
Year : 2019  |  Volume : 11  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 93-101
Analyzing the effect of organizational factors on reducing the disease transmission risk in nurses using an AIDS risk reduction model


1 Department of Nursing, Nani Hasanuddin Health Sciences Institute, Makassar, Indonesia
2 Department of Occupational Health and Safety, Faculty of Public Health, Airlangga University, Surabaya, Indonesia

Click here for correspondence address and email

Date of Web Publication26-Aug-2019
 

   Abstract 


Aims: Nurses are one of the health workers who face a high risk of contracting a disease at their workplace. The officers who are inconsistent in maintaining standard precautions when treating patients render nurses to be exposed to infectious disease. Settings and Design: This was an analytic observational study with a longitudinal design. Materials and Methods: This study was carried out in two Provincial B Type Government Hospitals, namely, Labuang Baji Provincial Regional Hospital and Makassar Haji Regional General Hospital, in Makassar City, with a sample size of 104 respondents. The data were subjected to ANOVA test to determine the effect of organizational factors on reducing the risk of AIDS risk reduction model-based disease transmission. Results: The results of this study indicate that the organizational factors do not affect the labeling of nurses related to the reduction of the risk of disease transmission (b = 0.086, ρ = 0.379). The organizational factors influence nurses commitment related to the reduction of the risk of disease transmission (b = 0.328, ρ = <0.001) and also their enactment related to the reduction of the risk of disease transmission (b = 0.199, ρ = 0.030). Conclusions: The organizational factors related to the reduction of the risk of disease transmission affect the action of nurses to reduce the risk (enactment) through the commitment. These organizational factors also affect the labeling of nurses as individuals who are at a risk of contracting a disease so as to facilitate the adoption of a behavior to reduce the risk of disease transmission in hospital.

Keywords: Disease transmission, organization, risk reduction behavior

How to cite this article:
Suarnianti, Martiana T, Haskas Y. Analyzing the effect of organizational factors on reducing the disease transmission risk in nurses using an AIDS risk reduction model. J Global Infect Dis 2019;11:93-101

How to cite this URL:
Suarnianti, Martiana T, Haskas Y. Analyzing the effect of organizational factors on reducing the disease transmission risk in nurses using an AIDS risk reduction model. J Global Infect Dis [serial online] 2019 [cited 2019 Sep 15];11:93-101. Available from: http://www.jgid.org/text.asp?2019/11/3/93/265393





   Introduction Top


Nurses are the health workers who play an important role in health services. They suffer a great health risk in Emergency Medical Services under various conditions where officers are not consistent in implementing patient care standards. This is evidenced by the fact that there are still nurses who do not wear gloves (17%), there are still those who do not throw away the contaminated material (19%), there are still those who take out a recapping needle (40%) when using a syringe, and there was an officer who was stabbed with a needle.[1] The implementation of standard precaution is still a big problem.

According to Moore et al.[2], three important factors could act as inhibitors for health workers in maintaining standard precaution. The construct includes different factors such as individual factors, namely, knowledge, education, attitudes, values, and beliefs; the factors related to work or work environment: experience, skills, workload, work stress, cognitive abilities, and power; and other factors, such as training, education, communication, supervision, policies, and procedures along with the management commitments for health. Considering these facts, the lack of standard precautions can render nurses to contract with patients. This can be minimized by implementing the AIDS risk reduction model (ARRM).

ARRM was introduced by Catania et al.[3], who suggested that the only way to prevent transmission of a disease is to change high-risk behavior. This method is applied to study individual efforts for avoiding transmission of a disease. Although this approach has some weaknesses, it has been proven effectiveness in reducing the risk of transmission of HIV/AIDS. This is also expected to reduce the risk of disease transmission to nurses.

The ARRM contains combined elements of both the Health Belief Model (HBM) and social cognitive theory (SCT) and can be used to describe that individual processes affect behavior of patients. HBM was formulated to explain health (preventive) behavior.[4] The basic components are based on the hypothesis that the dependent behavior is based on two variables, namely, the desire to avoid illness (or want to recover) and belief that certain health actions will prevent a disease.[5] Whereas, the main construction in SCT is self-efficacy and expectations of these results. According to Bandura[6], self-efficacy is an important construct in SCT. The essence of SCT is the assumption that people will act in ways that they believe will produce positive results and avoid the behaviors that they hope can produce unfavorable results.[7] Considering this hypothesis, we try to understand why people fail in making behavioral transitions. ARRM is suitable in longitudinal studies to determine why people fail to develop a behavior that will reduce risk. Such understanding will allow for effective interventions because it will be possible to identify people's positions in the change process[8] [Figure 1].
Figure 1: Differences in the Health Belief Model, social cognitive, and AIDS risk reduction models

Click here to view


The general framework of ARRM is based on a model of psychological problem-solving,[9] which is further integrated with HBM elements,[5],[10] efficacy theory,[5],[11] emotional influence,[12],[13] and interpersonal processes.[14],[15] The RRM includes three stages, namely, labeling, commitment, and enactment.[16] The labeling stage means that nurses could be labeled at a high risk of contracting a disease, while carrying out their duties. Once a nurse understands and is aware of the risk of contracting a disease, she will move to the commitment stage to reduce the risk. After the commitment stage is established, it continues to the stage, namely, enactment that consists of three phases: (1) nurses seek information about the ways to reduce risk (information seeking), (2) establish appropriate ways to use it (obtaining remedies), and (3) take action for reducing the risk (taking action) by implementing the standard precautions.

As suggested in ARRM, the factors involved in making a commitment to change high-risk behavior include perceived self-confidence activities.[17] The perception of self-confidence can affect the extent to which an individual will be motivated to change the behavior and will try to change.[18] The emotional conditions such as anxiety can help an individual to identify risk and increase individual commitment to give up the high-risk behavior.[19] However, it is known that in addition to individual factors, organizational factors, especially hospitals, the places were where nurses work, also have a very important role in changing these high-risk behaviors. According to Pecquet[20], such organizational factors include workload, supervision ability, policy and standard operational procedure (SOP), and training and availability of facilities summarized in indicators of work safety climate which consist of (a) management commitment, (b) management communication, (c) work safety rules and procedures, (d) work environment, (e) supervision environment, (f) nurse involvement, (g) appreciation of risk, (h) work pressure, and (i) competency suitability. Organizational factors[21] that become a benchmark in this study include the following: [Table 1].
Table 1: Organizational factor indicator

Click here to view


According to the CDC[22], the work safety climate is the perception of nurses regarding safety in a hospital work environment and includes six components, namely, (a) the support of top management (leadership) for work safety programs, (b) the absence of barriers to safe work practices, (c) cleanliness and regularity of the workplace, (d) minimizing communication conflicts between officers, (e) the existence of feedback related to periodic work safety or training by supervisors, and (f) availability of personal protective equipment and engineering control. Thus, it can be concluded that organizational factors related to the reduction of risk of disease transmission are nurses' perceptions of the conditions that are implemented in hospitals; this includes management commitment for risk reduction, management communication, transmission prevention regulations, and procedures, work environment, supervision environment, giving opportunities, and risk appreciation.

Thus, the purpose of this study was to delineate the influence of organizational factors on reducing the risk of transmission of ARRM-based diseases. If an influence of organizational factors on reducing the risk of transmission of a disease is found, it can be said that the ARRM pattern can be applied to nurses for reducing the risk of contracting various diseases in hospitals.


   Materials and Methods Top


This was an observational analytic study with a longitudinal design. Two Provincial B Type Government Hospitals in the City of Makassar, namely, Regional Provincial Labuang Baji Hospital and Makassar Regional Haji Hospital were considered for the data collection. Both the centers are equal in the clinical standards and policies; this will minimize the differences in facilities and health service capabilities, especially the nursing services. The measurements were carried at specific time periods.

The study population included 313 nurses working in Labuang Baji Provincial Hospital and 288 nurses in Makassar Haji Hospital, making a total of 601 participants. A sample size of 86 respondents was determined using the sample size determination software for health studies. Considering the possibility of dropouts and invalid responses, the final sample was increased by 20% as 104 respondents.

The sample size at the two study locations was adjusted to the proportion of the number of nurses available and the calculated sample size. At Labuang Baji Hospital, 55 respondents and at Haji Hospital, 49 respondents were recruited. The samples from the two study locations were considered to identify variations in hospital organization factors and not to make a comparison between the samples hospitals. The judgment sampling technique was used; it recruits subjects by selecting members of a population according to certain criteria.

The independent variables in this study were organizational factors that included seven indicators such as management commitment, management communication, work safety rules and procedures, work environment, supervision environment, providing opportunities, and appreciation for risk. However, these seven indicators do not represent the real organizational factors as all aspects of the organizational factors were not considered. The dependent variable was a reduction in the risk of disease transmission and included labeling, commitment, and enactment. The research instrument was in the form of a questionnaire and observation sheet.

The data were subjected to univariate and bivariate analyses. The univariate analysis of variables was performed to see the percentage frequency distribution. Whereas, the bivariate analysis was conducted to determine the shift of variables from the first measurement to the second measurement using the paired sample t-test and to determine the influence of organizational factor variables on the risk of ARRM-based disease transmission reduction using the ANOVA test.


   Results Top


Hospital organizational factors are measured by the nurses perceptions of organizational conditions related to the reduction of the risk of disease transmission in hospitals. The assessed organizational factors included management's commitment to prevent transmission, communication for the prevention of transmission, regulations, and procedures for the prevention of transmission, work environment, supervision environment, nurse involvement, and risk appreciation. Nurses' perceptions about the conditions of hospital organization factors showed a subjective picture of the organization in reducing the risk of disease transmission. After collecting the data, a pocketbook, titled “cross-infection sterilization and control (occupational safety and health for health workers)” was given to the respondents as action taken. The handbook is expected to make them aware of the importance of self-protection while working.

[Table 2] shows the demographic characteristics, including age, education, and employment, of the respondents. The majority of respondents was in the age group 26–35 years and was female (81.5%). Regarding the last level of education, the majority was (62.2%) having a degree. [Table 3] shows that nurses have a better perception of organizational factors related to the reduction of disease transmission. Regarding the first and second measurements, the nurses tended to label themselves at a high risk of contracting a disease. This means that nurses are aware of the magnitude of the risk of the disease transmission while carrying out their duties. The first measurement of nurses indicates that the nurses have a strong commitment to reduce the risk of disease transmission in hospitals. While on the second measurement, nurses showed weak commitments in reducing the risk of disease transmission. For the first and second measurement, the nurses showed good enactment for reducing the risk of disease transmission in hospitals.
Table 2: Demographic characteristics of the respondents

Click here to view
Table 3: Distribution of cognitive elements, organizational factors, labeling, commitment, and enactment in nurses

Click here to view


[Table 4] shows that organizational factors have no significant effect on the first and second labeling measurements. The organizational factors, both good and less, do not affect the labeling of nurses as individuals who are at a high risk of contracting a disease. [Table 5] shows that the organizational factors have no significant effect on the first commitment. Therefore, both the nurses' perception and perception of the organization related to the reduction of the risk of disease transmission do not affect the nurse's commitment to reduce the risk. In the second commitment measurement, organizational factors showed a significant effect on the nurses' commitment and had a positive contributing influence. The better the nurses' perception of the organizational factors, the strong their commitment to reduce the risk of disease transmission. The greater the lack of perception in nurses about the organizational factors, the weaker is their commitment.
Table 4: Effect of organizational factors on the first and second labeling of the nurses related to the reduction of the risk of disease transmission

Click here to view
Table 5: Effect of organizational factors on the first and second commitments of nurses related to reducing the risk of disease transmission

Click here to view


[Table 6] shows that organizational factors as an opportunity affecting the commitment of nurses to reduce the risk of disease transmission and exert a positive influence. The nurses who perceive less are given the opportunity to be involved in the risk reduction and tend to have weak commitments, while nurses who perceive the existence of good opportunities to engage in risk reduction tend to have strong commitments.
Table 6: Effect of indicators of organizational factors on the second commitment of nurses

Click here to view


[Table 7] shows that on the first measurement, the organizational factors have no significant effect on the first enactment, thus there are no nurses' perceptions about the organizational factors related to reducing the risk of disease transmission as well as the effect of nurses in reducing the risk. In subsequent measurements, organizational factors showed a significant effect on the enactment of the nurses from both hospitals and had a positive contributing effect. The nurses with less perception about the organizational factors tended to show weak enactment in reducing the risk of disease transmission. The better their perception of organizational factors, the better their enactment in reducing the risk of disease transmission.
Table 7: Effect of organizational factors on the first and second enactments of nurses related to reducing the risk of disease transmission

Click here to view


[Table 8] shows that the indicator of organizational factors in the form of risk appreciation has a significant effect on the second enactment of nurses. The nurses, who perceive a lack in the management's appreciation to reduce risks, are less cautious about a risk, while the nurses, who perceive management's appreciation to reduce risks to be good, tend to be good in taking risk reduction measures.
Table 8: Effect of organizational factor indicators on the second enactment of nurses

Click here to view


[Table 9] shows the results of paired sample t-test carried out to determine the changes in the first labeling to the second labeling, the first commitment to the second commitment, and from the first enactment to the second enactment. These results show that from the first labeling to the second one, there is no significant change. From the first commitment to the second one, there is a significant change in the mean value showing that nurses who tend to be strongly committed to the first measurement experienced a change in the mean on the next measurement to be weak in their commitment to reduce the risk of transmission. From the first enactment to the second one, there is a significant change with the mean values indicating that nurses who were less likely to take risk reduction measures at the first measurement experienced a mean change in subsequent measurements to be good in taking action to reduce the risk of disease transmission.
Table 9: Changes in labeling, commitment, and enactment from the first to third measurements

Click here to view


The organizational factor that influences the second commitment is the provision of opportunities. Similarly, the organizational factor that affects the second enactment is risk appreciation. The organizational factors related to the reduction of the risk of disease transmission affect the action of reducing the risk of disease transmission (enactment) through the commitment of nurses to reduce the risk of disease transmission. The organizational factors related to reducing the risk of disease transmission affect self-justification and labeling of the nurses as individuals who are at a risk of contracting a disease so as to facilitate the adoption of behaviors to reduce the risk of disease transmission in hospitals.


   Discussion Top


The organizational factors showed no effect on labeling the first and second measurements. This means that both organizational factors and the lack of labeling of nurses as individuals, who are at a high risk of contracting the disease, had no effect. This result is supported by the opinion of Catania et al.[3], who suggest that labeling is influenced by individual factors such as knowledge about transmission but not by organizational factors.

Henderson[23] argues that nurses do follow standard precautions and perception has a very important role because it is needed to influence health workers. They have an intention to seek information on standard precautions and finally adhere to these precautions.[24] The results of this study have implications for factors that do not affect the labeling of nurses.

According to Pasman[25], labels can function as a person's self-justification if their behavior is not socially acceptable. This makes possible for someone to blame outside interference rather than his own weakness. Labeling has a positive effect that can help someone to seek self-justification when someone does an action that is not acceptable to the social environment.

This study is in line with that of Lemert[26], which found that self-justification arises because of drug addiction, economic and social disorders, and intense intellectual processes at work related to labeling. This is a subjective motive that causes a person to use drugs. When a person starts a deviant behavior, self-justification is used as a defense from attacks or adjustments to the problems that occur. Thus, it can be inferred from this study that there are still nurses who have weak labeling, do not consider all patients at a high risk of transmitting the disease even though they have not been diagnosed.

The organizational factors are based on their influence on the first and second commitments. The results show that the organizational factors have on the effect on the first commitment, it is not apparent whether the nurses' perception on the organizational factors related to the reduction of the risk of disease transmission affects their commitment to reduce the risk of disease transmission. However, at the next measurement, the organizational factors do influence the nurses' commitment and have a positive contributing influence. The better the nurses' perception of the organizational factors, the stronger is their commitment to reduce the risk of disease transmission.

This is because good organizational factors can increase the motivation, compliance, and interest of nurses in work, which brings comfort and increases commitment to reduce the risk of disease transmission. The more the nurses lack perception of the organizational factors, the weaker is their commitment. This increases the risk of contracting a disease. It is better if the organizational factors are not well oriented to reduced risk; the nurses respond wisely and take the initiative to strongly commit to protect themselves from disease transmission.

Staw[27] found that in the context of organizational behavior, commitment is influenced by personal responsibility and resources. Therefore, when we consider indicators of organizational factors, what influences the commitment of nurses is the provision of opportunities. Giving opportunities has a positive contribution. The nurses who are not given the opportunity to be involved in risk reduction process tend to have weak commitments, while the nurses who perceive good opportunities to engage in risk reduction tend to have a strong commitment. Among the effects of organizational structures on different occupational groups, nurses' commitment was affected to be a greater extent than physicians' commitment by a higher degree of organizational autonomy in decision-making work, scheduling, and work methods.[28],[29]

The nurses' perceptions regarding the provision of opportunities include: (1) 51.3% of nurses agree that management involves nurses in making decisions related to the prevention of disease transmission; (2) 53.8% of nurses agree that their supervisors require them to play an active role in identifying factors that can increase the risk of contracting a disease; (3) 52.1% of nurses agree that their supervisors require them to report accidents, incidents, and situations of being affected or contracting a disease; (4) 56.3% of nurses agree that employers always ask them to participate in planning the prevention of disease transmission in the workplace; and (5) 54.6% of nurses agree that supervisors give them the responsibility to minimize the risk of disease transmission.

Nurses also perceive that good organizational factors sometimes do not work consistently. This is because the improvement and care of management are high if the hospital is in the process of assessment or accreditation, but after the accreditation process is complete, management's attention is reduced. According to the contribution and commitment to work by employees depend on their satisfaction with the facilities provided by the management. This is the reason why nurses show weak commitment if they perceive that organizational factors are not sufficient in reducing the risk of disease transmission. Liu et al.[30] concluded that improvement in nurses' work environments, increasing nurses staffing levels, and providing sufficient support to them for devoting more time to direct patient care activities could help in reducing professional exhaustion in nurses, thereby promoting patient safety.

The research conducted by Ruruk et al.[31], suggests that the commitment of nurses in carrying out the risk reduction measures of disease transmission (ρ = 0.041) is influenced by management commitment in the hospital. These results are in line with several other studies that link organizational factors to commitments with different factors. Sari and Bodroastuti[32] also argued that organizational factors have a positive influence on organizational commitment. Therefore, workers (nurses) depend on what is provided by the organization and depending on that they can strengthen their internal encouragement such as perceptions of losses and the benefits of safe behavior to reduce the risk of disease transmission.

The organizational factors were observed to have an effect on the first and second enactments. The results showed that at the first measurement, organizational factors had no effect on the first enactment so that both the nurses' perception and perception of organizational factors related to the reduction of the risk of disease transmission did not have an effect on the enactment of nurses in reducing the risk of disease transmission. In subsequent measurements, the organizational factors showed an influence on the enactment of the nurses and had a positive contributing effect. The fewer perception nurses have about the organizational factors, the less enactment they have in reducing the risk of disease transmission. This is because nurses feel that they do not get appreciation from management. The better the nurses' perception of organizational factors, the better is their enactment in reducing the risk of disease transmission.

When viewed from the indicator of organizational factors, the appreciation of risk affects the enactment. The nurses, who perceive the lack of management's appreciation for a risk, tend to be less cautions toward the risk. The nurses, who perceive management's appreciation of risks to be good, tend to be good at taking the risk the reduction measures. This shows that if management gives attention to risks that threaten the health of nurses, they will be better at taking risk reduction measures because they are aware of the magnitude of the risk of disease and risk reduction supported by management.

The nurses' perceptions regarding risk appreciation are as follows: (1) 35.3% of nurses agree that management does not schedule vaccinations regularly; (2) 30.3% of nurses agree that there is no reward when they always work according to SOPs; (3) 39.5% of nurses agree that their supervisors always emphasize that personal safety is a top priority; (4) 37% of nurses agreed that the hospital does not provide free medical checkup programs for nurses; and (5) 32.8% of nurses agree that their supervisors always praise if they protect themselves from the risk of an illness. The data show that the nurses perception is not good regarding the risk appreciation given by the management, thus they do not take action to reduce the risk of disease transmission in the hospital.

The enactment phase is carried out by the nurses in the three steps: staring from seeking information related to risk reduction, determining solutions to the problems that have been identified and the applying the solutions that have been determined in reducing the risk of disease transmission. However, the theory proposed by Kahneman and Tversky[33] shows that individual behavior is positive in avoiding risk when expecting positive solutions and negative when expecting negative solutions. This shows that the time frame is very important in determining a solution that will affect the behavior displayed when responding to risk.

Mark et al.[34], suggested that hospital nurses might have a high level of injury. However, the approach to improve the safety of nurses is more focused on efforts to change individual behavior through compliance, enforcement of safety regulations, and the obligation to participate in workplace safety training. The results of his research showed that work involvement and positive working conditions can reduce nurse injury, indirectly reducing the risk of disease transmission to nurses.

The results of this study contradict the opinion of Silberstang and Hazy[35], suggesting that microenactment allows organized learning at the group level even at the organizational level. For this reason, enactment needs to be established to produce effective leadership in the public organization sector. The statement shows that individual enactment actually makes the organization effective.

Feyer and Williamson[36] suggested that nurses' compliance in implementing the standard precautions include individual (nurses) and organizational factors both, thus it can be said that organizational factors influence the application of standard precautions in an effort to reduce the risk of disease transmission and suggest that safety can be integrated into organizational management system. Furthermore, the research conducted by Purnomo[37] also argues that there is a relationship between workplace safety climate, leadership support, management commitment, and providing information together on the compliance with the application of standard precautions with an OR (odd ratio) of 0.436, meaning that 43.6% of compliance with the application of standard precautions is explained by the climate of occupational health, leadership support, management commitment, provision of information, while the remaining 56.4% is explained by other variables.

The implications of this study are that organizational factors can directly have an impact on the actions of nurses in reducing the risk of transmission and can also be through commitment so that nurses who are committed will take action to reduce the risk of transmission of the disease properly.


   Conclusions Top


Considering the results of this study, the following conclusion can be made:

  1. Organizational factors related to the reduction of the risk of disease transmission have a major influence on the nurses' commitment to reduce risk so as to facilitate the adoption of behaviors to reduce the risk of disease transmission in hospitals
  2. Organizational factors related to reducing the risk of disease transmission affect self-justification and labeling nurses as individuals who are at a risk of contracting a disease so as to facilitate the adoption of behaviors to reduce the risk of disease transmission in hospitals
  3. Organizational factors related to the reduction of the risk of transmission of a disease do not affect the labeling of nurses
  4. Organizational factors related to reducing the risk of disease transmission affect the commitment of nurses. A good perception of nurses of the organizational factors related to reducing the risk of disease transmission strengthens their commitment to reduce the risk of transmission
  5. Organizational factors related to the reduction of the risk of disease transmission affect the nurses' enactment
  6. Organizational factors related to the reduction of the risk of disease transmission affect self-justification where nurses label themselves as individuals who are at a risk of contracting a disease and then commit to reducing the risk of disease transmission so as to facilitate the adoption of behaviors to reduce the risk of disease transmission in hospitals.


Recommendation

It can be recommended that hospitals should integrate the risk reduction of disease transmission into the organization's management system and apply it consistently in the management of the implementation of nursing services. The limitation of this study includes that it is focused solely on measuring organizational factors that play a role in reducing the risk of disease transmission. It is suggested that in the future studies, an assessment of organizational factors related to reducing the risk of disease transmission objectively and the addition of assessment indicators such as organizational culture should be incorporated to represent all aspects of an organization.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
   References Top

1.
Harris SA, Nicolai LA. Occupational exposures in emergency medical service providers and knowledge of and compliance with universal precautions. Am J Infect Control 2010;38:86-94.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Moore D, Gamage B, Bryce E, Copes R, Yassi A.BC Interdisciplinary Respiratory Protection Study Group. Protecting health care workers from SARS and other respiratory pathogens: Organizational and individual factors that affect adherence to infection control guidelines. Am J Infect Control 2005;33:88-96.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Catania JA, Gibson DR, Chitwood DD, Coates TJ. Methodological problems in AIDS behavioral research: Influences on measurement error and participation bias in studies of sexual behavior. Psychol Bull 1990;108:339-62.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Rosenstock IM. The health belief model and preventive health behavior. Health Educ Behav 1974;2(4):354-386.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Janz NK, Becker MH. The health belief model: A decade later. Health Educ Q 1984;11(1):1-47.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Bandura A. Social Foundations of thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory/Albert Bandura. Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice-Hall; 1986.p. 617.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Williams DM, Anderson ES, Winett RA. A review of the outcome expectancy construct in physical activity research. Ann Behav Med 2005;29:70-9.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Kegeles SM, Catania JA, Coates TJ, Pollack LM, Lo B. Psychosocial predictors of people who fail to return for their HIV test results. AIDS 1990;4:585-8. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2350448 . [Last accessed on 2018 Sep 14].  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Gross JJ, Levenson RW. Emotional suppression: Physiology, self-report, and expressive behavior. J Pers Soc Psychol 1993;64:970-86.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Becker MH, Janz NK. The health belief model and personal health behavior. Health Educ Monogr 1974;11:324-473.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Bandura A. Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychol Rev 1977;84:191-215.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Janis IL. Effects of fear arousal on attitude change: Recent developments in theory and experimental research. Adv Exp Soc Psychol 1967;3:166-224. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60344-5. [Last accessed on 2018 Sep 14].  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Leventhal GS. Fairness in social relationships. In: Contemporary Topics in Social Psychology. General Learning Press. Marristown, NJ. ISBN- 0382250788; 1976. p. 211-239.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Burke WW. Organization Development: Principles and Practices. 2nd ed. Boston: Little, Brown; 1982. p. 428. Available from: https://archive.org/details/organizationdeve00burk. [Last accessed on 2018 Sep 14].  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Planalp S, Honeycutt JM. Events that increase uncertainty in personal relationships. Hum Commun Res 1985;11:593-604.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Catania JA, Kegeles SM, Coates TJ. Towards an understanding of risk behavior: An AIDS risk reduction model (ARRM). Health Educ Q 1990;17:53-72.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
Boyer CB, Tschann JM, Shafer MA. Predictors of risk for sexually transmitted diseases in ninth grade urban high school students. J Adolesc Res 1999;14:448-65.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
Bandura A, DiClemente RJ. Social cognitive approach to the exercise of control over AIDS infection. In: Adolescents and AIDS: A Generation in Jeopardy. 1992. p. 89-116. Available from: https://www.uky.edu/~eushe2/Bandura/Bandura1994HIV.pdf. [Last accessed on 2018 Sep 18].  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
Strehlow U, Kampmann G. AIDS anxieties of adolescents: Determinants of “state” and “trait” anxiety dimensions in a linear structural model. J Adolesc Health 1993;14:475-84.  Back to cited text no. 19
    
20.
Pecquet CF. Measuring Safety Climate as an Indicator of Effective Safety and Health Programs in The Construction Industry. Louisiana State University; 2013. Available from: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2158&context=gradschool_dissertations. [Last accessed on 2018 Sep 18].  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.
Capozzi C, Panà A. Università degli Study Tor Vergata, Roma. Proposed updated isolation precautions guideline in a university teaching hospital in Italy. Ig Sanita Pubbl 2010;66:447-509.  Back to cited text no. 21
    
22.
CDC. Guideline for Isolation Precautions: Preventing Transmission of Infectious Agents in Healthcare Settings: Centers for Disease Control. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2007.  Back to cited text no. 22
    
23.
Henderson DK. Raising the bar: The need for standardizing the use of “standard precautions” as a primary intervention to prevent occupational exposures to bloodborne pathogens. Chicago J 2001;22:70-2.  Back to cited text no. 23
    
24.
Wogalter MS, DeJoy DM, Laughery KR. Warnings and Risk Communication. Taylor and Francis e-Library; 2005. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177%2F106480460201000107. [Last accessed on 2018 Sep 20].  Back to cited text no. 24
    
25.
Pasman J. The consequences of labeling mental illnesses on the self-concept: A review of the literature and future directions. Soc Cosm 2011;2:122-7. Available from: https://dspace.library.uu.nl/bitstream/handle/1874/202471/27-94-1-PB.pdf?sequence=2. [Last accessed on 2018 Sep 20].  Back to cited text no. 25
    
26.
Davis AK, Lemert EM. Social Pathology: A Systematic Approach to the Theory of Sociopathic Behavior. Social Forces. 1951; 16(4). p. 247-8.  Back to cited text no. 26
    
27.
Staw BM. Knee-deep in the big muddy: A study of escalating commitment to a chosen course of action. Organ Behav Hum Perform 1976;16:27-44.  Back to cited text no. 27
    
28.
Miedaner F, Kuntz L, Enke C, Roth B, Nitzsche A. Exploring the differential impact of individual and organizational factors on organizational commitment of physicians and nurses. BMC Health Serv Res 2018;18:180.  Back to cited text no. 28
    
29.
Conrad P. The meaning of medications: Another look at compliance. Soc Sci Med 1985;20:29-37.  Back to cited text no. 29
    
30.
Liu X, Zheng J, Liu K, Baggs JG, Liu J, Wu Y, et al. Hospital nursing organizational factors, nursing care left undone, and nurse burnout as predictors of patient safety: A structural equation modeling analysis. Int J Nurs Stud 2018;86:82-9.  Back to cited text no. 30
    
31.
Ruruk O, Suarnianti, Hanis M. Effect of nurse commitment and management commitment on risk reduction measures in Makassar City Hospital. J Ilm Kesehat Diagn 2017;8:1-8.  Back to cited text no. 31
    
32.
Sari FF, Bodroastuti T. Effect of personal factors, organizational factors and non-organizational factors on organizational commitment (Study of Production Staff of PT. Kubota Indonesia). J Kaji Akunt Dan Bisnis 2012;1(1):1-22.  Back to cited text no. 32
    
33.
Kahneman D, Tversky A. Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econom Soc 1979;47:263-92.  Back to cited text no. 33
    
34.
Mark BA, Hughes LC, Belyea M, Chang Y, Hofmann D, Jones CB, et al. Does safety climate moderate the influence of staffing adequacy and work conditions on nurse injuries? J Safety Res 2007;38:431-46.  Back to cited text no. 34
    
35.
Silberstang J, Hazy JK. Toward a micro-enactment theory of leadership and the emergence of innovation. Innov J Public Sect Innov J 2008;13:1-18.  Back to cited text no. 35
    
36.
Feyer AM, Williamson A. Occupational Injury: Risk, Prevention and Intervention. ISBN 9780748406470: CRC Press;USA 1998.  Back to cited text no. 36
    
37.
Purnomo R. Analysis of factors associated with compliance with implementing nurses in the application of standard precautions in banyumas hospital. Universitas Diponegoro; 2015.  Back to cited text no. 37
    

Top
Correspondence Address:
Dr. Suarnianti
Perintis Kemerdekaan Street Number 24, Makassar City, South Sulawesi
Indonesia
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/jgid.jgid_128_18

Rights and Permissions


    Figures

  [Figure 1]
 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3], [Table 4], [Table 5], [Table 6], [Table 7], [Table 8], [Table 9]



 

Top
  
 
  Search
 
  
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  


    Abstract
   Introduction
    Materials and Me...
   Results
   Discussion
   Conclusions
    References
    Article Figures
    Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed147    
    Printed11    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded0    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal

Sitemap | What's New | Feedback | Copyright and Disclaimer | Contact Us
2008 Journal of Global Infectious Diseases | Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
Online since 10th December, 2008