Cross-sectional study identifies job satisfaction and stress relationships in dentists, suggesting key intervention needs.
<ns3:p>Abstract* Introduction COVID-19 pandemic has generated changes in work environments and job satisfaction could be affected. We aimed to identify the relationship between job satisfaction and stress among dentists in Lima during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods This cross-sectional study was conducted with 547 dentists in Lima (Peru). The inclusion criteria were adult dental professionals of both genders who were working during the pandemic. A 23-item Palma Work Climate Scale (SL-SPC) Likert-like questionnaire and the 36-item Marquina & Adriazola stress questionnaire were used. Results The mean age was 38.02±8.5 years, 53.4% were male, 51% were single, 88.3% has housemates and 61.3% were engaged exclusively in private practice. High stress levels were reported by 73.7% of the respondents. Dentists who were dissatisfied with the importance of their tasks, working conditions, economic benefits and lack of job recognition had significantly higher stress levels (p<0.001) in all sociodemographic categories. The regression model showed that task importance (p=0.006), personal recognition (p<0.001) and perceived economic benefits (p<0.001) significantly influenced high stress levels. This pattern was particularly pronounced in males, married, and those who work both in the public and private sector. The adjusted logistic model showed that dentists who were dissatisfied with task importance (OR: 2.22, 95%CI: 1.24-4.00), personal recognition (OR: 5.92, 95%CI: 2.40-14.57), and economic benefits (OR: 10.52, 95%CI: 5.91-18.71) had an increased risk of experiencing high stress levels. Conclusion Our results highlight the significant relationship between job satisfaction and stress levels among dentists during the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings may have important implications for the design of interventions aimed at reducing stress and improving the well-being of dentists.</ns3:p>
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bastidas-Sánchez et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: