Cross-sectional study examines intrinsic spirituality's impact on work environment and quality of life in nurses, suggesting positive associations.
Aim This study examined whether intrinsic spirituality was associated with nurses’ perceptions of their work environment and their quality of work life. Background Nurses work in demanding settings that may shape perceptions of the work environment and quality of work life. Intrinsic spirituality may be an internal resource linked to these appraisals. Methods A cross‐sectional study in Türkiye ( n = 378) was reported in line with STROBE. Data were collected using the Intrinsic Spirituality Scale, Work Environment Scale, and Quality of Work Life Scale for Nurses. Analyses were performed using regression‐based mediation with 5,000 bootstrap resamples within a generalized linear modelling framework. Results Intrinsic spirituality was positively associated with perceived work environment ( B = 0.660, β = 0.549, p < 0.001). Perceived work environment and intrinsic spirituality were both positively associated with quality of work life ( B = 0.647, β = 0.507, p < 0.001, and B = 0.357, β = 0.233, p < 0.001, respectively). Bootstrap mediation indicated a significant indirect association of intrinsic spirituality with quality of work life through perceived work environment ( B = 0.427, p < 0.001), consistent with a partial mediation pattern. Discussion The findings provide preliminary evidence that both individual spiritual resources and organizational factors are relevant to nurses’ professional well‐being. Conclusion Supporting intrinsic spirituality may be associated with more favourable perceptions of the work environment and a higher quality of work life among nurses. Implications for nursing Addressing nurses’ spiritual resources and workplace conditions may support well‐being. Implications for Nursing Policy Policies that support spiritual well‐being initiatives and working conditions may be relevant to healthier environments and quality of work life; further longitudinal research is needed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Turan et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: