Pattern and perception of wellbeing, quality of work life and quality of care of health professionals in Southwest Nigeria

Table 4 Factors that best classify health practitioners with good and poor quality of work life

Predictors	Regression Coefficients (B)	Odds ratio (β)	Wald	P-value
Age (years)
20 – 29 (reference)			14.892	0.005*
30 – 39	0.234	1.264	1.844	0.175
40 – 49	0.141	1.151	0.515	0.473
50 – 59	0.763	2.144	11.164	< 0.001*
60 – 69	1.826	6.211	2.251	0.134
Education level
National Diploma (reference)			12.087	0.002*
Bachelor	0.360	1.433	2.373	0.123
Masters or Ph.D	0.813	2.255	9.491	0.002*
Designation
Nurse (reference)			13.474	0.061*
Medical practitioner	-0.108	0.898	0.426	0.514
Pharmacist	0.379	1.461	2.815	0.093
Physiotherapist	-0.350	0.705	1.947	0.163
Radiographer	0.877	2.404	0.688	0.407
Medical lab. scientist	0.210	1.233	0.706	0.401
Occupational therapist	-1.968	0.140	3.189	0.074
Others	0.839	2.315	1.385	0.239
Work volume per week
< 20 (reference)			11.067	0.011*
20–40	-0.771	0.463	6.232	0.013*
41–60	-0.734	0.480	5.971	0.015*
> 60	-1.049	0.350	10.647	0.001*
Clinician Quality of Care	0.743	2.103	35.805	< 0.001*
WHO-Quality of Life	0.706	2.025	31.946	< 0.001*
Personal Wellbeing	1.115	3.048	79.071	< 0.001*
Constant	-1.572	0.208	16.678	< 0.001*

Approach: Forward Wald binary logistic regression
Model summary: χ² (19, N = 1580) = 306.054, p < 0.001. Nagelkerke R² = 25.4%. Overall prediction success was also modest at 72.5%, with 55.5% of people with good personal wellbeing correctly classified and 83.0% of people classified under poor personal wellbeing
^* = statistic is significant at p < 0.05

ISSN: 1472-6963