Abstract
Objectives:
To investigate the causal relationship between workplace violence and health outcomes among healthcare workers, addressing gaps in evidence on its mechanisms and heterogeneous effects.
Methods:
A nationally representative cohort of 4,255 Chinese healthcare workers was surveyed via four-stage stratified sampling. Causal effects were estimated using multiple linear models and ordered logit model, with robustness checks via propensity score matching and instrumental variables to mitigate endogeneity.
Results:
Workplace violence reduces the probability of healthcare workers experiencing improved health by 12.9% (p = 0.000), with this effect persisting even after considering endogeneity. Physical violence had the most substantial impact, while psychological and verbal violence also contributed. Professional values mediated the effect. Vulnerable subgroups included women, younger workers, lower-ranking staff, and non-tertiary hospital employees.
Conclusion:
This study provides causal evidence that workplace violence undermines the health of healthcare workers, with implications for hospital policies and occupational safety standards. Interventions should prioritize physical violence prevention, support for high-risk groups, and value-based resilience training.
Introduction
Healthcare workers (HCWs), numbering approximately 104 million globally, play a vital role in delivering care, yet their physical and psychological wellbeing has mainly been overlooked [1, 2]. They face numerous stressors, including heavy workloads, long shifts, high-paced environments, and exposure to physical and psychological risks, further intensified by moral conflicts, workplace bullying, lack of social support, and job insecurity [3, 4]. These challenges lead to mental health issues such as dissatisfaction, stress, depression, anxiety, sleep disorders, compassion fatigue, and burnout, with 1.0% of physicians reporting suicide attempts and 17% experiencing suicidal ideation [5, 6]. According to a recent meta-analysis of 253 studies involving 331,544 participants, 61.9% of HCWs have experienced some form of WPV [7]. The consequences of WPV are profound, negatively impacting both physical and mental health. Anxiety, depression, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and other psychological conditions can lead to reduced job satisfaction, lower professional performance, increased turnover, and higher burnout rates [8–11]. Moreover, treating and compensating employees injured by WPV incurs significant costs and prolonged absences, further straining healthcare systems [12–15].
Existing research primarily examines hospital-based WPV through surveys, including assessments of risk factors, investigation of incident rates, management approaches, and consequences of people who encountered WPV [16]. Many researches indicates that WPV was significantly associated with objective level factors (age, gender, education level, professional status, workload, and work experience) [17], organizational level factors (shift work, excessive service volume, and high-stress situations) [18, 19], and personal level factors (history of drug or alcohol abuse, violence, or psychiatric conditions) [18].
WPV manifests in a spectrum of detrimental health effects, mediated by complex behavioral pathways. In the study of Zhao et al. [20], depression plays a key mediating role between WPV and occupational burnout. Havaei et al. [21] reveal that burnout mediated the relationship between WPV and health outcomes. However, given the importance of HCWs’ health, research gaps still need to be urgently filled. First, current research has yet to rigorously and scientifically explore whether and to what extent WPV affects the health of HCWs. Although some studies have discussed the adverse effects of WPV, there is a lack of direct examination. Second, previous studies have not yet established robust causality, most of the studies did not consider the endogeneity of the estimates, which led to the fact that their studies perhaps only provided evidence of the correlation between WPV and health outcomes [22, 23], and their estimates may even have been biased. We know little about the underlying mechanisms by which WPV affects the health of HCWs, which hinders our in-depth understanding of the effects of WPV. Professional value refers to the perceived value of their work, which affects workers’ productivity and job satisfaction [11]. Recent studies have shown that professional values are a key factor influencing the health of farmers or workers [24, 25]. However, given the distinct nature of healthcare work, the mediating effect of professional value among HCWs remains unexplored and requires further investigation.
Building on the current research gaps, this study leverages a large-scale dataset of Chinese HCWs to examine the effects of WPV on their health scientifically. It aims to evaluate the overall impact of WPV, identify the type that poses the most significant harm, and investigate how its effects vary based on the hospitals’ and HCWs’ characteristics. Additionally, the study seeks to deepen understanding by exploring professional value as a mediating factor. The findings aim to inform policy development to address health-related challenges in this field.
Methods
Data Source
This is a multicenter cross-sectional study conducted between October 2022 and March 2023 in China and using a four-stage stratified sampling technique [11]. With approval from the administrations of each hospital, email invitations were sent to the HCWs. Participants were required to provide written informed consent before accessing the questionnaire: before accessing the survey questionnaires, written informed consent was provided, and they were assured of their anonymity, informed that participation was voluntary, and had the option to withdraw from the study at any time without consequence. After consent was given, participants were given access to the questionnaire, which was designed to take approximately 15 min to complete, based on a pilot trial with healthcare workers who were not involved in the main study. All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee (Ethics Committee of West China Hospital, No. 2023822) and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards [26].
Variable Definition
This study’s key dependent variable is HCWs’ health status, measured using self-rated health (SRH) [24]. SRH is a widely utilized method for assessing health due to its simplicity, affordability, and self-reported nature [27]. For this study, participants assessed their health status by responding to the question, “How is your health status?” using a 5-point scale: 1 for “Very Unhealthy,” 2 for “Unhealthy,” 3 for “Average,” 4 for “Healthy,” and 5 for “Very Healthy.” This approach is particularly valuable in large population surveys, serving as a practical starting point for discussions about individuals’ health perceptions. Poor SRH has been shown to independently predict future health outcomes, such as disability, mortality, physical dysfunction, cardiovascular disease, and increased healthcare utilization [28–30]. SRH is strongly correlated with various biomarkers and is recognized as a reliable predictor of mortality, even when controlling for other health indicators [31]. Its predictive strength lies in its ability to reflect physical and mental health, providing a holistic view of an individual’s wellbeing. Moreover, SRH can detect subtle bodily changes that conventional empirical studies may overlook, highlighting its significance in understanding and predicting health outcomes through the interplay of social and biological mechanisms [24, 32].
The core explanatory variable in this study is WPV. The Chinese version of the Workplace Violence Scale was used [33]. This scale has been validated for its reliability and accuracy (with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.92) in the Chinese healthcare context. It includes five categories of violence: PA, EA, T, VSH, and SA. Respondents rated their exposure to each type of violence on a scale from 0 to 3, with 0 representing no incidents, 1 for one incident, 2 for two or three incidents, and 3 for more than three incidents in the past year. The total score ranges from 0 to 15 and is the sum of all five item scores. The survey included clear definitions for each type of violence. Further details about the questionnaire are available in Additional file 1.
Professional value is measured as a mediating factor between WPV and SRH using the Professional Value Questionnaire for Medical Staff, developed by Gu et al. in 2015. This tool is based on the Work Value Questionnaire and the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire and comprises 37 items across five dimensions: intrinsic, external, social, altruistic, and leisure values. Intrinsic values focus on motivation derived from the work itself, including personal influence, clarity of goals, responsibilities, feedback, accountability, and interest. External values emphasize material rewards such as salary, social status, wealth, promotion, and compensation. Social values pertain to workplace incentives, such as relationships, recognition, fairness, training, and family support. Altruistic values arise from contributing to society, helping others, and deriving satisfaction from serving others. Finally, leisure values address work-life balance, including autonomy, flexibility, job stability, and a supportive work environment.
To explore the influence of WPV on the health of HCWs, we also controlled for other control variables such as gender, age, education level, and income, as discussed in earlier studies [10, 16, 34]. For detailed variable definitions, please refer to Supplementary Table S1.
Estimation Models
To investigate the impact of WPV on HCWs’ health, we conducted a regression analysis. Given that the dependent variable is an ordinal variable, an Ordered Logit model was employed in the baseline regression, as shown in Equations 1, 2 below:
Where is the latent SRH of HCW , which is mapped to the observed through the cutoff point that are estimated together with and satisfied with . is the explanatory variable that we are interested in, representing the experience of workplace violence by HCW . is a column vector of control variables that may affect HCWs’ , including gender, age, education, income, marriage, working year, night shift, seniority, position, job, department, employment, hospital level, and hospital category. is the fixed effect, and is the residual term.
Additionally, this study aims to investigate the marginal treatment effect (MTE) of WPV, specifically how WPV influences the probability of HCWs’ SRH assuming each value, with other control variables set to their mean. Following the methods of Aakvik, A., J. J. Heckman and E. J. Vytlacil [35] and Huang, B., Y. Lian and W. Li [36], we estimated the MTE of health education on the health of migrants based on the above benchmark model [34].
To ensure more reliable estimates, we employed a multiple linear model to examine the effect of WPV on HCWs’ SRH. While the independent variables are ordered, following the practice in empirical research, the study’s robustness could be damaged if the linear model provides similar results [37]. The model is outlined by Equation 3 below:
In this equation, represents the SRH of HCWs . is a constant. represents the WPV experience of HCWs . is the same set of control variables as Model [1]. is the fixed effect. is the residual term, and to mitigate the heteroskedasticity problem, we used robust standard errors in the estimation.
To mitigate potential endogeneity, we initially employed propensity score matching (PSM) to minimize the selection bias issues. In practice, the probability that a HCW is subject to WPV is related to their characteristics and thus may lead to selection bias in estimation. This paper corrected the self-selection bias by PSM. By Smith and Todd’s standard [29], we selected the following control variables for the matching process: gender, age, education, marriage, income, work experience, night shifts, seniority, and position. Another potential concern is that our estimates reflect the fact that HCWs with worse health are more likely to suffer from WPV. This potential endogeneity could introduce bias into our estimates, which we address using an instrumental variable (IV). We used the average WPV level from hospitals of the same tier, excluding the HCW’s own hospital, as the IV. This method satisfies the requirement of relevance and exclusion. The WPV level in peer hospitals is strongly associated with the likelihood of WPV exposure for HCWs, as higher WPV levels in these hospitals increase the probability of elevated WPV levels in the worker’s hospital, thereby raising their risk of experiencing WPV. Simultaneously, the WPV levels in other hospitals of the same tier do not directly affect the HCW’s health, satisfying the requirement of exclusion.
Results
Descriptive Statistics
Our survey included 25 regional secondary- and tertiary-care hospitals across China. A nationally representative cohort of 4,255 Chinese HCWs was selected. Descriptive statistics are shown in Table 1. Our study revealed that 50.97% of HCWs reported being healthy, a figure significantly lower than the average among Chinese adults, highlighting an important issue that warrants attention [27].
TABLE 1
| Variable | Definition | Obs | Mean (%) | S.D. | Min | Max |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Explained variable | ||||||
| SRH | Very unhealthy = 1 | 55 | 1.29 | 0.816 | 1 | 5 |
| Unhealthy = 2 | 461 | 10.83 | ||||
| Average = 3 | 1,570 | 36.90 | ||||
| Healthy = 4 | 1902 | 44.70 | ||||
| Very healthy = 5 | 267 | 6.27 | ||||
| Explanatory variable | ||||||
| WPV | Workplace violence | 4,255 | 2.189 | 2.846 | 0 | 15 |
| Control variables | ||||||
| Gender | Female = 0 | 3,161 | 74.29 | 0.437 | 0 | 0 |
| Male = 1 | 1,094 | 25.71 | ||||
| Age | Year | 4,255 | 35.887 | 8.791 | 22 | 60 |
| Education | Year | 4,255 | 15.943 | 1.429 | 12 | 22 |
| Income | CNY | 4,255 | 6,268.376 | 2,488.098 | 1,500 | 11,000 |
| Marriage | No = 0 | 913 | 21.46 | 0.411 | 0 | 1 |
| Yes = 1 | 3,342 | 78.54 | ||||
| Working Year | (0,1] = 1 | 182 | 4.28 | 0.890 | 1 | 4 |
| (1,5] = 2 | 739 | 17.37 | ||||
| (5,10] = 3 | 1,168 | 27.45 | ||||
| (10,] = 4 | 2,166 | 50.90 | ||||
| Night Shift | No = 0 | 1,552 | 36.47 | 0.481 | 0 | 1 |
| Yes = 1 | 2,703 | 63.53 | ||||
| Seniority | Not reported = 1 | 369 | 8.67 | 0.930 | 1 | 5 |
| Junior = 2 | 1741 | 40.92 | ||||
| Intermediate = 3 | 1,390 | 32.67 | ||||
| Deputy senior = 4 | 647 | 15.21 | ||||
| Senior = 5 | 108 | 2.54 | ||||
| Position | Intern/student/trainee = 1 | 70 | 1.65 | 0.498 | 1 | 4 |
| Employee = 2 | 3,225 | 75.79 | ||||
| Administration manager = 3 | 878 | 20.63 | ||||
| Hospital manager = 4 | 82 | 1.93 | ||||
| Job | 4,255 | 2.256 | 1.378 | 1 | 6 | |
| Department | 4,255 | 2.354 | 1.175 | 1 | 4 | |
| Employment | 4,255 | 1.555 | 0.539 | 1 | 3 | |
| Hospital Level | 4,255 | 2.349 | 1.687 | 1 | 5 | |
| Hospital Category | 4,255 | 1.843 | 0.363 | 1 | 2 | |
Descriptive statistics (China. 2022–2023).
(1) Education level is a continuous variable, specifically, senior middle school/technical secondary school = 12, junior college = 15, undergraduate = 16, postgraduate = 19, and doctorate = 22. (2) Job is a classified variable, specifically, Physician = 1, Nurse/midwife = 2, Pharmacist = 3, Allied health professional (therapist/radiographer/assistant) = 4, Administrative or clerical worker = 5, Other = 6. (3) Department is a classified variable, specifically, General medicine = 1, General surgery = 2, Medical auxiliary/ancillary = 3, Other = 4. (4) Hospital Level is a classified variable, specifically, Tertiary A = 1, Tertiary B = 2, Secondary A = 3, Secondary B = 4, Others = 5. (5) Hospital category is a classified variable, specifically, Specialty hospital = 1, General hospital = 2.
As for the key variable of interest in this paper, WPV, it has a mean value of 2.189, which means that, on average, HCWs are subjected to one type of WPV. HCWs who experienced WPV were treated as the treatment group, and those who did not were the control group. Supplementary Table S2 shows that 2,454 HCWs (57.67%) reported experiencing WPV at least once in this study. This prevalence is lower than the global average of 78.9% reported in previous research [16]. Furthermore, it could be found that, compared to HCWs who did not suffer WPV, those who experienced WPV have a significantly worse SRH, which is statistically significant at the 1% level. Further investigation is warranted to clarify the causal relationship between workplace violence and SRH outcomes and to identify potential underlying mechanisms.
Benchmark Regression and Robust Test
Table 2 shows regression analysis reveals that WPV significantly harms Chinese HCWs SRH. Ordered Logit results (Column 1) show a one-unit WPV increase reduces the odds of SRH improvement by 12.9%, with statistical significance (1% level). Marginal effects indicate WPV lowers the probability of “healthy,” “very healthy” SRH by 2.4% and 0.8%, respectively, while raising “very unhealthy” (0.2%), “unhealthy” (1.2%), and “average” (1.7%) probabilities. Multiple linear models (Column 7) confirm WPV’s negative SRH impact, aligning with baseline findings.
TABLE 2
| Variables | (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) | (7) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SRH | |||||||
| Ordered logit model | OLS model | ||||||
| Total effect | Marginal effects | ||||||
| Very unhealthy | Unhealthy | Average | Healthy | Very healthy | |||
| WPV | 0.871*** | 0.002*** | 0.012*** | 0.017*** | −0.024*** | −0.008*** | −0.056*** |
| (0.011) | (0.000) | (0.001) | (0.002) | (0.002) | (0.001) | (0.005) | |
| Gender | 1.237** | −0.003** | −0.019** | −0.027** | 0.036** | 0.012** | 0.071** |
| (0.103) | (0.001) | (0.007) | (0.011) | (0.014) | (0.005) | (0.033) | |
| Age | 0.998 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | −0.000 | −0.000 | −0.001 |
| (0.005) | (0.000) | (0.000) | (0.001) | (0.001) | (0.000) | (0.002) | |
| Education | 0.983 | 0.000 | 0.002 | 0.002 | −0.003 | −0.001 | −0.009 |
| (0.023) | (0.000) | (0.002) | (0.003) | (0.004) | (0.001) | (0.010) | |
| Income | 1.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | −0.000 | −0.000 | 0.000 |
| (0.000) | (0.000) | (0.000) | (0.000) | (0.000) | (0.000) | (0.000) | |
| Marriage | 1.185** | −0.002* | −0.015* | −0.022** | 0.029** | 0.010* | 0.070** |
| (0.103) | (0.001) | (0.008) | (0.011) | (0.015) | (0.005) | (0.035) | |
| Working Year | 0.837*** | 0.002*** | 0.016*** | 0.023*** | −0.030*** | −0.010*** | −0.072*** |
| (0.045) | (0.001) | (0.005) | (0.007) | (0.009) | (0.003) | (0.022) | |
| Night Shift | 0.645*** | 0.006*** | 0.039*** | 0.055*** | −0.075*** | −0.025*** | −0.178*** |
| (0.044) | (0.001) | (0.006) | (0.008) | (0.011) | (0.004) | (0.027) | |
| Seniority | 1.055 | −0.001 | −0.005 | −0.007 | 0.009 | 0.003 | 0.022 |
| (0.056) | (0.001) | (0.005) | (0.007) | (0.009) | (0.003) | (0.022) | |
| Position | 1.409*** | −0.004*** | −0.030*** | −0.043*** | 0.059*** | 0.020*** | 0.138*** |
| (0.105) | (0.001) | (0.007) | (0.009) | (0.013) | (0.004) | (0.030) | |
| Cons | - | 3.639*** | |||||
| (0.178) | |||||||
| Fixed Effect | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Observations | 4,255 | 4,255 | 4,255 | 4,255 | 4,255 | 4,255 | 4,255 |
| (Pseudo) R2 | 0.046 | 0.046 | 0.046 | 0.046 | 0.046 | 0.046 | 0.104 |
The effect of workplace violence on the self-rated health of healthcare workers (China, 2022–2023).
(1) *, **, and *** represent significance at the 10%, 5%, and 1% levels, respectively. (2) The numbers in parentheses are robust standard errors. (3) The coefficients in column 1 are presented as odds ratio.
Endogeneity Solving
The study confirms that WPV significantly harms HCWs’ SRH. To strengthen reliability and address potential endogeneity, the analysis employed two methods: PSM and IV. First, PSM was applied using a 1:1 nearest-neighbor approach (caliper = 0.01). Supplementary Table S3 and Supplementary Figure S1 confirmed balance between treatment and control groups post-matching, with no significant differences (p > 0.1 for all covariates). Kernel density plots (Supplementary Figure S1) demonstrated aligned distributions, validating the common support assumption. Table 3 (columns 1–7) showed WPV’s negative coefficients remained statistically significant, reinforcing baseline results and confirming WPV’s adverse health impact after correcting for selection bias.
TABLE 3
| Variables | (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) | (7) | (8) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SRH | ||||||||
| PSM | IV | |||||||
| Ordered Logit Model | OLS Model | |||||||
| Total Effects | Marginal Effects | |||||||
| Very Unhealthy | Unhealthy | Average | Healthy | Very Healthy | ||||
| Violence | 0.862*** | 0.002*** | 0.012*** | 0.020*** | −0.024*** | −0.010*** | −0.060*** | −0.053*** |
| (0.016) | (0.000) | (0.002) | (0.002) | (0.003) | (0.001) | (0.007) | (0.007) | |
| Gender | 1.197 | −0.002 | −0.014 | −0.025 | 0.029 | 0.012 | 0.058 | 0.069** |
| (0.140) | (0.002) | (0.009) | (0.016) | (0.019) | (0.008) | (0.047) | (0.033) | |
| Age | 1.000 | −0.000 | −0.000 | −0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | −0.001 |
| (0.007) | (0.000) | (0.001) | (0.001) | (0.001) | (0.000) | (0.003) | (0.002) | |
| Education | 0.963 | 0.000 | 0.003 | 0.005 | −0.006 | −0.002 | −0.015 | −0.009 |
| (0.031) | (0.000) | (0.003) | (0.004) | (0.005) | (0.002) | (0.013) | (0.010) | |
| Income | 1.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | −0.000 | −0.000 | −0.000 | 0.000 |
| (0.000) | (0.000) | (0.000) | (0.000) | (0.000) | (0.000) | (0.000) | (0.000) | |
| Marriage | 1.243* | −0.003* | −0.017* | −0.030* | 0.035* | 0.015* | 0.090* | 0.070** |
| (0.151) | (0.002) | (0.010) | (0.017) | (0.020) | (0.008) | (0.050) | (0.035) | |
| Working Year | 0.860* | 0.002* | 0.012* | 0.021* | −0.024* | −0.010* | −0.060* | −0.073*** |
| (0.067) | (0.001) | (0.006) | (0.011) | (0.013) | (0.005) | (0.032) | (0.022) | |
| Night Shift | 0.673*** | 0.005*** | 0.031*** | 0.055*** | −0.065*** | −0.027*** | −0.160*** | −0.180*** |
| (0.063) | (0.002) | (0.008) | (0.013) | (0.015) | (0.006) | (0.038) | (0.027) | |
| Seniority | 0.989 | 0.000 | 0.001 | 0.002 | −0.002 | −0.001 | −0.008 | 0.021 |
| (0.076) | (0.001) | (0.006) | (0.011) | (0.012) | (0.005) | (0.031) | (0.022) | |
| Position | 1.398*** | −0.004*** | −0.026*** | −0.046*** | 0.055*** | 0.022*** | 0.127*** | 0.138*** |
| (0.143) | (0.002) | (0.008) | (0.014) | (0.017) | (0.007) | (0.042) | (0.030) | |
| Cons | - | 3.639*** | 3.318*** | |||||
| (0.178) | (0.198) | |||||||
| Fixed Effect | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Observations | 2,208 | 2,208 | 2,208 | 2,208 | 2,208 | 2,208 | 2,208 | 4,255 |
| (Pseudo) R2 | 0.040 | 0.040 | 0.040 | 0.040 | 0.040 | 0.040 | 0.091 | 0.104 |
Regression results after mitigating endogeneity (China, 2022–2023).
Note: (1) *, **, and *** represent significance at the 10%, 5%, and 1% levels, respectively. (2) The numbers in parentheses are robust standard errors. (3) The coefficients in Column 1 are presented as odds ratio.
Second, the IV approach used the average WPV level from peer hospitals (same tier, excluding the respondent’s hospital) as the instrument. IV regression results (Table 3, column 8) confirmed instrument validity: the unidentifiable test (p = 0.000) proved strong correlation, while the Kleibergen-Paap Wald F-statistic (65.590) exceeded the threshold (F > 10), ruling out weak instrument concerns. The IV estimate for WPV (−0.053, p < 0.01) further validated its negative health effect. Together, PSM and IV analyses robustly support the conclusion that WPV deteriorates HCWs’ health, with consistent findings across methodologies.
Further Analysis on the Type of WPV
We also investigate the negative impact of each category type of WPV on the health of HCWs. WPV can be categorized into 5 types [16], and Table 4 provides estimates of health shocks for all WPV types. All types of WPV have a statistically significant negative impact on the SRH of HCWs, with physical violence being the most destructive. Specifically, for each unit increase in physical violence, the probability that a HCW’s SRH would increase by one level would decrease by 30.2%.
TABLE 4
| Variables | (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SRH | |||||
| Ordered logit model | |||||
| Physical Violence | 0.698*** | ||||
| (0.031) | |||||
| Psychological Abuse | 0.712*** | ||||
| (0.019) | |||||
| Verbal Threats | 0.700*** | ||||
| (0.026) | |||||
| Verbal Sexual Harassment | 0.759*** | ||||
| (0.042) | |||||
| Physical Sexual Harassment | 0.739*** | ||||
| (0.060) | |||||
| Controls | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Fixed Effect | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Observations | 4,255 | 4,255 | 4,255 | 4,255 | 4,255 |
| Pseudo R2 | 0.037 | 0.046 | 0.040 | 0.033 | 0.032 |
Effects of different workplace violence on the self-rated health of healthcare workers (China, 2022–2023).
Note: (1) *, **, and *** represent significance at the 10%, 5%, and 1% levels, respectively. (2) The numbers in parentheses are robust standard errors. (3) The coefficients are presented as odds ratio.
Mechanism Analysis
The study demonstrates that WPV significantly impairs HCWs’ SRH by eroding their professional values. Panel A of Table 5 shows WPV negatively impacts both overall professional values and all five sub-dimensions (p < 0.01). Each unit increase in WPV reduces the likelihood of improved total professional values by 15.1%, with particularly strong effects on leisure values, suggesting severe disruptions to work-life balance. The consistent negative effects across all dimensions underscore WPV’s pervasive harm to HCWs’ professional identity and motivation. Panel B reveals professional values positively influence SRH, with altruistic values showing the strongest effect (34.3% increased odds of better SRH per unit increase). External (17.6%) and internal (15.7%) values also significantly boost SRH, while societal (11.3%), leisure (11.1%), and total scores (3.9%) show smaller but meaningful effects. These results highlight those professional values, especially altruism, serve as key protective factors for HCWs’ health perceptions. Together, these findings establish professional value erosion as a critical mechanism linking WPV to poorer SRH. The study suggests interventions should both prevent WPV and strengthen professional values, particularly altruism and work-life balance, to safeguard HCWs’ health. The robust, multi-dimensional evidence supports comprehensive policy approaches addressing both violence reduction and value reinforcement.
TABLE 5
| Panel A | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variables | (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) |
| Ordered Logit Model | ||||||
| Total | Inside | Outside | Society | Altruistic | Leisure | |
| Violence | 0.849*** | 0.909*** | 0.865*** | 0.867*** | 0.872*** | 0.830*** |
| (0.010) | (0.010) | (0.010) | (0.010) | (0.010) | (0.011) | |
| Controls | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Fixed Effect | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Observations | 4,255 | 4,255 | 4,255 | 4,255 | 4,255 | 4,255 |
| Pseudo R2 | 0.015 | 0.012 | 0.021 | 0.017 | 0.019 | 0.023 |
| Panel B | ||||||
| (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) | |
| Ordered Logit Model | ||||||
| SRH | SRH | SRH | SRH | SRH | SRH | |
| Total | 1.039*** | |||||
| (0.002) | ||||||
| Inside | 1.157*** | |||||
| (0.011) | ||||||
| Outside | 1.176*** | |||||
| (0.010) | ||||||
| Society | 1.113*** | |||||
| (0.006) | ||||||
| Altruistic | 1.343*** | |||||
| (0.023) | ||||||
| Leisure | 1.111*** | |||||
| (0.006) | ||||||
| Controls | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Fixed Effect | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Observations | 4,255 | 4,255 | 4,255 | 4,255 | 4,255 | 4,255 |
| Pseudo R2 | 0.088 | 0.065 | 0.080 | 0.080 | 0.068 | 0.077 |
The mediating effect of professional value (China, 2022–2023).
Note: (1) *, **, and *** represent significance at the 10%, 5%, and 1% levels, respectively. (2) The numbers in parentheses are robust standard errors. (3) Professional value has 5 subscore, including inside value, extrinsic value, society value, altruistic value, and leisure value. (4) The coefficients are presented as odds ratio.
Heterogeneity Analysis
The study examines how WPV differentially affects HCWs’ health across demographic groups (Table 6). While WPV harms all HCWs, effects vary significantly: (i) Gender: Females show greater SRH deterioration (85.6% of original improvement probability) than males (89.8%), showing a 4.2% gap. (ii) Age: Younger HCWs experience more severe health impacts than older colleagues. (iii) Seniority: Junior staff (85.1% probability) face 3.5% greater SRH reduction than senior workers (88.6%), reflecting experience/socioeconomic buffers. (iv) Hospital level: Non-tertiary hospital workers (85.5%) show 3.3% worse outcomes than tertiary hospital staff (88.8%), indicating resource disparities.
TABLE 6
| Variables | (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) | (7) | (8) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Self-rated health | ||||||||
| Ordered logit model | ||||||||
| Gender | Age | Seniority | Hospital level (3A) | |||||
| Female | Male | Low | High | Low | High | Non | Yes | |
| Violence | 0.856*** | 0.898*** | 0.854*** | 0.885*** | 0.851*** | 0.886*** | 0.855*** | 0.888*** |
| (0.013) | (0.019) | (0.016) | (0.014) | (0.016) | (0.015) | (0.015) | (0.016) | |
| Controls | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Fixed Effect | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Observations | 3,161 | 1,094 | 2,188 | 2067 | 2,110 | 2,145 | 2,312 | 1943 |
| Pseudo R2 | 0.051 | 0.048 | 0.049 | 0.050 | 0.044 | 0.050 | 0.049 | 0.040 |
| Empirical P value | 0.038** | 0.067* | 0.047** | 0.064* | ||||
Heterogeneous effects of workplace violence on the self-rated health of healthcare workers (China, 2022–2023).
Note: (1) *, **, and *** represent significance at the 10%, 5%, and 1% levels, respectively. (2) The numbers in parentheses are robust standard errors. (3) The coefficients are presented as odds ratio. (4) Age is grouped based on the sample median of 35 years, with individuals aged 35 or younger classified as “Low” and those older than 35 categorized as “High.” Seniority is divided by professional experience: junior-level and lower positions are classified as “Low,” while intermediate, associate senior, and senior roles are classified as “High” Hospital level is categorized based on whether the hospital is tertiary or non-tertiary: tertiary hospitals are marked as “Yes,” and non-tertiary as “No.” (5) The “Empirical P-value” is obtained by Fisher’s Permutation test and used to test the significance of the difference in the coefficients of WPV within groups.
These findings demonstrate WPV’s universal harm while revealing critical vulnerabilities: Female HCWs experience disproportionately severe effects; Less experienced/younger workers show greater susceptibility; Resource-constrained settings exacerbate impacts. And the results underscore the need for targeted interventions addressing these differential vulnerabilities through gender-sensitive protections, enhanced support for junior staff, and resource allocation to non-tertiary hospitals.
Discussion
Main Findings
Healthcare workers are a high-risk group for exposure to workplace violence, and such adverse experiences exacerbate their physical and psychological vulnerabilities, posing a serious threat to the normal functioning of the healthcare system. However, limited empirical evidence exists on the extent to which workplace violence undermines the health of healthcare workers, and little is known about the underlying mechanisms and heterogeneous effects. These gaps constrain the development and implementation of effective policies. To address this issue, this study employs cross-sectional survey data from 4,255 healthcare workers in China to investigate these questions, thereby contributing to the literature on workplace violence and informing the design of relevant intervention policies.
Our study finds that WPV significantly impairs HCWs’ health, a finding that remains reliable under various robustness tests and is an empirical addition to research on HCWs’ health influencing factors [16]. Given the healthcare’s challenging WPV environment [3, 17], this finding has important practical implications. Therefore, we need to emphasize the health of HCWs and take adequate measures to stop the occurrence. Our study suggests that WPV undermines the SRH of HCWs by diminishing their professional values and, in turn, their SRH. A study involving nursing students found a significant negative correlation between WPV and professional identity [38], and another study by Zhang et al. [36] found that WPV affects the sleep quality of psychiatric nurses through professional identity. There is a complex interaction between professional values and health. Conflicts between professional values and reality can lead to psychological stress for HCWs. For instance, the values of medical staff conflict with the reality of their work can lead to guilt, anxiety, and burnout, thus affecting their mental health via a path like conflicting values lead to the accumulation of internal stress, and internal stress leads to impaired mental health (e.g., anxiety, depression). The altruistic value of medical professionals may be taken to extremes, leading to over-commitment to their work at the expense of their own health. The possible path is that altruistic tendencies cause neglect of rest and self-care, which leads to physical fatigue and decreased immunity [39].
Our study concludes that physical violence exhibits the most pronounced effect, followed by oral threats, psychological abuse, physical sexual harassment, and verbal sexual harassment. As mentioned in a few studies [40], different types of WPV might affect health among medical staff. However, to our knowledge, no study has attempted to quantify this differential effect. The present study makes a unique contribution by quantifying the adverse impact of each type of WPV, adding new empirical evidence to the existing body of studies. Possible reasons for our findings are that physical violence is the most direct and immediate threat to safety, and bodily injury can lead to long-term health issues like chronic pain. Plus, the visibility of physical violence might make it more likely to be reported, which could affect study results [41].
The findings of heterogeneity indicate that the female gender is associated with an elevated risk of WPV-related health damage. This observation is consistent with previous studies [42]. First, women are overrepresented in high-risk sectors, including nursing and midwifery, while male workers predominate among physicians, dentists, and pharmacists. In this case, we can see a clear power imbalance in client-facing roles [43]. Second, biological vulnerability due to heightened stress among women is severe. Female nurses show 23% higher PTSD rates post-WPV than males [44]. Another possibility is the underreporting in male-dominated fields since most males did not like to disclose.
Furthermore, younger HCWs and those with lower seniority are more vulnerable, and this finding aligns with previous studies [9]. Possible explanations are that younger, lower-graded HCWs are less able to withstand adverse external shocks, i.e., WPV, and that, in the Chinese social context, these HCWs lack adequate social skills to cope with WPV and its negative impacts. WPV has a more severe health deterioration effect on HCWs in non-tertiary hospitals. Previous studies indicated that more than half of the medical WPV events occurred in tertiary hospitals due to the higher volume of patients and higher expectations of the patients. However, the present study reveals that HCWs in non-tertiary hospitals were experiencing more critical health situations that necessitate heightened attention in future research. The underlying reasons for this discrepancy are not fully elucidated, however, it is hypothesized that tertiary hospitals are equipped with more resources, which could be used to relieve the effect of WPV after such events and tertiary hospital managers paid more attention to the measures to prevent or tackle WPVs, and this finding requires more attention in future research [45–47].
Policy Implications
This study highlights key policy measures to address WPV against HCWs. For HCWs, it emphasizes proactive steps to protect their health, rights, and working conditions. Policymakers must prioritize reducing WPV by strengthening institutional frameworks tailored to each country’s socio-economic context, such as stricter penalties to deter perpetrators. Enhancing HCWs’ professional values through recognition programs, career development, and public appreciation can mitigate WPV’s health impacts. The study also calls for targeted interventions for vulnerable groups, including females, younger HCWs, and lower-grade HCWs, by ensuring equitable access to anonymous reporting and decision-making channels. Non-tertiary hospitals, often under-resourced, require exceptional support to address systemic challenges. Combining legal, professional, and equity-focused strategies, a multifaceted approach is essential to create safer healthcare environments.
Limitations
First, although various methods were employed to enhance the reliability of the results, this study is based on cross-sectional data due to data limitations. Second, the data was collected in China, as the situation differs from one country to another, incorporating data from other nations could enhance the generalizability of the findings. Finally, this study focused solely on the mechanism of professional values, and future research could contribute by exploring additional mechanisms to provide a more comprehensive understanding of this relationship.
Conclusion
This study confirms that WPV severely harms HCWs’ health, with physical violence being most detrimental. Female, younger, lower-ranking, and non-tertiary hospital staff face higher risks. Professional values partially mediate this harm. These findings call for urgent WPV prevention policies and targeted support for vulnerable groups. Future research should prioritize interventions to safeguard HCWs’ wellbeing.
Statements
Data availability statement
The data used to support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding authors upon request.
Ethics statement
Participants were required to provide written informed consent before accessing the questionnaire: before accessing the survey questionnaires, written informed consent was provided, and they were assured of their anonymity, informed that participation was voluntary, and had the option to withdraw from the study at any time without consequence. All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee (Ethics Committee of West China Hospital, No. 2023822) and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Author contributions
TL: conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, methodology, software, visualization, writing – original draft, writing – review and editing; XT: conceptualization, sources, writing – original draft, writing - review and editing; LM and WL: supervision, validation. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.
Funding
The author(s) declare that financial support was received for the research and/or publication of this article. This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant numbers 92159302); Science and Technology Project of Sichuan (grant numbers 2022ZDZX0018); 1.3.5 project for disciplines of excellence, West China Hospital, Sichuan University (grant numbers ZYGD22009); Qinghai University Medical Faculty education and teaching reform project (grant numbers qyjg202221).
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they do not have any conflicts of interest.
Generative AI statement
The author(s) declare that no Generative AI was used in the creation of this manuscript.
Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.
Supplementary material
The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.ssph-journal.org/articles/10.3389/ijph.2025.1608523/full#supplementary-material
References
1.
GhrfH C . Measuring the Availability of Human Resources for Health and Its Relationship to Universal Health Coverage for 204 Countries and Territories from 1990 to 2019: A Systematic Analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet (2022) 399(10341):2129–54. 10.1016/S0140-6736(22)00532-3
2.
Søvold LE Naslund JA Kousoulis AA Saxena S Qoronfleh MW Grobler C et al Prioritizing the Mental Health and Well-Being of Healthcare Workers: An Urgent Global Public Health Priority. Front Public Health (2021) 9:679397. 10.3389/fpubh.2021.679397
3.
Kuhlmann E Falkenbach M Lotta G Tenbensel T Dopfer-Jablonka A . Violence Against Healthcare Workers in the Middle of a Global Health Crisis: What Is It About Policy and what to Learn from International Comparison?Front Public Health (2023) 11:1182328. 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1182328
4.
Mira J Madarasova Geckova A Knezevic B Sousa P Strametz R . Editorial: Psychological Safety in Healthcare Settings. Int J Public Health (2024) 69–2024. 10.3389/ijph.2024.1608073
5.
Lever I Dyball D Greenberg N Stevelink SAM . Health Consequences of Bullying in the Healthcare Workplace: A Systematic Review. J Adv Nurs (2019) 75(12):3195–209. 10.1111/jan.13986
6.
Friganović A Slijepčević J Režić S Alfonso-Arias C Borzuchowska M Constantinescu-Dobra A et al Critical Care Nurses’ Perceptions of Abuse and Its Impact on Healthy Work Environments in Five European Countries: A Cross-Sectional Study. Int J Public Health (2024) 69–2024. 10.3389/ijph.2024.1607026
7.
Liu J Gan Y Jiang H Li L Dwyer R Lu K et al Prevalence of Workplace Violence Against Healthcare Workers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Occup Environ Med (2019) 76(12):927–37. 10.1136/oemed-2019-105849
8.
Wang J Huang Y Wang S Zhang Z He Y Wang X et al The Impact of Workplace Violence on Job Burnout Among Chinese Correctional Officers: The Chain Mediating Effects of Stress and Insomnia. BMC Public Health (2024) 24(1):566. 10.1186/s12889-024-18048-1
9.
Doehring MC Palmer M Satorius A Vaughn T Mulat B Beckman A et al Workplace Violence in a Large Urban Emergency Department. JAMA Netw Open (2024) 7(11):e2443160. 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.43160
10.
Chen M Xie H Liao X Ni J . Workplace Violence and Turnover Intention Among Chinese Nurses: The Mediating Role of Compassion Fatigue and the Moderating Role of Psychological Resilience. BMC Public Health (2024) 24(1):2437. 10.1186/s12889-024-19964-y
11.
Cao Q Wu H Tang X Zhang Q Zhang Y . Effect of Occupational Stress and Resilience on Insomnia Among Nurses During COVID-19 in China: A Structural Equation Modelling Analysis. BMJ Open (2024) 14(7):e080058. 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-080058
12.
Phillips JP . Workplace Violence Against Health Care Workers in the United States. N Engl J Med (2016) 374(17):1661–9. 10.1056/NEJMra1501998
13.
Sun T Gao L Li F Shi Y Xie F Wang J et al Workplace Violence, Psychological Stress, Sleep Quality and Subjective Health in Chinese Doctors: A Large Cross-Sectional Study. BMJ Open (2017) 7(12):e017182. 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017182
14.
Zhao SH Shi Y Sun ZN Xie FZ Wang JH Zhang SE et al Impact of Workplace Violence Against Nurses' Thriving at Work, Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intention: A Cross-Sectional Study. J Clin Nurs (2018) 27(13-14):2620–32. 10.1111/jocn.14311
15.
Choi K Maas ET Koehoorn M McLeod CB . Time to Return to Work Following Workplace Violence Among Direct Healthcare and Social Workers. Occup Environ Med (2020) 77(3):160–7. 10.1136/oemed-2019-106211
16.
Rossi MF Beccia F Cittadini F Amantea C Aulino G Santoro PE et al Workplace Violence Against Healthcare Workers: An Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Public Health (2023) 221:50–9. 10.1016/j.puhe.2023.05.021
17.
Tian Y Yue Y Wang J Luo T Li Y Zhou J . Workplace Violence Against Hospital Healthcare Workers in China: A National Wechat-Based Survey. BMC Public Health (2020) 20(1):582. 10.1186/s12889-020-08708-3
18.
D'Ettorre G Pellicani V Mazzotta M Vullo A . Preventing and Managing Workplace Violence Against Healthcare Workers in Emergency Departments. Acta Biomed (2018) 89(4-s):28–36. 10.23750/abm.v89i4-S.7113
19.
Zhang X Li Y Yang C Jiang G . Trends in Workplace Violence Involving Health Care Professionals in China from 2000 to 2020: A Review. Med Sci Monit (2021) 27:e928393. 10.12659/MSM.928393
20.
Zhao X Zhang Z Chen Z Tian Y Chen H Zhou J . Mediating Role of Depression Between Workplace Violence and Job Burnout Among Healthcare Workers. Zhong Nan Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban (2023) 48(6):903–8. 10.11817/j.issn.1672-7347.2023.230043
21.
Havaei F Astivia OLO MacPhee M . The Impact of Workplace Violence on Medical-Surgical Nurses' Health Outcome: A Moderated Mediation Model of Work Environment Conditions and Burnout Using Secondary Data. Int J Nurs Stud (2020) 109:103666. 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2020.103666
22.
Cooper B Eva N Fazlelahi FZ Newman A Lee A Obschonka M . Addressing Common Method Variance and Endogeneity in Vocational Behavior Research: A Review of the Literature and Suggestions for Future Research. J Vocat Behav (2020) 121:103472. 10.1016/j.jvb.2020.103472
23.
Ullah S Zaefarian G Ullah F . How to Use Instrumental Variables in Addressing Endogeneity? A Step-by-Step Procedure for Non-Specialists. Ind Market Manag (2021) 96:A1–A6. 10.1016/j.indmarman.2020.03.006
24.
Yang F Jiang Y Paudel KP . Impact of Work Value Awareness on Self-Rated Physical Health of Rural-to-Urban Migrant Workers in China. Healthcare (Basel) (2021) 9(5):505. 10.3390/healthcare9050505
25.
Saito Y Igarashi A Noguchi-Watanabe M Takai Y Yamamoto-Mitani N . Work Values and Their Association With Burnout/Work Engagement Among Nurses in Long-Term Care Hospitals. J Nurs Manag (2018) 26(4):393–402. 10.1111/jonm.12550
26.
World Medical Association. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects. Jama (2013) 310(20):2191–4. 10.1001/jama.2013.281053
27.
Dong WL Li YC Wang ZQ Jiang YY Mao F Qi L et al Self-Rated Health and Health-Related Quality of Life Among Chinese Residents, China, 2010. Health Qual Life Outcomes (2016) 14:5. 10.1186/s12955-016-0409-7
28.
Park G Chung W . Self-Rated Health as a Predictor of Mortality According to Cognitive Impairment: Findings from the Korean Longitudinal Study of Aging (2006-2016). Epidemiol Health (2021) 43:e2021021. 10.4178/epih.e2021021
29.
Wuorela M Lavonius S Salminen M Vahlberg T Viitanen M Viikari L . Self-Rated Health and Objective Health Status as Predictors of All-Cause Mortality Among Older People: A Prospective Study with a 5-10-and 27-Year Follow-Up. BMC Geriatr (2020) 20(1):120. 10.1186/s12877-020-01516-9
30.
Sheridan PE Mair CA Quiñones AR . Associations Between Prevalent Multimorbidity Combinations and Prospective Disability and Self-Rated Health Among Older Adults in Europe. BMC Geriatr (2019) 19(1):198. 10.1186/s12877-019-1214-z
31.
Xiong S Wang Z Lee B Guo Q Peoples N Jin X et al The Association Between Self-Rated Health and All-Cause Mortality and Explanatory Factors in China's Oldest-Old Population. J Glob Health (2022) 12:11005. 10.7189/jogh.12.11005
32.
Schnittker J Bacak V . The Increasing Predictive Validity of Self-Rated Health. PLoS One (2014) 9(1):e84933. 10.1371/journal.pone.0084933
33.
Wang P Wang M Hu G Wang Z . Study on the Relationship Between Workplace Violence and Work Ability Among Health Care Professionals in Shangqiu City. Health Res (2006) 35(4):472–4. Available online at: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16986527/.
34.
Tian Y Luo T Jiang Y . The Effect of Health Education on Migration Health: Evidence from a Large Migrant Survey in China. Health and Social Care Community (2023) 2023(1):1–13. 10.1155/2023/3830723
35.
Aakvik A Heckman JJ Vytlacil EJ . Estimating Treatment Effects for Discrete Outcomes When Responses to Treatment Vary: An Application to Norwegian Vocational Rehabilitation Programs. J Econom (2005) 125(1):15–51. 10.1016/j.jeconom.2004.04.002
36.
Huang B Lian Y Li W . How far Is Chinese Left-Behind Parents' Health Left Behind?China Econ Rev (2016) 37:15–26. 10.1016/j.chieco.2015.07.002
37.
Treiman DJ . Quantitative Data Analysis: Doing social Research to Test Ideas. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons. (2014). Available online at: https://books.google.com/books?id=c-fOAgAAQBAJ&dq=Tarsilla+M.+D.J.+Treiman.+(2009).+Quantitative+Data+Analysis:+Doing+Social+Research+to+Test+Ideas.+San+Francisco,+CA:+Jossey-Bass.+Canadian+Journal+of+Program+Evaluation.+2010%3B25(1):131-3.&lr=&hl=zh-CN&source=gbs_navlinks_s.
38.
Wang L Li H Chen Q Fang C Cao L Zhu L . Mediating Effect of Workplace Violence on the Relationship Between Empathy and Professional Identity Among Nursing Students. Front Psychol (2022) 13:964952. 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.964952
39.
Pakkanen P Häggman-Laitila A Pasanen M Kangasniemi M . Health and Social Care Workers' Professional Values: A Cross-Sectional Study. Nurs Ethics (2024) 31(5):681–98. 10.1177/09697330231200569
40.
Veronesi G Ferrario MM Giusti EM Borchini R Cimmino L Ghelli M et al Systematic Violence Monitoring to Reduce Underreporting and to Better Inform Workplace Violence Prevention Among Health Care Workers: Before-And-After Prospective Study. JMIR Public Health Surveill (2023) 9:e47377. 10.2196/47377
41.
Spelten E Thomas B O'Meara PF Maguire BJ FitzGerald D Begg SJ . Organisational Interventions for Preventing and Minimising Aggression Directed Towards Healthcare Workers by Patients and Patient Advocates. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (2020) 4(4):Cd012662. 10.1002/14651858.CD012662.pub2
42.
Ponce B Gruenberger E McGwin G Samora J Patt J . Workplace Violence in Orthopaedic Surgery: A Survey of Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Membership. J Am Acad Orthop Surg (2024) 32(8):e359–e367. 10.5435/JAAOS-D-23-00596
43.
Ajuwa MP Veyrier CA Cousin Cabrolier L Chassany O Marcellin F Yaya I et al Workplace Violence Against Female Healthcare Workers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. BMJ Open (2024) 14(8):e079396. 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-079396
44.
Gerberich SG Church TR McGovern PM Hansen HE Nachreiner NM Geisser MS et al An Epidemiological Study of the Magnitude and Consequences of Work Related Violence: The Minnesota Nurses' Study. Occup Environ Med (2004) 61(6):495–503. 10.1136/oem.2003.007294
45.
Hall BJ Xiong P Chang K Yin M Sui XR . Prevalence of Medical Workplace Violence and the Shortage of Secondary and Tertiary Interventions Among Healthcare Workers in China. J Epidemiol Community Health (2018) 72(6):516–8. 10.1136/jech-2016-208602
46.
Hu Y Luo Q Li R Zhang M Wang Y Su P et al Anti-Violence Measures Developed by ILO and WHO: Analysis of the Prevalence of Workplace Violence and the Effects of Implementation in a General Hospital in China. Front Public Health (2022) 10:1049832. 10.3389/fpubh.2022.1049832
47.
Guo YQ Huang J Xu NN Ma XJ . Worker Characteristics and Measures Associated with Patient and Visitor Violence in the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Multilevel Regression Analysis from China. Front Public Health (2022) 10:877843. 10.3389/fpubh.2022.877843
Summary
Keywords
China, healthcare workers, instrumental variable, propensity score matching, workplace violence
Citation
Luo T, Tang X, Ma L and Li W (2025) The Effect of Workplace Violence on the Health of Healthcare Workers: Empirical Evidence From a Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study in China. Int. J. Public Health 70:1608523. doi: 10.3389/ijph.2025.1608523
Received
19 March 2025
Accepted
14 October 2025
Published
27 October 2025
Volume
70 - 2025
Edited by
Germán Guerra, University of Geneva, Switzerland
Reviewed by
Adriano Friganović, University of Applied Health Sciences, Croatia
Archana Kumari, AIIMS, New Delhi, India
Updates
Copyright
© 2025 Luo, Tang, Ma and Li.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Li Ma, 1004500237@qq.com; Weimin Li, weimi003@scu.edu.cn
†These authors have contributed equally to this work
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.