title: Cultural leisure activities, recovery and work engagement among hospital employees.
abstract: This study explored the relationship between cultural leisure activities, recovery experiences and two outcomes among hospital workers. The differences in recovery experiences (detachment, relaxation, mastery and control) and outcomes (work engagement and subjective recovery state) among hospital personnel (N=769) were analysed by the type (receptive or creative) and frequency of cultural activities. The cross-sectional data were collected by a digital questionnaire. Employees who reported both receptive and creative cultural leisure activities on a weekly basis had the highest relaxation, mastery and control experiences during off-job time. In addition, those with weekly creative activities had beneficial mastery experiences. There were no differences in recovery outcomes after adjustment for age, except in work engagement. Cultural leisure activities, and creative activities in particular, play an important role in certain aspects of recovery.
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychiatry, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Central Hospital, Finland.
authors.forename: Katinka
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Tuisku
authors.forename: Marianna
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Virtanen
authors.forename: Jessica DE
authors.initials: JD
authors.lastname: Bloom
authors.forename: Ulla
authors.initials: U
authors.lastname: Kinnunen
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D003469:Culture; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007899:Leisure Activities; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D010564:Personnel, Hospital; D055815:Young Adult
references.citation: Prev Med. 2009 Aug-Sep;49(2-3):142-7
references.pmid: 19589351
references.citation: Ind Health. 2013;51(4):443-51
references.pmid: 23648769
references.citation: Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2011 Dec;84(8):877-88
references.pmid: 21695434
references.citation: Psychosom Med. 2009 May;71(4):469-73
references.pmid: 19321851
references.citation: Work. 2016 Sep 27;55(1):93-100
references.pmid: 27612069
references.citation: J Occup Environ Med. 2013 Apr;55(4):371-7
references.pmid: 23532191
references.citation: J Occup Health Psychol. 2007 Jul;12(3):204-21
references.pmid: 17638488
references.citation: Workplace Health Saf. 2013 Feb;61(2):85-9; quiz 90
references.pmid: 23336129
references.citation: Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2013 Apr;86(3):281-8
references.pmid: 22456978
references.citation: Int J Qual Health Care. 2002 Feb;14(1):5-13
references.pmid: 11871630
references.citation: Nurs Outlook. 2005 Nov-Dec;53(6):291-9
references.pmid: 16360700
references.citation: J Pers Soc Psychol. 2011 Aug;101(2):354-65
references.pmid: 21688922
references.citation: J Epidemiol Community Health. 2012 Aug;66(8):698-703
references.pmid: 21609946
references.citation: Creat Nurs. 2011;17(4):187-94
references.pmid: 22403858
references.citation: Scand J Work Environ Health. 2006 Dec;32(6):482-92
references.pmid: 17173204
references.citation: J Health Psychol. 2005 Jan;10(1):79-99
references.pmid: 15576502
references.citation: Am Psychol. 2000 Jan;55(1):5-14
references.pmid: 11392865
references.citation: J Occup Environ Med. 2014 Aug;56(8):814-9
references.pmid: 25099407
references.citation: Am Psychol. 2000 Jan;55(1):68-78
references.pmid: 11392867