DDS. Master's Student, Postgraduate Program on Public Health Management, Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas (SP), Brazil.
MSc. Doctoral Student, Postgraduate Program on Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Universidade Federal de Uberlândia (UFU), Uberlândia (MG), Brazil.
Sao Paulo Med J. 2021 Jul-Aug;139(4):331-340. doi: 10.1590/1516-3180.2020.0661.R2.0902021.
Individuals' quality of working life and motivation are directly related to their satisfaction and wellbeing. Although studies on the quality of life of family health workers have been conducted, there are none correlating these professionals' wellbeing with this work model.
To review the scientific literature in order to identify the levels of quality of life, in their dimensions, of Family Health Strategy workers.
Systematic review of observational studies developed through a partnership between two postgraduate schools (Piracicaba and Uberlândia).
The review followed the PRISMA recommendations and was registered in the PROSPERO database. Ten databases were used, including the "grey literature". Two evaluators selected the eligible studies, collected the data and assessed the risk of biases, independently. The JBI tool was used to assess the risk of bias. A complementary statistical analysis was conducted on the means and standard deviations of the results from the WHOQOL-100 and WHOQOL-bref questionnaires.
The initial search presented 1,744 results, from which eight were included in the qualitative analysis. The studies were published between 2007 and 2018. The total sample included 1,358 answered questionnaires. All the studies presented low risk of bias. The complementary analysis showed that the environmental factor (mean score 56.12 ± 2.33) had the most influence on the quality of life of community health workers, while physical health (mean score 14.29 ± 0.21) had the most influence on graduate professionals.
Professionals working within the Family Health Strategy had dimensions of quality of life that varied according to their professional category.
个人的工作生活质量和动力与其满意度和幸福感直接相关。尽管已经对家庭健康工作者的生活质量进行了研究，但没有将这些专业人员的幸福感与这种工作模式联系起来的研究。
综述科学文献，以确定家庭健康战略工作者生活质量及其各维度的水平。
由两所研究生院校（皮拉西卡巴和乌贝兰迪亚）合作开展的观察性研究系统综述。
综述遵循 PRISMA 建议，并在 PROSPERO 数据库中注册。使用了十个数据库，包括“灰色文献”。两名评估员独立选择合格的研究，收集数据并评估偏倚风险。使用 JBI 工具评估偏倚风险。对 WHOQOL-100 和 WHOQOL-bref 问卷结果的均值和标准差进行了补充统计分析。
最初的搜索结果为 1744 条，其中 8 条被纳入定性分析。研究发表于 2007 年至 2018 年之间。总样本包括 1358 份回答问卷。所有研究的偏倚风险均较低。补充分析表明，环境因素（平均得分 56.12 ± 2.33）对社区卫生工作者的生活质量影响最大，而身体健康（平均得分 14.29 ± 0.21）对研究生专业人员的影响最大。
在家庭健康战略框架内工作的专业人员的生活质量维度因专业类别而异。
