[Retracted] A Mixed Methods Investigation of the Prevalence and Influencing Factors of Compassion Fatigue among Midwives in Different Areas of China

Table 2

Single factor analysis of compassion fatigue among midwives.

Project	Degree of compassion fatigue		Statistics	value
	None and mild	Moderate and above
Level of hospital			12.040^1)	0.002
Secondary	15 (8.98)	152 (91.02)
Tertiary	29 (16.86)	143 (83.14)
Specialized	48 (27.27)	128 (72.73)
Area			18.860^1)	< 0.001
Eastern	61 (23.78)	129 (76.22)
Central	38 (21.25)	132 (78.75)
Western	15 (8.58)	160 (91.42)
Age			32.601^2)	< 0.001
20~	35 (38.89)	55 (61.11)
2 6~	26 (13.54)	166 (86.46)
3 1 ~	15 (10.71)	125 (89.28)
> 3 5	15 (16.13)	78 (83.87)
Marriage situation
Unmarried	47 (34.06)	91 (65.94)	45.560^1)	< 0.001
Married	44 (12.72)	302 (87.28)
Divorced	2 (6.45)	29 (93.55)
Sleep quality			24.760^2)	< 0.001
Normal	34 (31.78)	73 (68.22)
Occasional insomnia	37 (16.89)	182 (83.11)
Frequent insomnia	12 (7.95)	139 (92.05)
Children situation			59.646^2)	< 0.001
None	53 (35.57)	96 (66.43)
Infant	18 (11.18)	143 (88.81)
School-age	6 (5.04)	113 (94.96)
Junior school and above	17 (19.77)	69 (80.23)
Experiences of traumatic delivery			76.138^2)	< 0.001
0	29 (60.42)	19 (39.58)
1~	14 (11.20)	111 (88.80)
3~	17 (11.41)	132 (88.59)
> 5	13 (6.74)	180 (93.26)
Job satisfaction			44.039^2)	< 0.001
Very satisfied	4 (40.00)	6 (60.00)
Satisfied	47 (37.90)	77 (62.10)
Ordinary	29 (10.43)	249 (89.57)
Very unsatisfied	6 (5.83)	97 (94.17)
Whether workload is too large			13.656^2)	0.004
Yes	36 (14.46)	213 (88.54)
Ordinary	49 (20.08)	195 (79.92)
No	3 (13.64)	19 (86.36)
Whether to like work environment			20.753^2)	< 0.001
Yes	47 (27.81)	122 (72.19)
Ordinary	32 (12.17)	231 (87.83)
No	4 (4.82)	79 (95.18)
Social support level			113.154^2)	< 0.001
Low	12 (7.36)	151 (92.64)
Medium	28 (9.89)	255 (90.11)
High	43 (62.31)	26 (37.69)

Note. 1: value; 2: value (Kruskal–Wallis).