Mental and Physical Well-being of People Working in Helping Professions, Employed in Youth Educational Centres and Sociotherapy Centres

Representatives of helping professions are particularly exposed to occupational stress. The aim of the study was to evaluate mental and physical well-being, as well as their correlates and predictors in a group of employees working at youth educational centres and sociotherapy centres. A total of 96 employees working at youth educational centres and sociotherapy centres in Kujawsko-Pomorskie voivodeship took part in the study. The following psychometric tools were used: the Psychosocial Working Conditions Questionnaire, the Mini-COPE, the LOT-R, and the GSES. The results obtained indicate that people working in helping professions experience mental and physical health problems. Only 3% of the subjects declared they sleep all night. Over 40% and over 35% of the subjects estimate they suffer from low mood and irritation episodes, respectively, rather frequently or continually. Subjects with poorer mental health are more likely to use Helplessness, Avoidance behaviours, or Turning to religion to cope with stress. The strongest predictor of mental well-being is the sense of self-efficacy. Whereas, the strongest predictor of physical well-being is the ability to cope with stress by giving into the feeling of Helplessness. The study demonstrated poor mental and physical well-being of the subjects. A statistically significant correlation was found between sex and the level of mental and physical health. Employees working at youth educational centres and sociotherapy centres with better mental and physical well-being had a stronger sense of self-efficacy and a higher level of life optimism. Hence, the sense of self-efficacy is a predictor for better mental well-being.

Statistical analyses were conducted using the IBM SPSS Statistics 21 package. 166 The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was used to determine the normality of data distribution.

167
A correlation between variables was evaluated using the Spearman's rho and Pearson's r 168 coefficients. Linear regression analysis with the stepwise method was also used. We assumed 169 a confidence level of p < 0.05. 170 Firstly, the data was analysed using basic descriptive statistics, and the Kolmogorov-Smirnov 171 test was applied to examine the normality of quantitative variable distribution. It turned out 172 that distribution of most variables deviates from the normal distribution. Nevertheless, the skewness value for these variables exceeds the contractual absolute value of 0.8 only in the 174 case of seniority, and consequently the distribution of other scales is not grossly asymmetrical 175 with respect to the Gauss curve. It was therefore decided that parametric tests will be carried 176 out with the participation of other variables.

178
The sten scale was used to describe the level of mental and physical well-being of the 179 respondents. The mental well-being results were nearly evenly distributed between three 180 categories. 31 subjects demonstrated poor mental health, whereas 29 and 36 subjects showed 181 average and high mental health, respectively. As far as physical well-being was concerned, 182 33.3% of the respondents rated it as low, 37.5% as high, and 29.2% as average.

183
According to the procedure described in the "Proposal for analysis of questionnaire results" 184 chapter in the "Psychosocial work conditions" manual, a percentage of the responses to  The analyses showed that over 40% and over 35% of the subjects estimate they suffer from 191 low mood and irritation episodes, respectively, continually or frequently (Tab. I). When it 192 comes to sense of nervousness, over 30% of the subjects estimate they "continually" or 193 "rather frequently" experience this state. 40 subjects declared "rather frequent", and 194 8 subjects "continual" problems concentrating (which is about 11.52 % of the subjects versus 195 4.8 % of the norm). More than six times as many respondents declared they experienced 196 loneliness "rather frequently" compared with teachers' answers presented in the questionnaire 197 manual. 200 for teachers (D1 scale; physical well-being.

202
The largest differences between the subjects' results and the standards for teachers were 203 observed with regard to sleep self-evaluation (Tab. II). Nearly half of the subjects selected the 204 answer "I do not sleep at all", which is more than six times as many respondents compared 205 with teachers' answers presented in the manual. Only less than 3% of the subjects declared 206 that they sleep all night  and this result is over sixteen times lower than the official standard.

258
The results are provided in Table III. Tab. III. This is the Table III. Summary of prediction properties of two models for the 262 dependent variable of mental and physical well-being levels. 263 The results of analysis showed that Helplessness scale was the strongest predictor, explaining 264 the highest percentage of variance in physical well-being (Table III)