*3.2.1 Univariate analysis of 2009 cohort*

Workplace bullying was significantly linked to younger age (p = <10−3), occupational status of intern (p = <10−3), surgical specialties (p = 0.046), shorter seniority at work (p = 0.003), serious family problems (p = 0.001), as well as to disappointing medical practice (p < 10−3).

All the remaining socio-demographic, occupational or environmental features had no significant relationship with bullying at work in interns and residents in 2009 (**Table 2**).


**197**

**Table 4.**

**Table 3.**

*Influence of Tunisian Revolution on Bullying at Work in Interns and Residents*

After binary logistic regression, the determinant model influencing the advent of MHW was made of intern job position (p < 10−3), female gender (p < 10−3), shorter seniority (p = 0.02), the deliberate choice of medical career (p < 10−3), dissatisfaction with medical practice (p < 10−3), serious family problems (p < 10−3) and

In 2016, workplace bullying was significantly related to younger age (p = 0.003), to the internship status (p = <10−3), to surgical specialties (p = 0.046), to a shorter seniority at work (p = 0.004), to the use of public transport (p = 0.016), to compulsory choice of medical curriculum (p < 10−3) as well as to disappointing medical

All the remaining socio-demographic, occupational or environmental features had no significant relationship with bullying at work in interns and residents in 2016.

The binary logistic regression showed an explanatory model of the moral harass-

Comparison of the NAQ-R scores between 2009 and 2016 showed that it was significantly higher in 2009 score, while no difference was noticed in bullying

**Determinants P** Job Position (Intern) <10–3 Gender (Female) 0.001 Seniority (Shorter) 0.023 Choice (Compulsory) 0.006 Medical Practice (Disappointing) 0.002 Family Problems (Serious) 0.007 Leisure Activities (Lack) 0.011

**Determinants p** Job position (intern) 0.008 Specialty (Surgery) 0.031 Choice (Compulsory) < 10–3 Medical Practice (Disappointing) < 10–3

ment at work for 2016 Cohort consisting of job position (p = 0.008), specialty (p = 0.031), deliberate choice of medical studies (p < 10−3) and Medical practice

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.93847*

*3.2.2 Multivariate analysis of 2009 cohort*

lack of leisure activities (p = 0.01) (**Table 3**).

*3.2.3 Univariate analysis of 2016 cohort*

*3.2.4 Multivariate analysis of 2016 cohort*

dissatisfaction (p < 10−3) (**Table 4**).

*3.2.5 Comparison of both cohorts' scores*

scores between both cohorts (**Table 5**).

*Multivariate model of moral harassment at work in 2009 cohort.*

*Multivariate model explaining workplace bullying in 2016 cohort.*

practice (p < 10−3) (**Table 2**).

#### **Table 2.**

*Univariate analysis of determinants of work bullying in both cohorts.*

*Influence of Tunisian Revolution on Bullying at Work in Interns and Residents DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.93847*
