Self-Perceived Individual Health Responsibility Among Healthcare Workers: Associated Factors and Relationship with Preventive Behaviors—A Cross-Sectional Study
Ocxana Maria Țocan, Larisa Pinte, Alexandru Marian Constantin, Cristian Băicuș, Anna Schneider-Kamp, Marina Ruxandra OțeleaBackground/Objectives: Empowerment strategies promoting healthy behaviors are important for preventing chronic diseases and cancer, while individual health responsibility (IHR) plays a significant role. Although widely discussed in the literature, the concept of IHR does not have clearly defined domains or a validated instrument for assessment. Its overlap with locus of control theory, self-motivation, and personality type creates further difficulties. Meanwhile, perception of one’s own responsibility for health is an intuitive, simple item to answer, reflecting a person’s belief related to this topic. Moreover, for ethical reasons, this concept cannot be separated from personal beliefs and should not be adjusted according to strict scales and externally imposed definitions. Therefore, this study aimed to: (1) explore whether there is an association between self-perception of IHR and preventive/risk-taking behaviors; and (2) examine socio-demographic factors associated with the IHR score and three self-perceived characteristics, namely self-perceived locus of control, health literacy, and health status. Methods: A cross-sectional study with 968 healthcare workers was conducted in a large, multidisciplinary hospital covering several behaviors (smoking, alcohol consumption, diet, and participation in a screening program for hepatitis C). IHR was evaluated on a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 meant “to very little extent” and 10 meant “to a great extent”. Results: The average IHR score was 8.80 (SD = 1.88). In the univariate analysis, the IHR score was significantly related to gender, age, education, marital status, and all three personal characteristics. In the multivariate analysis, the socio-demographic associations lost statistical significance. IHR maintained its association with the healthy diet score in the multivariable model (B = 0.113, p = 0.036). In the unadjusted analyses, the distribution of IHR differed between participants who declared alcohol consumption and those who declared abstinence (χ2 = 17.157, p = 0.002). However, this association was not retained in the multivariable model. Self-perceived internal locus of control was negatively associated with screening acceptance, but not with IHR. The OR of 0.927 refers to a one-point increase on the 1–10 scale. Across the full observed scale range, this corresponds to an OR of 0.51 (95% CI: 0.29–0.89), indicating lower odds of screening acceptance among participants with higher perceived internal control. Because this estimate assumes linearity across the entire scale, it should be interpreted cautiously. Conclusions: The gap between perceived responsibility and actual behavior suggests that IHR messaging alone is unlikely to be sufficient. Future research should consider social desirability and external locus of control when analyzing IHR and health behaviors.