Resilience and Quality of Life: The Role of Positive Affect on Healthcare Professionals in High‐Stress Environments

ABSTRACT Background Healthcare professionals (HCPs) operate within environments of chronic occupational stress; a burden significantly amplified in Israel by the compounded pressures of the COVID‐19 pandemic and active warfare. While resilience and positive affect (PA) are established protective factors, the nature of their interactive role in sustaining quality of life (QoL) during prolonged, extreme crises remains under‐explored. Aim This study examines resilience, positive affect (PA), and quality of life (QoL) among healthcare professionals (HCPs), investigating whether PA moderates the relationship between resilience and QoL during a prolonged crisis. Methods A cross‐sectional national online survey was conducted among 260 Israeli HCPs nationally. Participants completed validated instruments including the Brief Resilience Scale (BRS), the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS), and the Multicultural Quality of Life Index (MQLI). Moderation analyses assessed the predictive effects of resilience and the moderating role of PA on QoL. Results Both resilience and PA significantly predicted QoL. A small but significant interaction effect indicated that PA moderated the resilience–QoL relationship, with stronger benefits among HCPs with lower resilience. Specifically, resilience showed a stronger association with QoL among HCPs with lower levels of PA, whereas this association weakened at higher levels of PA. Linking Evidence to Action Healthcare leaders and managers could optimize staff quality of life by implementing interventions that promote positive affect, such as peer‐support systems and recognition initiatives, especially for staff with lower baseline resilience. At the policy level, institutions stand to benefit from adopting broader systemic strategies alongside individual‐focused training to sustain a supportive emotional climate during prolonged crises. Furthermore, future research should utilize longitudinal designs to evaluate the long‐term impact of these interventions on workforce retention.