Factors associated with link workers considering leaving their role: a cross-sectional survey.

IF 2 Q2 PRIMARY HEALTH CARE
BJGP Open Pub Date : 2025-07-01 DOI:10.3399/BJGPO.2024.0128
Stephanie Tierney, Lucy Moore, Debra Westlake, Kamal Mahtani, David Nunan, Kerryn Husk, Shoba Dawson, Jane Smith, Emma Fuller, Lilly Sabir, Pauline Roberts, Obioha Ukoumunne
{"title":"Factors associated with link workers considering leaving their role: a cross-sectional survey.","authors":"Stephanie Tierney, Lucy Moore, Debra Westlake, Kamal Mahtani, David Nunan, Kerryn Husk, Shoba Dawson, Jane Smith, Emma Fuller, Lilly Sabir, Pauline Roberts, Obioha Ukoumunne","doi":"10.3399/BJGPO.2024.0128","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Social prescribing (SP) link workers (LWs) listen to patients' concerns and difficulties, and connect them to relevant community assets (groups, organisations, or charities) that can help with their non-medical issues (for example, loneliness, debt, housing). LW retention is key to sustaining SP within primary care.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To examine occupational self-efficacy, job discrepancy, and other factors as potential predictors of LWs' intentions to leave or remain in their posts.</p><p><strong>Design & setting: </strong>Cross-sectional survey involving LWs from the United Kingdom.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>An online questionnaire was distributed via SP-related organisations. Questions were on the following: (a) intention to leave the role; (b) demographics; and (c) role experience, including occupational self-efficacy and discrepancy between expectations and reality of the job. Questions were mainly closed, although some allowed LWs to provide a written response. Logistic regression models were fitted to identify predictors, and content analysis used to categorise open-ended responses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 342 questionnaire responses were included in the analysis. Higher job discrepancy was associated with past (odds ratio [OR] per 30 unit <i>increase</i> = 6.86; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.91 to 12.0; <i>P</i><0.001) and future (OR = 4.86; 95% CI = 2.70 to 8.72; <i>P</i><0.001) intentions to leave, while lower occupational self-efficacy was associated only with past intentions to leave (OR per 10 unit <i>decrease</i> = 1.91; 95% CI = 1.24 to 2.93; <i>P</i> = 0.003).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Findings highlight factors influencing LW retention, offering a foundation for targeted interventions, which could include clearer communication about the role during recruitment, and adjusting job descriptions and support when required.</p>","PeriodicalId":36541,"journal":{"name":"BJGP Open","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BJGP Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGPO.2024.0128","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PRIMARY HEALTH CARE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Social prescribing (SP) link workers (LWs) listen to patients' concerns and difficulties, and connect them to relevant community assets (groups, organisations, or charities) that can help with their non-medical issues (for example, loneliness, debt, housing). LW retention is key to sustaining SP within primary care.

Aim: To examine occupational self-efficacy, job discrepancy, and other factors as potential predictors of LWs' intentions to leave or remain in their posts.

Design & setting: Cross-sectional survey involving LWs from the United Kingdom.

Method: An online questionnaire was distributed via SP-related organisations. Questions were on the following: (a) intention to leave the role; (b) demographics; and (c) role experience, including occupational self-efficacy and discrepancy between expectations and reality of the job. Questions were mainly closed, although some allowed LWs to provide a written response. Logistic regression models were fitted to identify predictors, and content analysis used to categorise open-ended responses.

Results: In total, 342 questionnaire responses were included in the analysis. Higher job discrepancy was associated with past (odds ratio [OR] per 30 unit increase = 6.86; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.91 to 12.0; P<0.001) and future (OR = 4.86; 95% CI = 2.70 to 8.72; P<0.001) intentions to leave, while lower occupational self-efficacy was associated only with past intentions to leave (OR per 10 unit decrease = 1.91; 95% CI = 1.24 to 2.93; P = 0.003).

Conclusion: Findings highlight factors influencing LW retention, offering a foundation for targeted interventions, which could include clearer communication about the role during recruitment, and adjusting job descriptions and support when required.

链接工人考虑离职的相关因素:一项横断面调查。
背景:社会处方(SP)联系工作者(LWs)倾听患者的关切和困难,并将他们与相关的社区资产(团体/组织/慈善机构)联系起来,以帮助他们解决非医疗问题(如孤独、债务、住房)。保留LW是在初级保健中维持SP的关键。目的:探讨职业自我效能感、工作差异等因素对低薪员工离职或留任意向的潜在影响。设计与设置:横断面调查涉及来自英国的LWs。方法:通过sp相关组织进行在线问卷调查。问题是:a)离职意向,b)人口统计,以及c)角色经验,包括职业自我效能感和工作期望与现实之间的差异。问题主要是不公开的,尽管有些问题允许法律工作者提供书面答复。拟合逻辑回归模型以确定预测因子,并使用内容分析对开放式响应进行分类。结果:342份问卷被纳入分析。较高的工作差异与过去(每30单位增加的优势比[OR] =6.86;95% CI: 3.91 ~ 12.0;P=0.003)和未来(OR=4.86;95% CI: 2.70 ~ 8.72;较低的职业自我效能感仅与过去离职意图相关(每减少10个单位的OR =1.91;95% CI: 1.24 ~ 2.93;P = 0.003)。结论:研究结果突出了影响LW保留的因素,为有针对性的干预提供了基础,包括在招聘过程中更清晰地沟通LW的角色,并在需要时调整工作描述和支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BJGP Open
BJGP Open Medicine-Family Practice
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
181
审稿时长
22 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信