Does type of provider matter for staff well-being? a cross-sectional study of residential care home workers' job demands and resources.

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Tomas Lindmark, Sven Trygged, Maria Engström
{"title":"Does type of provider matter for staff well-being? a cross-sectional study of residential care home workers' job demands and resources.","authors":"Tomas Lindmark, Sven Trygged, Maria Engström","doi":"10.1177/10519815241300294","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Marketisation trends have introduced new elements in residential care homes, potentially related to the psychosocial work environment and well-being of care workers. <b>Objective:</b> This study examined differences in job demands and resources across public, outsourced, and private residential care home providers and their associations with care workers' burnout, job satisfaction, and turnover intentions. <b>Methods:</b> Data from 253 care workers across 19 residential care homes in three municipalities were analysed using a cross-sectional design, with a 45.3% response rate. We applied the Job Demands-Resources theory and the Copenhagen psychosocial questionnaire, conducting analyses of variance and multiple regressions with Generalised Estimating Equations to account for nested data. <b>Results:</b> Outsourced care workers reported higher emotional demands than those in the public sector, while private providers offered greater influence and supervisor support compared to public ones. Burnout levels were significantly higher in the medium-sized municipality compared to the small one, while provider type was not significant. Private care workers reported higher job satisfaction, but public sector workers reported better work-life balance. Approximately 60% of respondents considered leaving their jobs at least occasionally, with public sector workers reporting higher turnover intentions than those in for-profit settings. <b>Conclusions:</b> The study highlights the need for targeted work environment improvements, including better leadership and support in the public sector, addressing emotional demands in outsourced settings, and encouraging full-time employment to support work-life balance in the private sector. Stakeholders should prioritise improving job resources to improve care workers' well-being, especially amid budget constraints and profit goals.</p>","PeriodicalId":51373,"journal":{"name":"Work-A Journal of Prevention Assessment & Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":"10519815241300294"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Work-A Journal of Prevention Assessment & Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10519815241300294","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Marketisation trends have introduced new elements in residential care homes, potentially related to the psychosocial work environment and well-being of care workers. Objective: This study examined differences in job demands and resources across public, outsourced, and private residential care home providers and their associations with care workers' burnout, job satisfaction, and turnover intentions. Methods: Data from 253 care workers across 19 residential care homes in three municipalities were analysed using a cross-sectional design, with a 45.3% response rate. We applied the Job Demands-Resources theory and the Copenhagen psychosocial questionnaire, conducting analyses of variance and multiple regressions with Generalised Estimating Equations to account for nested data. Results: Outsourced care workers reported higher emotional demands than those in the public sector, while private providers offered greater influence and supervisor support compared to public ones. Burnout levels were significantly higher in the medium-sized municipality compared to the small one, while provider type was not significant. Private care workers reported higher job satisfaction, but public sector workers reported better work-life balance. Approximately 60% of respondents considered leaving their jobs at least occasionally, with public sector workers reporting higher turnover intentions than those in for-profit settings. Conclusions: The study highlights the need for targeted work environment improvements, including better leadership and support in the public sector, addressing emotional demands in outsourced settings, and encouraging full-time employment to support work-life balance in the private sector. Stakeholders should prioritise improving job resources to improve care workers' well-being, especially amid budget constraints and profit goals.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Work-A Journal of Prevention Assessment & Rehabilitation
Work-A Journal of Prevention Assessment & Rehabilitation PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
30.40%
发文量
739
期刊介绍: WORK: A Journal of Prevention, Assessment & Rehabilitation is an interdisciplinary, international journal which publishes high quality peer-reviewed manuscripts covering the entire scope of the occupation of work. The journal''s subtitle has been deliberately laid out: The first goal is the prevention of illness, injury, and disability. When this goal is not achievable, the attention focuses on assessment to design client-centered intervention, rehabilitation, treatment, or controls that use scientific evidence to support best practice.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信