Occupational health risks and provision gaps among live-in caregivers: findings from a qualitative interview study of Polish live-ins in Germany.

IF 3.2 4区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Lea Scheuvens, Maria Girbig, Melanie Schubert, Charlyn Görres, Amelie Schirmer, Agnieszka Sykut, Stephanie Drössler, Verena Weihofen, Liv Hübner, Daniel Kämpf, Charlotte Pietzsch, Katja Schladitz, Franziska Welzel, Nadja-Raphaela Baer, Steffi Riedel-Heller, Liane Schenk, Margrit Löbner, Andreas Seidler
{"title":"Occupational health risks and provision gaps among live-in caregivers: findings from a qualitative interview study of Polish live-ins in Germany.","authors":"Lea Scheuvens, Maria Girbig, Melanie Schubert, Charlyn Görres, Amelie Schirmer, Agnieszka Sykut, Stephanie Drössler, Verena Weihofen, Liv Hübner, Daniel Kämpf, Charlotte Pietzsch, Katja Schladitz, Franziska Welzel, Nadja-Raphaela Baer, Steffi Riedel-Heller, Liane Schenk, Margrit Löbner, Andreas Seidler","doi":"10.1186/s12995-026-00522-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Migrant live-in caregivers play an important role in home-based long-term care, yet their working and living conditions remain largely underregulated. Despite increasing evidence of precarious employment and health risks among live-in caregivers internationally, little is known about their occupational health risks and access to occupational health care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This qualitative interview study is part of the project Live-In Health and reports findings from 16 semi-structured interviews with Polish live-in caregivers (15 females and one male) working in German private households. Interviews were conducted in Polish, transcribed, translated into German, and analyzed using qualitative content analysis following an inductive-deductive approach. Identified work-related strains and risks were structured in four main domains according to established occupational risk assessment frameworks from the German care sector.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants reported extensive occupational health risks across the four main domains: physical strain (e.g., musculoskeletal strain from patient transfers), psychological strain (e.g., social isolation, conflicts with agencies, emotional burden), occupational safety and health including working hours (e.g., long working hours, insufficient recovery time, lack of preparation and insurance coverage), and exposure to biological and hazardous substances (e.g., wound care, unhygienic living conditions). Access to occupational and general health care in Germany was largely absent. Preventive services, occupational medical examinations, and accident insurance coverage were inconsistently available or missing altogether. Live-ins described substantial barriers related to legal ambiguity, agency practices, lack of information, and unclear responsibilities. At the same time, informal support from families, ambulatory care services, and peer networks emerged as partial coping resources.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Polish live-in caregivers in Germany are exposed to considerable occupational health risks while remaining largely excluded from occupational health care structures. The findings highlight substantial gaps in the implementation of existing occupational safety and health regulations for caregivers in private households. Strengthening occupational health protection for live-in caregivers requires enforceable working time regulations, reliable insurance coverage, accessible occupational health services, and clearer oversight of intermediary agencies. Tailored, low-threshold occupational health approaches are urgently needed to address the structural vulnerabilities of this workforce and to ensure healthy and sustainable care provision for the growing demand in home-based care for older people in Germany.</p>","PeriodicalId":48903,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology","volume":"21 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13455274/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12995-026-00522-8","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Migrant live-in caregivers play an important role in home-based long-term care, yet their working and living conditions remain largely underregulated. Despite increasing evidence of precarious employment and health risks among live-in caregivers internationally, little is known about their occupational health risks and access to occupational health care.

Methods: This qualitative interview study is part of the project Live-In Health and reports findings from 16 semi-structured interviews with Polish live-in caregivers (15 females and one male) working in German private households. Interviews were conducted in Polish, transcribed, translated into German, and analyzed using qualitative content analysis following an inductive-deductive approach. Identified work-related strains and risks were structured in four main domains according to established occupational risk assessment frameworks from the German care sector.

Results: Participants reported extensive occupational health risks across the four main domains: physical strain (e.g., musculoskeletal strain from patient transfers), psychological strain (e.g., social isolation, conflicts with agencies, emotional burden), occupational safety and health including working hours (e.g., long working hours, insufficient recovery time, lack of preparation and insurance coverage), and exposure to biological and hazardous substances (e.g., wound care, unhygienic living conditions). Access to occupational and general health care in Germany was largely absent. Preventive services, occupational medical examinations, and accident insurance coverage were inconsistently available or missing altogether. Live-ins described substantial barriers related to legal ambiguity, agency practices, lack of information, and unclear responsibilities. At the same time, informal support from families, ambulatory care services, and peer networks emerged as partial coping resources.

Conclusions: Polish live-in caregivers in Germany are exposed to considerable occupational health risks while remaining largely excluded from occupational health care structures. The findings highlight substantial gaps in the implementation of existing occupational safety and health regulations for caregivers in private households. Strengthening occupational health protection for live-in caregivers requires enforceable working time regulations, reliable insurance coverage, accessible occupational health services, and clearer oversight of intermediary agencies. Tailored, low-threshold occupational health approaches are urgently needed to address the structural vulnerabilities of this workforce and to ensure healthy and sustainable care provision for the growing demand in home-based care for older people in Germany.

住家照顾者的职业健康风险和提供差距:来自德国波兰住家照顾者定性访谈研究的结果。
背景:移民住家照顾者在家庭长期护理中发挥着重要作用,但他们的工作和生活条件在很大程度上仍未得到监管。尽管越来越多的证据表明,国际上的住家照顾者存在不稳定的就业和健康风险,但人们对他们的职业健康风险和获得职业保健的机会知之甚少。方法:这项定性访谈研究是“住家健康”项目的一部分,报告了对在德国私人家庭工作的波兰住家护理人员(15名女性和1名男性)进行的16次半结构化访谈的结果。访谈以波兰语进行,转录,翻译成德语,并使用归纳演绎方法进行定性内容分析。根据德国护理部门的既定职业风险评估框架,确定了四个主要领域的与工作有关的压力和风险。结果:参与者报告了四个主要领域的广泛职业健康风险:身体紧张(例如,病人转移造成的肌肉骨骼紧张)、心理紧张(例如,社会孤立、与机构的冲突、情绪负担)、职业安全和健康,包括工作时间(例如,工作时间长、恢复时间不足、缺乏准备和保险),以及接触生物和有害物质(例如,伤口护理、不卫生的生活条件)。在德国,基本没有获得职业保健和一般保健的机会。预防服务、职业医疗检查和意外保险不一致,或者根本没有。同居家庭描述了与法律模糊、代理实践、信息缺乏和责任不明确有关的实质性障碍。与此同时,来自家庭、流动护理服务和同伴网络的非正式支持成为部分应对资源。结论:在德国的波兰住家护理人员暴露在相当大的职业健康风险中,同时在很大程度上被排除在职业卫生保健结构之外。调查结果突出表明,在执行针对私人家庭照料者的现有职业安全和健康法规方面存在巨大差距。加强对住家照顾者的职业健康保护需要可执行的工作时间法规、可靠的保险覆盖、可获得的职业健康服务以及对中介机构更明确的监督。迫切需要有针对性的低门槛职业健康办法,以解决这一劳动力的结构性脆弱性,并确保为德国老年人日益增长的家庭护理需求提供健康和可持续的护理。
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
Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology
Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
23
审稿时长
19 weeks
期刊介绍: Aimed at clinicians and researchers, the Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology is a multi-disciplinary, open access journal which publishes original research on the clinical and scientific aspects of occupational and environmental health. With high-quality peer review and quick decision times, we welcome submissions on the diagnosis, prevention, management, and scientific analysis of occupational diseases, injuries, and disability. The journal also covers the promotion of health of workers, their families, and communities, and ranges from rehabilitation to tropical medicine and public health aspects.
×
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
小红书