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.
AnttonenAMeagherG. Mapping marketisation: concepts and goals. In: MeagherGSzebehelyM (eds) Marketisation in nordic eldercare: a research report on legislation, oversight, extent and consequences. Stockholm: Stockholm University, 2013, pp.13–22.
2.
European Commission, Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion. Long-term care report: Trends, challenges and opportunities in an ageing society. Vol II, country profiles. Luxembourg: Publications Office, 2021.
3.
SzebehelyMStranzAStrandellR. Vem ska arbeta i framtidens äldreomsorg? [Who will work in eldercare in the future?]. Stockholm: Stockholm University; 2017, pp.1–50.
4.
DuxburyLHigginsCSmartR. Elder care and the impact of caregiver strain on the health of employed caregivers. Work (Reading, Mass.)2011; 40: 29–40.
5.
KorbusHHildebrandCSchottN, et al.Health status, resources, and job demands in geriatric nursing staff: a cross-sectional study on determinants and relationships. Int J Nurs Stud2023; 145: 104523.
6.
MidjeHHTorpSØvergårdKI. The role of working environment and employee engagement in person-centred processes for older adults in long-term care services. Int Pract Dev J2022; 12: 1–19. Available from: https://doi.org/10.19043/ipdj.122.007
StormPStranzA. Äldreboendet i marknadiseringens tid: Konkurrens, organisering och vardagsomsorg [Nursing homes in the time of marketisation: competition, organisation, and everyday care]. In: JönsonHSzebehelyM (eds) Äldreomsorger i Sverige: Lokala variationer och generella trender [Eldercare in Sweden: local variations and general trends]. Malmö: Gleerups, 2018, pp.169–184.
9.
BosABoseliePTrappenburgM. Financial performance, employee well-being, and client well-being in for-profit and not-for-profit nursing homes: a systematic review. Health Care Manag Rev2017; 42: 352–368.
10.
LindmarkTEngströmMTryggedS. Psychosocial work environment and well-being of direct-care staff under different nursing home ownership types: a systematic review. J Appl Gerontol2023; 42: 347–359.
11.
HarringtonCOlneyBCarrilloH,et al.Nurse staffing and deficiencies in the largest for-profit nursing home chains and chains owned by private equity companies. Health Serv Res2012; 47: 106–128.
12.
WinbladUBlomqvistPKarlssonA. Do public nursing home care providers deliver higher quality than private providers? Evidence from Sweden. BMC Health Serv Res2017; 17: 1–12.
13.
VrangbækKPetersenOHHjelmarU. Is contracting out good or bad for employees? A review of international experience. Rev Public Pers Admin2015; 35: 3–23.
14.
LindmarkTIngardCTryggedS. Prerequisites for empowerment: a study of procurement documents for the provision of care in Swedish nursing homes. Eur J Soc Work2023; 26: 853–868.
15.
LeeJ. Nursing home nurses’ turnover intention: a systematic review. Nursing Open2022; 9: 22–29.
16.
StoltRBlomqvistPWinbladU. Privatization of social services: quality differences in Swedish elderly care. Soc Sci Med2011; 72: 560–567.
ErlandssonSStormPStranzA,et al.Trydegård G-B. Marketising trends in Swedish eldercare: competition, choice and calls for stricter regulation. In: MeagherGSzebehelyM (eds) Marketisation in nordic eldercare. Stockholm: Stockholm University, 2013, pp.23–84. Available from: https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:667188/FULLTEXT01.
19.
FelteniusD. Towards a more diversified supply of welfare services? Marketisation and the local governing of nursing homes in scandinavian countries. In: SivesindKHSaglieJ (eds) Promoting active citizenship: markets and choice in scandinavian welfare. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2017, pp.117–157.
20.
ÅgotnesGJacobsenFFSzebehelyM. The growth of the for-profit nursing home sector in Norway and Sweden: driving forces and resistance. In: ArmstrongPArmstrongH (eds) The privatisation of care: the case of nursing homes. London: Routledge, 2020, pp.38–50.
21.
National Board of Health and Welfare. Statistik om äldre och personer med funktionsnedsättning efter regiform 2021 [Statistics on older adults and people with disabilities by form of governance 2021]. Stockholm: National Board of Health and Welfare, 2022. ISBN:978-91-7555-585-0. Report No.: 2022-3-7791. Available from: https://www.socialstyrelsen.se/globalassets/sharepoint-dokument/artikelkatalog/statistik/2022-3-7784.pdf
22.
AnttonenAKarsioO. How marketisation is changing the nordic model of care for older people. In: MartinelliFAnttonenAMätzkeM (eds) Social services disrupted: changes, challenges, and policy implications for Europe in times of austerity. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2017, pp.219–238.
23.
ArmstrongPJacobsenFFLanoixM,et al.The crisis in the nursing home labour force: where is the political will? In: ArmstrongPBraedleyS (eds) Care homes in a turbulent era. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2023, pp.50–66.
ComondoreVRDevereauxPJZhouQ, et al.Quality of care in for-profit and not-for-profit nursing homes: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ2009; 339: b2732.
26.
BromsRDahlströmCNistotskayaM. Provider ownership and indicators of service quality: evidence from Swedish residential care homes. J Public Adm Res Theory2024; 34: 150–163.
27.
AloisioLDCoughlinMSquiresJE. Individual and organisational factors of nurses’ job satisfaction in long-term care: a systematic review. Int J Nurs Stud2021; 123: 104073.
HöckertinC. Control and participation for employees within geriatric care: does ownership make a difference?Work2008; 30: 137–147.
31.
SimmonsCRodriguesRSzebehelyM. Working conditions in the long-term care sector: a comparative study of migrant and native workers in Austria and Sweden. Health Soc Care Community2022; 30: e2191–e2202.
32.
BakkerABDemeroutiE. Job demands-resources theory: taking stock and looking forward. J Occup Health Psychol2017; 22: 273–285.
33.
EngströmMJarnhedenSHThamP. Staff quality of working life and turnover intentions in municipal nursing care and social welfare: a cross-sectional study. BMC Nursing2023; 22: 1–8.
34.
RahnfeldMWendscheJIhleA, et al.Uncovering the care setting–turnover intention relationship of geriatric nurses. Eur J Ageing2016; 13: 159–169.
35.
WoodheadELNorthropLEdelsteinB. Stress, social support, and burnout among long-term care nursing staff. J Appl Gerontol2016; 35: 84–105.
36.
BerthelsenHHakanenJJWesterlundH. Copenhagen Psychosocial questionnaire - A validation study using the job demand-resources model. PLoS ONE2018; 13: e0196450.
37.
BerthelsenHWesterlundHPejtersenJH,et al.Construct validity of a global scale for workplace social capital based on COPSOQ III. PLoS ONE2019; 14: e0221893.
38.
AloisioLDBaumbuschJEstabrooksCA, et al.Factors affecting job satisfaction in long-term care unit managers, directors of care and facility administrators: a secondary analysis. J Nurs Manag2019; 27: 1764–1772.
39.
LiZYuZHuangS, et al.The effects of psychological capital, social capital, and human capital on hotel employees’ occupational stress and turnover intention. Int J Hosp Manag2021; 98: 103046.
40.
StrömgrenMErikssonABergmanD,et al.Social capital among healthcare professionals: a prospective study of its importance for job satisfaction, work engagement and engagement in clinical improvements. Int J Nurs Stud2016; 53: 116–125.
41.
SandmarkHHägglundKNilssonK,et al.Understanding work ability: experiences of female assistant nurses in elderly care. Work2009; 34: 373–383.
42.
BakkerABDemeroutiESanz-VergelAI. Job demands–resources theory: ten years later. Annu Rev Organ Psychol Organ Behav2023; 10: 25–53.
43.
LindmarkTEngströmMTryggedS. First-line managers’ perceptions of their psychosocial work environment in nursing homes: a qualitative analysis of the influence of ownership type. Health Soc Care Community2023; 31: 6694499.
44.
ArmstrongPSzebehelyM. Introduction: framing and comparing unpaid care work. In: ArmstrongP (ed) Unpaid work in nursing homes: flexible boundaries. Bristol: Policy Press, 2023, pp.1–17.
45.
DalyTSzebehelyM. Unheard voices, unmapped terrain: care work in long-term residential care for older people in Canada and Sweden. Int J Soc Welfare2012; 21: 139–148.
ErikssonEJordalMHjelmK,et al.Job satisfaction and well-being among migrant care workers in nursing homes: an integrative review. Nursing Open2023; 10(6): 3486–3505.
48.
CohenJ. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences,2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1988.
49.
BerthelsenHWesterlundHBergströmG,et al.Validation of the Copenhagen psychosocial questionnaire version III and establishment of benchmarks for psychosocial risk management in Sweden. Int J Environ Res Public Health2020; 17: 3179.
50.
BurrHBerthelsenHMoncadaS, et al.The third version of the Copenhagen psychosocial questionnaire. Safety Health Work2019; 10: 482–503.
51.
EftekhariSAlipourFAminianO,et al.The association between job stress and metabolic syndrome among medical university staff. J Diabetes Metab Disord2021; 20: 321–327.
52.
AminianOEftekhariSGhaffariM, et al.Assessment of the psychosocial work environment of professional drivers. J Public Health2015; 23: 341–347.
53.
JavaidMUSohailMBanoS,et al.Copenhagen Psychosocial “work organization and job content” as a higher-order construct in relation to Workers’ health: the moderating role of leadership quality. Risk Manag Healthc Policy2023; 16: 1721–1730.
54.
McHughML. Multiple comparison analysis testing in ANOVA. Biochem Med (Zagreb)2011; 21: 203–209.
55.
SzebehelyMTrydegårdG-B. Generell välfärd och lokalt självstyre: ett dilemma i den svenska äldreomsorgen? [General welfare and local self-governance: a dilemma in Swedish eldercare?]. In: JönsonHSzebehelyM (eds) Äldreomsorger i Sverige: lokala variationer och generella trender [eldercare in Sweden: local variations and general trends]. Malmö: Gleerups, 2018, pp.21–42.
56.
KockNLynnGS. Lateral collinearity and misleading results in variance-based SEM: an illustration and recommendations. J Assoc Inf Syst2012; 13: 546–580.
57.
HuangFL. Analysing cross-sectionally clustered data using generalized estimating equations. J Educ Behav Stat2022; 47: 101–125.
KiJChoi-KwonS. Health problems, turnover intention, and actual turnover among shift work female nurses: analysing data from a prospective longitudinal study. PLOS ONE2022; 17: e0270958.
61.
MarshallEGPowerMEdgecombeN,et al.Above and beyond: a qualitative study of the work of nurses and care assistants in long term care. Work2020; 65: 509–516.
EngströmMHögbergHStrömbergA, et al.Staff working life and older persons’ satisfaction with care: a multilevel, correlational design. J Nurs Care Qual2021; 36: E7–E13.
64.
LundgrenDErnsth BravellMBörjessonU,et al.The association between psychosocial work environment and satisfaction with old age care among care users. J Appl Gerontol2020; 39: 785–794.
65.
BanerjeeAArmstrongHArmstrongP, et al.Regulation and accountability in the care home sector: expert commentaries. In: ArmstrongPBraedleyS (eds) Care homes in a turbulent era. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2023, pp.137–150.
BromsRDahlströmCNajarJ,et al.COVID-19 mortality and the structural characteristics of eldercare facilities: Evidence from Sweden. Public Perform Manag Rev2024; 47: 505–533. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2023.2295282
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
