Helena Temkin-Greener1, Nan Tracy Zheng, Shubing Cai, Hongwei Zhao, Dana B Mukamel. 1. Department of Community and Preventive Medicine, Center for Ethics, Humanities and Palliative Care, University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, 601 Elmwood Avenue, Rochester, NY 14642, USA. Helena_Temkin-Greener@urmc.rochester.edu
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Work environment attributes--job design, teamwork, and work effectiveness--are thought to influence nursing home (NH) quality of care. However, few studies tested these relationships empirically. OBJECTIVE: We investigated the relationship between these work environment attributes and quality of care measured by facility-level regulatory deficiencies. METHODS: Data on work environment were derived from survey responses obtained (in 2006-2007) from 7418 direct care workers in 162 NHs in New York State. Data on facility deficiencies and characteristics came from the Online Survey, Certification and Reporting database. We fit multivariate linear and logistic regressions, with random effects and probability weights, to models with the following dependent variables: presence/absence of quality of life deficiencies, number of quality of care (QC) deficiencies, and presence/absence of high severity G-L deficiencies (causing actual harm/immediate jeopardy). Key independent variables included work effectiveness (a 5-point Likert scale score); percent staff in daily care teams and primary assignment. The work effectiveness measure has been demonstrated to be psychometrically reliable and valid. Other variables included staffing, size, facility case-mix, and ownership. RESULTS: In support of the proposed hypotheses, we found work effectiveness to be a statistically significant predictor of all 3 measures of deficiencies. Primary assignment of staff to residents was significantly associated with fewer QC and high severity deficiencies. Greater penetration of self-managed teams was associated with fewer QC deficiencies. DISCUSSION: Work environment attributes impact quality of care in NHs. These findings provide important insights for NH administrators and regulators in their efforts to improve quality of care for residents.
BACKGROUND: Work environment attributes--job design, teamwork, and work effectiveness--are thought to influence nursing home (NH) quality of care. However, few studies tested these relationships empirically. OBJECTIVE: We investigated the relationship between these work environment attributes and quality of care measured by facility-level regulatory deficiencies. METHODS: Data on work environment were derived from survey responses obtained (in 2006-2007) from 7418 direct care workers in 162 NHs in New York State. Data on facility deficiencies and characteristics came from the Online Survey, Certification and Reporting database. We fit multivariate linear and logistic regressions, with random effects and probability weights, to models with the following dependent variables: presence/absence of quality of life deficiencies, number of quality of care (QC) deficiencies, and presence/absence of high severity G-L deficiencies (causing actual harm/immediate jeopardy). Key independent variables included work effectiveness (a 5-point Likert scale score); percent staff in daily care teams and primary assignment. The work effectiveness measure has been demonstrated to be psychometrically reliable and valid. Other variables included staffing, size, facility case-mix, and ownership. RESULTS: In support of the proposed hypotheses, we found work effectiveness to be a statistically significant predictor of all 3 measures of deficiencies. Primary assignment of staff to residents was significantly associated with fewer QC and high severity deficiencies. Greater penetration of self-managed teams was associated with fewer QC deficiencies. DISCUSSION: Work environment attributes impact quality of care in NHs. These findings provide important insights for NH administrators and regulators in their efforts to improve quality of care for residents.
Authors: Dan R Berlowitz; Gary J Young; Elaine C Hickey; Debra Saliba; Brian S Mittman; Elaine Czarnowski; Barbara Simon; Jennifer J Anderson; Arlene S Ash; Lisa V Rubenstein; Mark A Moskowitz Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2003-02 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Jill Scott-Cawiezell; Margaret Schenkman; Laurie Moore; Carol Vojir; Robert P Connoly; Mary Pratt; Laura Palmer Journal: J Nurs Care Qual Date: 2004 Jul-Sep Impact factor: 1.597
Authors: Marilyn J Rantz; Lanis Hicks; Victoria Grando; Gregory F Petroski; Richard W Madsen; David R Mehr; Vicki Conn; Mary Zwygart-Staffacher; Jill Scott; Marcia Flesner; Jane Bostick; Rose Porter; Meridean Maas Journal: Gerontologist Date: 2004-02
Authors: Mary Thoesen Coleman; Stephen Looney; James O'Brien; Craig Ziegler; Cynthia A Pastorino; Carolyn Turner Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2002-07 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Helena Temkin-Greener; Shubing Cai; Nan Tracy Zheng; Hongwei Zhao; Dana B Mukamel Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2011-11-18 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Orna Intrator; Edward Alan Miller; Emily Gadbois; Joseph Kofi Acquah; Rajesh Makineni; Denise Tyler Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2015-11-13 Impact factor: 3.402