MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W7111987123

Quitting Home Care: A Narrative Inquiry of Registered Nurses Experiences in Navigating the Changes to Home Care Over Time

2025· article· en· W7111987123 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueUniversity Library (University of Saskatchewan) · 2025
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiqueGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésFeelingHealth careAcute careNarrativeNarrative inquiryHome healthPositive devianceQualitative research
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

As populations are aging, there is an increasing demand on the acute care system. As a result, more care is transitioning to the community. Home care is a sector in health care that is well-positioned to support this transition and is expanding rapidly to do so. During the growth of the home care sector, rapid and ongoing changes are occurring that risk affecting frontline nurses who are the implementors of the changes. In this study, I engaged three nurses who left home care jobs due to burn out, lack of job satisfaction, and unrealistic expectations from their employer over time. For the methodology, I used Clandinin and Connelly’s (2000) narrative inquiry approach. My research puzzle explored how changes within the home care sector shaped the experiences of home care nurses, potentially influencing their decision to leave, and how their experiences of leaving home care impacted their lives. Their decision to leave home care was heavily influenced by the rapid and ongoing changes, which were negatively affecting them. The participants and I co-constructed stories about their experiences in feeling a lack of support from the employer, how they felt themselves negatively change, and how they could not see the extent of the negative effect until they had left the position in home care. The three participants worked in the south zone of Alberta, in an Alberta Health Services home care setting. I engaged in a minimum of four audio-taped conversations with each participant, lasting approximately 60 minutes per meeting. Using participants’ stories provided a snapshot of their time in home care. The participants spoke of how they felt the vision of home care was lost in the process of home care’s rapid growth and how this loss of vision affected their confidence in their nursing role. The participants also spoke about needing to reevaluate the role and expectation of a case manager as the program evolved. Furthermore, with the rapid growth of the program, the participants felt there was a lack of time to effectively build relationships with their clients and provide safe care. Lastly, the participants felt the team dynamics change as the pressures and expectations increased. Through these changes, they described how symptoms of trauma arose. The participants described situations that threatened their personal safety from both inside the organization and from the clients they provided care to. They explained feelings of powerlessness to be able to change their work experience, eventually resulting in moral distress. Lastly, as time went on in their home care journeys, the participants explained how chronic stress developed and how that impacted their physical and emotional health. Eventually, their experiences of trauma trickled into their personal lives. At one point, each participant identified their intent to leave nursing altogether from their experiences. Once they left home care, each participant spoke about their healing journey and what they had learned since leaving such as the ability to set boundaries for a healthy work life balance. Recommendations for health care organizations, nurses, frontline managers, education, and future research are presented in the final chapter, based on the participants' journeys and experiences.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,014
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: Qualitatif
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,015
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,075

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0140,020
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0100,012
Communication savante0,0080,008
Science ouverte0,0040,008
Intégrité de la recherche0,0030,007
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,022
Tête enseignante GPT0,291
Écart entre enseignants0,269 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2025
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueUniversity Library (University of Saskatchewan)Même sujetGeriatric Care and Nursing HomesTravaux en français237 207