Staff Experiences of Building Design in a Canadian Long-Term Care Home in the Context of Interinstitutional Relocation: An Interpretive Description Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This interpretive description study explored staff perceptions of building design in the context of interinstitutional relocation. The relocation involved moving from an old, familiar long-term care home to a new, larger facility with a conventional design that meets current standards. The model of care remained unchanged. In-depth interviews were conducted with 14 LTC workers along with building walkthroughs and a comprehensive review of design documentation. Through an iterative analysis of this data, six main themes emerged: (i) attachment to the old home, (ii) recognition of an improved resident experience, (iii) high expectations, mixed impressions; (iv) new footprint, less team flexibility; (v) challenged by the demands of a changed physical environment and its processes; and (vi) feeling less connected to people and place. Findings indicate that while staff recognized benefits of the new building design to residents, they did not perceive the same or equal benefits in their own experiences. The new building design challenged established ways of working, team flexibility and social dynamics which increased stress and affected morale post-relocation. These findings have implications for both design and change management processes and inform a series of recommendations for improving early staff impressions of and interactions with their changed work environment.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".