Submitted:
01 October 2024
Posted:
02 October 2024
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Design & Participants
2.2. Survey Design
2.3. Demographics & Personal Experience Variables
2.4. Work-Related Variables
2.5. Assessment Scales
2.6. Decision to Work in HCC
2.7. Analysis & Variable Selection
3. Results
3.1. Sample
3.2. Decision to Continue Working in HCC
3.3. Variables Influencing Both Temporary Leaves & Sector Exits
3.4. Variables Influencing Only Temporary Leaves
3.5. Variables Influencing Only Sector Exits
4. Discussion
5. Limitations
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Home and Community Care Support Services (2023). Ontario. Retrieved August 30, 2024 from https://healthcareathome.ca/mandatory-covid-19- vaccinepolicy/#:~:text=On%20Tuesday%2C%20August%2017%2C%20Ontario%27s,volunteers%20effectiv e%20September%207%2C%202021.
- Ghezeljeh, T.; Shahrestanaki, S.; Kohne, Z.; Fakhari, E. Home care nurses’ perception of challenges they faced during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study. BMC Nursing 2022, 21, 314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ahmed, H.E.B.; Bourgeault, I.L. (2022). Sustaining Nursing in Canada: A Set of Coordinated Evidence-Based Solutions Targeted to Support the Nursing Workforce Now and into the Future. Canadian Federation of Nurses Unions.
- Canadian Federation of Nurses Unions (CFNU) (2022). Canada’s nursing shortage at a glance: a media reference guide. Retrieved December 15, 2023 from https://nursesunions.ca/wp- content/uploads/2022/07/nurses_shortage_media_ref_guide_comp.pdf.
- Baumann, A.; Crea-Arsenio, M. The crisis in the nursing labour market: Canadian policy perspectives. Healthcare 2023, 11, 1954. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gómez-Ochoa, S.A.; Franco, O.H.; Rojas, L.Z.; Raguindin, P.F.; Roa-Díaz, Z.M.; Wyssmann, B.M.; Guevara, S.L.R.; Echeverría, L.E.; Glisic, M.; Muka, T. COVID-19 in health-care workers: a living systematic review and meta-analysis of prevalence, risk factors, clinical characteristics, and outcomes. American journal of epidemiology 2021, 190, 161–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nizzer, S.; Baliga, S.; McKay, S.M.; Holness, D.L.; King, E.C. Sustaining a Workforce: Reflections on Work from Home and Community Care Nurses Transitioning out of the COVID-19 Pandemic. SAGE Open Nursing 2024, 10, 23779608241264162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- De Groot, K.; Maurits, E.E.; Francke, A.L. Attractiveness of working in home care: An online focus group study among nurses. Health & Social Care in the Community 2018, 26, e94–e101. [Google Scholar]
- Beattie, M.; Carolan, C.; Macaden, L.; Maciver, A.; Dingwall, L.; Macgilleeathain, R.; Schoultz, M. Care home workers experiences of stress and coping during COVID-19 pandemic: A mixed methods study. Nursing Open 2023, 10, 687–703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Berkhout, S.G.; Sheehan, K.A.; Abbey, S.E. Individual-and institutional-level concerns of health care workers in Canada during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative analysis. JAMA Network Open 2021, 4, e2118425–e2118425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Billings, J.; Ching, B.C.F.; Gkofa, V.; Greene, T.; Bloomfield, M. Healthcare workers’ experiences of working on the frontline and views about support during COVID-19 and comparable pandemics: A rapid review and meta-synthesis. MedRxiv 2020, 2020–06. [Google Scholar]
- Blanco-Donoso, L.M.; Moreno-Jiménez, J.; Gallego-Alberto, L.; Amutio, A.; Moreno-Jiménez, B.; Garrosa, E. Satisfied as professionals, but also exhausted and worried!!: The role of job demands, resources and emotional experiences of Spanish nursing home workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Health & social care in the community 2022, 30, e148–e160. [Google Scholar]
- Brady, C.; Fenton, C.; Loughran, O.; Hayes, B.; Hennessy, M.; Higgins, A.; Leroi, I.; Shanagher, D.; McLoughlin, D.M. Nursing home staff mental health during the Covid-19 pandemic in the Republic of Ireland. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry 2022, 37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cengiz, Z.; Isik, K.; Gurdap, Z.; Yayan, E.H. Behaviours and experiences of nurses during the COVID-19 pandemic in Turkey: A mixed methods study. Journal of nursing management 2021, 29, 2002–2013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nelson, H.; Hubbard Murdoch, N.; Norman, K. The role of uncertainty in the experiences of nurses during the Covid-19 pandemic: A phenomenological study. Canadian Journal of Nursing Research 2021, 53, 124–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Stelnicki, A.M.; Carleton, R.N.; Reichert, C. Nurses’ mental health and well-being: COVID-19 impacts. Canadian Journal of Nursing Research 2020, 52, 237–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Tourangeau, A.E.; Patterson, E.; Saari, M.; Thomson, H.; Cranley, L. Work-related factors influencing home care nurse intent to remain employed. Health Care Management Review 2017, 42, 87–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Phillips, J.; Palokas, M.; Christian, R.; Harris, J.; Hinton, E. Emotional intelligence in nurse managers as it relates to staff nurse job satisfaction and retention: a scoping review. JBI evidence synthesis 2021, 19, 3238–3267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Smith, K.B.; Profetto-McGrath, J.; Cummings, G.G. Emotional intelligence and nursing: An integrative literature review. International journal of nursing studies 2009, 46, 1624–1636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mayer, J.D.; Salovey, P.; Caruso, D. Models of emotional intelligence. Handbook of intelligence 2000, 2, 396–420. [Google Scholar]
- Codier, E.; Kamikawa, C.; Kooker, B.M.; Shoultz, J. Emotional intelligence, performance, and retention in clinical staff nurses. Nursing administration quarterly 2009, 33, 310–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Côté, S.; Miners, C.T. Emotional intelligence, cognitive intelligence, and job performance. Administrative science quarterly 2006, 51, 1–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rapisarda, B.A. The impact of emotional intelligence on work team cohesiveness and performance. The International Journal of Organizational Analysis 2002, 10, 363–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marvos, C.; Hale, F.B. Emotional intelligence and clinical performance/retention of nursing students. Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing 2015, 2, 63–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kim, N.H.; Park, S.Y. The influence of emotional intelligence and professional self-concept on retention intention in nurses. Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society 2019, 20, 157–166. [Google Scholar]
- Halfer, D. Job embeddedness factors and retention of nurses with 1 to 3 years of experience. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing 2011, 42, 468–476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Simeone, S.; Vellone, E.; Virgolesi, M.; Sterling, M.R.; Alvaro, R.; Pucciarelli, G. “I found myself alone”–A phenomenological study of the home care workers' experience during the COVID-19 pandemic. Nursing & Health Sciences 2022, 24, 395–404. [Google Scholar]
- Carlson, E.; Rämgård, M.; Bolmsjö, I.; Bengtsson, M. Registered nurses’ perceptions of their professional work in nursing homes and home-based care: A focus group study. International journal of nursing studies 2014, 51, 761–767. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Karlsson, I.; Ekman, S.L.; Fagerberg, I. A difficult mission to work as a nurse in a residential care home–some registered nurses’ experiences of their work situation. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences 2009, 23, 265–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Connelly, D.M.; Guitar, N.A.; Garnett, A.; Smith-Carrier, T.; Prentice, K.; Calver, J.; King, E.; McKay, S.; Pearson, D.; Sinha, S.; et al. A Leave of Absence Might Not Be a Bad Thing: Registered Practical Nurses Working in Home Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Home Health Care Management & Practice 2024, 10848223241232408. [Google Scholar]
- Eysenbach, G. Improving the quality of Web surveys: the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES). Journal of medical Internet research 2004, 6, e34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Connor, K.M.; Davidson, J.R. Development of a new resilience scale: The Connor-Davidson resilience scale (CD-RISC). Depression and anxiety 2003, 18, 76–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Winwood, P.C.; Colon, R.; McEwen, K. A practical measure of workplace resilience: Developing the resilience at work scale. Journal of occupational and environmental medicine 2013, 55, 1205–1212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wong, C.S.; Law, K.S. 2017. The effects of leader and follower emotional intelligence on performance and attitude: An exploratory study. In Leadership perspectives (pp. 97-128). Routledge.
- Campbell-Sills, L.; Stein, M.B. Psychometric analysis and refinement of the connor–davidson resilience scale (CD-RISC): Validation of a 10-item measure of resilience. Journal of Traumatic Stress: Official Publication of The International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies 2007, 20, 1019–1028. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Cavanaugh, J.E.; Neath, A.A. The Akaike information criterion: Background, derivation, properties, application, interpretation, and refinements. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Statistics 2019, 11, e1460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fox, J.; Monette, G. Generalized Collinearity Diagnostics. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1992, 87, 178–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Szczygiel, D.D.; Mikolajczak, M. Emotional intelligence buffers the effects of negative emotions on job burnout in nursing. Frontiers in psychology 2018, 9, 2649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- White, E.M.; Wetle, T.F.; Reddy, A.; Baier, R.R. Front-line nursing home staff experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association 2021, 22, 199–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Galanis, P.; Vraka, I.; Fragkou, D.; Bilali, A.; Kaitelidou, D. Nurses' burnout and associated risk factors during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of advanced nursing 2021, 77, 3286–3302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bakker, A.B.; Demerouti, E.; Verbeke, W. 2004. Using the job demands-resources model to predict burnout and performance. Human Resource Management: Published in Cooperation with the School of Business Administration, The University of Michigan and in alliance with the Society of Human Resources Management.
- Maslach, C.; Schaufeli, W.B.; Leiter, M.P. Job burnout. Annual review of psychology 2001, 52, 397–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Demerouti, E.; Bakker, A.B.; Nachreiner, F.; Schaufeli, W.B. A model of burnout and life satisfaction amongst nurses. Journal of advanced nursing 2000, 32, 454–464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nizzer, S.; Moreira, N.A.; Mohammed, E.T.C.L.; Holness, D.L.; McKay, S.M.; King, E.C. (2024b). Home Care Nurse Leaders’ Experiences and Emerging Needs during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Nursing Leadership Network of Ontario Conference. Niagara-on-the-Lake, ON. 15 April 2024; -16. [Google Scholar]
- Drost, A.; Alam, M.I.; Boamah, S.; Kralj, B.; Costa, A.; Sweetman, A. Multiple jobholding and part-time work among nurses in long-term care homes compared to other healthcare sectors: evidence from Ontario. Health Policy 2023, 130, 104713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reopening Ontario (A flexible response to COVID-19): Limiting work to a single long-term care home (2022). Retrieved August 22, 2024 from https://www.ontario.ca/laws/regulation/200146.
- Lawson, T.; Nathans, L.; Goldenberg, A.; Fimiani, M.; Simard-Zakaib, C.; Bernier, C.; Pribanic-White, T.; Weaver, L.; Young, H.; Cui, M.; Sinha, A.; Boire-Schwab, D.; Waschuk, G.; Querry, G.; Fitz-Simon, N. (2022). COVID-19: Emergency Measures Tracker. McCarthy Tetrault. Retrieved September 20, 2024 from https://www.mccarthy.ca/en/insights/articles/covid-19-emergency-measures-tracker.
- Hoedl, M.; Eglseer, D.; Bauer, S. Associations between personal protective equipment and nursing staff stress during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Nursing Management 2021, 29, 2374–2382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Førsund, L.H.; Schumacher, E. Alone yet accountable, the unseen buffers: A qualitative study of nurses' experiences working in home care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences 2024, 38, 321–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Smitha Rao, I.D.; WangID, K. 2023. Model Minority Mutiny: addressing anti-Asian racism during the COVID-19 pandemic in social work. Dual Pandemics: Creating Racially-Just Responses to a Changing Environment through Research, Practice and Education.
- Wälivaara, B.M.; Sävenstedt, S.; Axelsson, K. Caring relationships in home-based nursing care-registered nurses’ experiences. The open nursing journal 2013, 7, 89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
| Variable | Description | Proportion (%) or Mean (SD) |
|---|---|---|
| Gender |
Woman | 328 (49.4%) |
| Man | 329 (49.5%) | |
| Gender-diverse/Prefer not to say | 7 (1.1%) | |
| Ethnicity |
Black | 91 (13.7%) |
| East/Southeast Asian | 38 (5.7%) | |
| South Asian | 76 (11.4%) | |
| White | 392 (59%) | |
| Other identities | 67 (10.1%) | |
| Age | 37.99 (8.07) | |
| Marital Status |
Single | 64 (9.6%) |
| Married/Common law | 502 (75.6%) | |
| Separated/Divorced | 81 (12.2%) | |
| Widowed | 17 (2.6%) | |
| Citizenship Status | Canadian Citizen | 302 (45.5%) |
| Permanent Resident | 294 (44.3%) | |
| Temporary Resident | 66 (9.9%) | |
| Other | 2 (0.3%) | |
| Registered years as a nurse | 13.22 (5.85) | |
| Years worked in HCC* regardless of employment status | 6.78 (4.54) | |
| Employment Status | Full-time in 1 or more roles | 453 (68.2%) |
| Part-time | 211 (31.8%) | |
| Ontario Health Region |
West | 231 (34.8%) |
| Central | 217 (32.7%) | |
| Toronto | 75 (11.3%) | |
| East | 105 (15.8%) | |
| North (East & West) | 36 (5.4%) | |
| Note: SD = Standard Deviation; HCC = home and community care | ||
| Variable | Description | Stay | Temporary Leave | Exit | p-value |
| n (%) or median [IQR] |
n (%) or median [IQR] |
n (%) or median [IQR] |
|||
| Gender | Woman & Gender-diverse/ Prefer not to say | 185 (51.8%) | 100 (50.3%) | 50 (46.3%) | 0.601 |
| Man | 172 (48.2%) | 99 (49.7%) | 58 (53.7%) | ||
| Age | 38.00 [30.00, 42.00] |
40.00 [34.00, 45.00] |
35.00 [31.00, 43.00] |
<0.001 | |
| Ethnicity | Black | 60 (16.8%) | 19 (9.5%) | 12 (11.1%) | 0.029 |
| East/Southeast Asian | 20 (5.6%) | 10 (5.0%) | 8 (7.4%) | ||
| South Asian | 28 (7.8%) | 29 (14.6%) | 19 (17.6%) | ||
| White | 211 (59.1%) | 120 (60.3%) | 61 (56.5%) | ||
| Other identities | 38 (10.6%) | 21 (10.6%) | 8 (7.4%) | ||
| Marital status | Single | 44 (12.3%) | 15 (7.5%) | 5 (4.6%) | 0.157 |
| Married/Common law | 266 (74.5%) | 152 (76.4%) | 84 (77.8%) | ||
| Separated/Divorced | 37 (10.4%) | 28 (14.1%) | 16 (14.8%) | ||
| Widowed | 10 (2.8%) | 4 (2.0%) | 3 (2.8%) | ||
| Citizenship status | Canadian citizen | 157 (44.0%) | 75 (37.7%) | 70 (64.8%) | <0.001 |
| Permanent resident | 155 (43.4%) | 104 (52.3%) | 35 (32.4%) | ||
| Temporary resident | 43 (12.0%) | 20 (10.1%) | 3 (2.8%) | ||
| Other | 2 (0.6%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | ||
| Past health | 3.00 [2.50, 3.50] |
3.00 [2.00, 3.50] |
3.00 [2.50, 3.50] |
0.014 | |
| Test Covid positive | No | 260 (72.8%) | 74 (37.2%) | 52 (48.1%) | <0.001 |
| Yes | 97 (27.2%) | 125 (62.8%) | 56 (51.9%) | ||
| Connor-Davidson Resilience score (/40) | 29.00 [24.00, 33.00] |
31.00 [28.00, 32.00] |
31.00 [27.75, 34.00] |
0.003 | |
| Resilience at Work score (/120) | 88.00 [76.00, 96.00] |
89.00 [84.00, 95.00] |
92.00 [82.00, 97.00] |
0.045 | |
| Wong and Law Emotional Intelligence Score (/112) | 90.00 [79.00, 96.00] |
93.00 [88.00, 99.00] |
95.50 [88.75, 101.00] |
<0.001 | |
| Income meets financial needs | 3.00 [2.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [2.00, 3.00] |
3.00 [2.00, 3.00] |
<0.001 | |
| Change in household income | Same | 140 (39.2%) | 34 (17.1%) | 20 (18.5%) | <0.001 |
| Decreased | 79 (22.1%) | 84 (42.2%) | 18 (16.7%) | ||
| Increased | 138 (38.7%) | 81 (40.7%) | 70 (64.8%) | ||
| Received COVID-19 related supplemental income | No | 143 (40.1%) | 62 (31.2%) | 24 (22.2%) | 0.001 |
| Yes | 214 (59.9%) | 137 (68.8%) | 84 (77.8%) | ||
| Years in home and community care | 5.00 [3.00, 10.00] |
7.00 [4.00, 10.00] |
5.00 [4.00, 9.00] |
<0.001 | |
| Weekly hours worked | 30.00 [19.00, 37.00] |
30.00 [7.50, 36.50] |
30.00 [26.00, 36.00] |
0.002 | |
| Work in other sectors | No | 118 (33.1%) | 42 (21.1%) | 16 (14.8%) | <0.001 |
| Yes | 239 (66.9%) | 157 (78.9%) | 92 (85.2%) | ||
| Employment Status | Fulltime in 1 or more roles | 204 (57.1%) | 160 (80.4%) | 89 (82.4%) | <0.001 |
| Parttime | 153 (42.9%) | 39 (19.6%) | 19 (17.6%) | ||
| Worked in new supervisor role | No | 192 (53.8%) | 44 (22.1%) | 24 (22.2%) | <0.001 |
| Yes | 139 (38.9%) | 135 (67.8%) | 75 (69.4%) | ||
| Already worked as supervisor | 26 (7.3%) | 20 (10.1%) | 9 (8.3%) | ||
| Ontario Health Region | West | 131 (36.7%) | 72 (36.2%) | 28 (25.9%) | 0.008 |
| Central | 106 (29.7%) | 73 (36.7%) | 38 (35.2%) | ||
| Toronto | 30 (8.4%) | 25 (12.6%) | 20 (18.5%) | ||
| East | 65 (18.2%) | 23 (11.6%) | 17 (15.7%) | ||
| North (East & West) | 25 (7.0%) | 6 (3.0%) | 5 (4.6%) | ||
| Note: IQR = Interquartile Range | |||||
| Variable | Description | Stay | Temporary Leave | Exit | p-value |
| n (%) or median [IQR] |
n (%) or median [IQR] |
n (%) or median [IQR] |
|||
| Increase in caseload | 3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
4.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [2.00, 4.00] |
<0.001 | |
| Increase in travel | 3.00 [2.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [2.00, 4.00] |
<0.001 | |
| Increase in virtual appointments | 3.00 [2.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [2.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [2.00, 4.00] |
0.240 | |
| Increase in non-client hours | 3.00 [2.00, 3.00] |
3.00 [2.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [2.00, 3.00] |
0.007 | |
| Increase in referrals | 3.00 [2.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.50 [3.00, 4.00] |
0.047 | |
| Increase in case severity | 3.00 [2.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [2.00, 4.00] |
0.002 | |
| Increase in caseload variability | 3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
0.568 | |
| Clear communication | 3.50 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.50 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.25 [3.00, 3.50] |
0.002 | |
| Concise communication | 3.00 [2.50, 3.50] |
3.00 [3.00, 3.50] |
3.00 [2.50, 3.50] |
<0.001 | |
| Relevant communication | 3.50 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.50 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.50 [3.00, 4.00] |
0.777 | |
| Timely communication | 3.50 [3.00, 3.50] |
3.00 [2.50, 3.50] |
3.00 [2.50, 3.50] |
0.050 | |
| Satisfaction with income | 3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
4.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
0.046 | |
| Satisfaction with professional development opportunities | 3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
0.974 | |
| Satisfaction with education opportunities | 3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [2.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [2.00, 4.00] |
0.169 | |
| Satisfaction with benefits | 3.00 [2.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [2.50, 4.00] |
3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
0.568 | |
| Satisfaction with EAP | 3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
0.727 | |
| Satisfaction with Rewards/Recognition | 3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
0.960 | |
| Satisfaction with IPC training | 3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [2.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [2.00, 4.00] |
0.574 | |
| Satisfaction with access to COVID-19 information from employer | 3.00 [2.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [2.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [2.00, 4.00] |
0.058 | |
| Satisfaction with access to COVID-19 information from CNO | 3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [2.75, 4.00] |
0.577 | |
| Satisfaction with access to IPAC support | 3.00 [2.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [2.00, 4.00] |
0.010 | |
| Satisfaction with supervisor communication about COVID-19 | 3.00 [2.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [2.00, 4.00] |
0.625 | |
| Satisfaction with employer communication about COVID-19 protocols | 3.00 [2.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
0.039 | |
| Satisfaction with connection with supervisor | 3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
0.085 | |
| Satisfaction with connection with employer | 3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
4.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
0.085 | |
| Satisfaction with PPE access | 3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
4.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [2.00, 4.00] |
<0.001 | |
| Satisfaction with PPE quality | 3.00 [2.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
0.003 | |
| Feel part of a team | 3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
4.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
0.072 | |
| Have opportunities to connect with supervisor | 3.00 [2.00, 3.00] |
3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [2.00, 4.00] |
0.003 | |
| Have opportunities to connect with colleagues | 3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [2.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [2.00, 4.00] |
0.045 | |
| Feel employer cares about wellbeing | 3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
0.701 | |
| Pandemic impact on household responsibilities | 3.00 [2.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
0.744 | |
| Pandemic impact on parenting/caregiving responsibilities | 2.50 [2.00, 3.50] |
3.00 [2.50, 3.50] |
3.00 [2.00, 3.00] |
0.033 | |
| Pandemic impact on friend relationships | 3.00 [1.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [2.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [2.00, 4.00] |
<0.001 | |
| Pandemic impact on family relationships | 3.00 [2.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
0.125 | |
| Pandemic impact on professional network | 3.00 [2.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [2.50, 4.00] |
3.00 [2.00, 4.00] |
<0.001 | |
| Pandemic impact on personal hygiene | 3.00 [2.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
3.00 [3.00, 4.00] |
0.076 | |
| Note: IQR = Interquartile Range | |||||
| Variable | Description | Temporary Leave (Reference: Stay) | Exit (Reference: Stay) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Est. | SE | P-value | RRR | Est. | SE | P-value | RRR | ||
| Gender |
Women/ Gender-diverse/ Prefer not to say |
Reference | |||||||
| Man | 0.32 | 0.23 | 0.161 | 1.38 (0.88,2.16) | 0.41 | 0.29 | 0.152 | 1.51 (0.86,2.66) | |
| Ethnicity |
White | Reference | |||||||
| Black | -0.35 | 0.36 | 0.329 | 0.70 (0.35,1.43) | -0.92 | 0.46 | 0.047 | 0.40 (0.16,0.99) | |
| East/Southeast Asian | 0.40 | 0.54 | 0.463 | 1.49 (0.51,4.32) | 0.57 | 0.61 | 0.343 | 1.78 (0.54,5.82) | |
| Other identities | 0.81 | 0.38 | 0.032 | 2.25 (1.07,4.70) | -0.03 | 0.51 | 0.955 | 0.97 (0.35,2.66) | |
| South Asian | 0.60 | 0.40 | 0.138 | 1.82 (0.83,4.02) | 1.06 | 0.48 | 0.025 | 2.90 (1.14,7.35) | |
| Age | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.206 | 1.03 (0.99,1.07) | -0.02 | 0.02 | 0.399 | 0.98 (0.94,1.03) | |
| Marital status |
Married/Common Law | Reference | |||||||
| Separated/Divorced | 0.27 | 0.35 | 0.439 | 1.31 (0.66,2.60) | 1.12 | 0.41 | 0.007 | 3.08 (1.37,6.93) | |
| Single/Widowed | -0.54 | 0.36 | 0.131 | 0.58 (0.29,1.17) | -0.66 | 0.50 | 0.186 | 0.52 (0.20,1.37) | |
| Past health status | -0.17 | 0.14 | 0.236 | 0.85 (0.64,1.12) | -0.44 | 0.18 | 0.013 | 0.64 (0.45,0.91) | |
| Test positive for COVID-19 |
No | Reference | |||||||
| Yes | 1.49 | 0.29 | <0.001 | 4.43 (2.53,7.77) | 1.27 | 0.34 | <0.001 | 3.55 (1.83,6.89) | |
| Wong and Law Emotional Intelligence Score | 0.04 | 0.01 | 0.010 | 1.04 (1.01,1.07) | 0.09 | 0.02 | <0.001 | 1.10 (1.06,1.14) | |
| Income meets financial needs | -0.16 | 0.14 | 0.261 | 0.85 (0.64,1.13) | 0.10 | 0.17 | 0.579 | 1.10 (0.78,1.55) | |
| Change in household income |
Same | Reference | |||||||
| Decreased | 0.90 | 0.34 | 0.008 | 2.45 (1.27,4.74) | 0.45 | 0.50 | 0.369 | 1.56 (0.59,4.12) | |
| Increased | 0.89 | 0.33 | 0.007 | 2.44 (1.27,4.69) | 1.51 | 0.41 | <0.001 | 4.52 (2.04,10.02) | |
| Received COVID-19 related supplemental income |
No | Reference | |||||||
| Yes | 0.63 | 0.25 | 0.012 | 1.88 (1.15,3.08) | 0.86 | 0.33 | 0.010 | 2.35 (1.23,4.51) | |
| Employment Status |
Full-time in 1 or more roles | Reference | |||||||
| Part-time | -0.45 | 0.28 | 0.107 | 0.64 (0.37,1.10) | -0.34 | 0.36 | 0.342 | 0.71 (0.36,1.43) | |
| Years in home and community care | -0.12 | 0.04 | 0.001 | 0.89 (0.83,0.96) | -0.13 | 0.05 | 0.007 | 0.88 (0.80,0.97) | |
| Weekly hours worked | -0.03 | 0.01 | 0.033 | 0.97 (0.95,0.998) | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.280 | 1.02 (0.99,1.05) | |
| Worked in new supervisor role |
No | Reference | |||||||
| Already worked as supervisor | 1.03 | 0.42 | 0.014 | 2.80 (1.23,6.36) | 0.03 | 0.56 | 0.954 | 1.03 (0.35,3.09) | |
| Yes | 0.42 | 0.31 | 0.175 | 1.52 (0.83,2.79) | 0.44 | 0.38 | 0.253 | 1.55 (0.73,3.29) | |
| Work in other sectors |
No | Reference | |||||||
| Yes | -0.33 | 0.29 | 0.265 | 0.72 (0.41,1.28) | 0.49 | 0.38 | 0.206 | 1.63 (0.77,3.45) | |
| Ontario Health Region |
West | Reference | |||||||
| Central | 0.36 | 0.27 | 0.183 | 1.44 (0.84,2.45) | 0.33 | 0.36 | 0.355 | 1.39 (0.69,2.80) | |
| East | -0.02 | 0.35 | 0.948 | 0.98 (0.49,1.94) | 0.61 | 0.43 | 0.154 | 1.84 (0.80,4.30) | |
| North [East & West] | -0.39 | 0.55 | 0.478 | 0.68 (0.23,1.98) | 0.05 | 0.66 | 0.943 | 1.05 (0.29,3.85) | |
| Toronto | 0.81 | 0.39 | 0.035 | 2.26 (1.06,4.81) | 1.53 | 0.46 | 0.001 | 4.63 (1.87,11.45) | |
| Increase in caseload | -0.03 | 0.10 | 0.752 | 0.97 (0.79,1.19) | -0.32 | 0.13 | 0.013 | 0.73 (0.57,0.94) | |
| Increase in caseload variability | -0.01 | 0.12 | 0.963 | 0.99 (0.79,1.26) | -0.26 | 0.14 | 0.060 | 0.77 (0.58,1.01) | |
| Concise communication | 0.44 | 0.19 | 0.018 | 1.56 (1.08,2.24) | -0.56 | 0.22 | 0.012 | 0.57 (0.37,0.89) | |
| Relevant communication | -0.60 | 0.20 | 0.002 | 0.55 (0.37,0.80) | -0.10 | 0.24 | 0.668 | 0.90 (0.56,1.45) | |
| Timely communication | -0.30 | 0.17 | 0.078 | 0.74 (0.53,1.03) | -0.49 | 0.21 | 0.019 | 0.61 (0.40,0.92) | |
| Satisfaction with employer communication about COVID-19 protocols | 0.26 | 0.12 | 0.034 | 1.30 (1.02,1.66) | 0.39 | 0.15 | 0.009 | 1.48 (1.10,1.99) | |
| Satisfaction with supervisor communication about COVID-19 | -0.11 | 0.13 | 0.401 | 0.90 (0.69,1.16) | -0.36 | 0.15 | 0.019 | 0.70 (0.52,0.94) | |
| Satisfaction with benefits | 0.43 | 0.13 | 0.001 | 1.53 (1.18,1.99) | 0.25 | 0.16 | 0.131 | 1.28 (0.93,1.77) | |
| Satisfaction with PPE access | 0.05 | 0.13 | 0.685 | 1.05 (0.82,1.36) | -0.29 | 0.15 | 0.062 | 0.75 (0.56,1.02) | |
| Satisfaction with PPE quality | 0.21 | 0.14 | 0.119 | 1.24 (0.95,1.62) | 0.22 | 0.16 | 0.179 | 1.25 (0.90,1.72) | |
| Have opportunities to connect with colleagues | 0.00 | 0.13 | 0.982 | 1.00 (0.77,1.29) | -0.36 | 0.15 | 0.021 | 0.70 (0.52,0.95) | |
| Pandemic impact on caregiving responsibilities | 0.01 | 0.14 | 0.961 | 1.01 (0.76,1.34) | -0.29 | 0.18 | 0.110 | 0.75 (0.52,1.07) | |
| Pandemic impact on professional network | 0.04 | 0.11 | 0.760 | 1.04 (0.83,1.30) | 0.44 | 0.14 | 0.002 | 1.56 (1.18,2.06) | |
| Pandemic impact on friend relationships | 0.22 | 0.11 | 0.035 | 1.25 (1.02,1.54) | 0.10 | 0.13 | 0.442 | 1.11 (0.85,1.44) | |
| Note: Est = Estimate, SE = Standard Error, RRR = Relative Risk Ratio | |||||||||
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).