Search

Transactional models of stress posit that perceptions of both resources and demands determine whether stress will be experienced. To test this model and better understand teacher stress, we examined levels of elementary teachers' burnout symptoms: (1) between schools, with individual/teacher perceptions of demands and resources aggregated to the group level, and (2) at the individual teacher level within schools, where perceptions of classroom demands and resources, as well as teachers' personal coping resources and experience, were taken into account. We assessed the specific classroom demands and resources hypothesized to contribute to elementary teachers' burnout symptoms using the Classroom Appraisal of Resources and Demands (CARD), and we used the Preventive Resources Inventory (PRI) to measure teachers' psychological coping resources. Burnout symptoms were measured using the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI). Data were collected from 451 teachers in 13 elementary schools within 3 adjacent counties that comprise part of the metropolitan statistical area for a large urban region in the southeastern United States. We administered surveys at teacher staff meetings over 2 academic years, and the overall response rate was 77.62%. We used hierarchical linear modeling to nest teachers within schools. Although there was little variance in reported burnout symptoms between schools, each of the individual teacher-level variables was associated in the predicted direction with burnout symptoms. These findings may support transactional models of stress in that individual differences among teachers within schools in perceptions of demands and resources predicted burnout symptoms and differences in school context were not. (Contains 4 tables.)

The authors explored stress among 521 teachers in 16 elementary schools. They used hierarchical linear modeling to examine the relation of school and teacher characteristics to reported demands and resources in the classroom. School-level predictor variables included spring vs. fall data collection, Title I status, minority percentage, the interaction between spring data collection and Title I status, and the composite achievement score. There were no statistically significant associations between Title I status or time of year for data collection and the Classroom Appraisal of Resources and Demands subscale scores. However, there were relations among minority percentage, the student achievement composite, and perceptions of the availability of instructional resources. (Contains 6 tables.)

Background: A key concern for managers and nurse administrators of healthcare settings is staffing. Determining and maintaining an appropriate level and mix of staff is especially problematic for those working in the long-term aged-care sector, where resident needs are complex and recruitment and retention of staff is challenging., Objectives: To identify which staffing models are associated with the best patient and staff outcomes., Search Strategy: We searched the Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (DARE) in The Cochrane Library and the databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, Ageline, CINAHL, and Dissertation abstracts. We also handsearched the reference lists and bibliographies of all retrieved articles., Selection Criteria: This review considered interrupted time series studies and studies with concurrent control designs of care staff or residents of residential or subacute or extended aged-care settings that evaluated the effectiveness of staffing models and skill mixes on resident and care staff outcomes., Data Collection and Analysis: Two review authors critically appraised all studies that were retrieved based on the screening of titles and abstracts according to the EPOC Group's data collection checklist.The same two review authors independently extracted and summarised details of eligible studies using the data abstraction form developed by EPOC., Main Results: We included two studies (one interrupted time series and one controlled before-and-after study); both evaluated a primary-care model compared with a either a team-nursing model or a usual-care model. The primary-care model was found to provide slightly better results than the comparator for some outcomes such as resident well-being or behaviour. While nursing staff favoured the primary-care model in one study, neither study found significant improvements in staff outcomes using the primary model compared with the comparator. One study evaluated the uptake of the primary-care model within their facilities and found incorporation of this model into their practice was limited., Authors' Conclusions: Apart from two small studies evaluating primary care, no evidence in the form of concurrently controlled trials could be identified. While these two studies generally favour the use of primary care, the research designs of both ITS and CBA studies are considered prone to bias, specifically selection and blinding of participants and assessors. Therefore, these studies should be regarded with caution and there is little clear evidence for the effective use of any specific model of care in residential aged care to benefit either residents or care staff. Research in this area is clearly needed.