Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
203,952 studies31 sourcesUpdated 44 min ago
Peer-reviewedCC BY-NC 4.0The European Journal of Public Health

Assistant nurses’ perceptions of welfare technology use for care outcomes and workforce well-being

Abstract

Background: The use of welfare technologies to support individual’s safety, independence, and participation has increased in response to ageing populations and workforce shortages in health and social care. However, studies of their impact on care quality and workforce well-being remain scarce, particularly in eldercare. This study examines associations between different types of welfare technologies, care delivery outcomes, and assistant nurses’ well-being.

Methods: A survey study of randomly sampled assistant nurses (2024, N = 1,163 and 2025 N = 1,216). Assistant nurses are the largest occupation group in Swedish eldercare workforce. Independent variable was types of welfare technology. Outcomes included perceived care quality (continuity, participation, loneliness) and work-related well-being (work ability, job satisfaction). Associations were analyzed using logistic and linear regression with generalized estimating equations, adjusting for sociodemographic and employment factors.

Results: Technologies for documentation and planning were most common (76%; 83%), while those supporting communication (9.3%; 8.3%) and training or activities (9.9%; 11.3%) were least prevalent. Technologies supporting training or activities were associated with improved continuity of care (OR 1.75, p=.001), reduced loneliness (OR 1.48, p=.013), and increased participation (OR 1.81, p<.001). They were also linked to higher work ability (β = 0.29, p=.023) and job satisfaction (β = 0.287, p=.019). No significant associations were found for monitoring or documentation technologies and worker well-being.

Conclusions: Technologies enabling meaningful interaction between care workers and recipients are associated with better care outcomes and improved worker well-being, but remain least prevalent. Prioritizing the implementation of such technologies can strengthen workforce retention by improving workforce well-being and care delivery outcomes for ageing population.

Key messages: • Not all welfare technologies support care quality or worker well-being; those enabling meaningful interaction shows more favourable outcomes.

• Investment should shift toward technologies enabling shared activities and interaction, which remain less prevalent but can strengthen care outcomes and worker well-being.

Related

  1. Perceptions of ostrich welfare and ethical practices: insights from consumers, farmers and stakeholders.
    Maud Bonato, Monique Dawson, Anel Engelbrecht +1
    Tropical animal health and productionPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textGeneral biologyEurope PMC
  2. How much climate-smart agriculture is enough? A dose-response analysis of technology adoption effects on farmer welfare in Ghana
    Stephen Prah, John N. Ng’ombe, Bright Owusu Asante +1
    PLOS ClimatePeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full textClimate sciencePLOS
  3. “They’re just shifting a problem”: A qualitative study of stakeholder perceptions of the welfare implications of UK rescue dog importation
    Lisa J. Wallis, Alisha Murphy, Gina Pinchbeck +3
    PLOS OnePeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full textZoology & animal behaviourPLOS
  4. Attitudes and beliefs regarding future municipal eldercare needs: health and welfare technology or whom do I want support from when I need it?
    Sanna Tiikkaja, Sylvia Olsson, Christine Gustafsson
    Frontiers in Public HealthPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Epidemiology & public healthFrontiersCrossref
  5. Upskilling, reskilling, or deskilling? Welfare technology and job satisfaction in care work
    E Nordlander, D Dellve, S Frennert +2
    The European Journal of Public HealthPeer-reviewedCC BY-NC 4.0Full textPMCEurope PMC
BibTeX
@article{naseer2026assistant,
  title = {{Assistant nurses’ perceptions of welfare technology use for care outcomes and workforce well-being}},
  author = {M Naseer and K Skagert and E Nordlander and S Frennert and L Dellve},
  journal = {The European Journal of Public Health},
  year = {2026},
  month = oct,
  doi = {10.1093/eurpub/ckag169.457},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckag169.457},
  note = {CC BY-NC 4.0},
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Assistant nurses’ perceptions of welfare technology use for care outcomes and workforce well-being
AU  - M Naseer
AU  - K Skagert
AU  - E Nordlander
AU  - S Frennert
AU  - L Dellve
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/10/01
JO  - The European Journal of Public Health
DO  - 10.1093/eurpub/ckag169.457
UR  - https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckag169.457
AB  - Background: The use of welfare technologies to support individual’s safety, independence, and participation has increased in response to ageing populations and workforce shortages in health and social care. However, studies of their impact on care quality and workforce well-being remain scarce, particularly in eldercare. This study examines associations between different types of welfare technologies, care delivery outcomes, and assistant nurses’ well-being.  Methods: A survey study of randomly sampled assistant nurses (2024, N = 1,163 and 2025 N = 1,216). Assistant nurses are the largest occupation group in Swedish eldercare workforce. Independent variable was types of welfare technology. Outcomes included perceived care quality (continuity, participation, loneliness) and work-related well-being (work ability, job satisfaction). Associations were analyzed using logistic and linear regression with generalized estimating equations, adjusting for sociodemographic and employment factors.  Results: Technologies for documentation and planning were most common (76%; 83%), while those supporting communication (9.3%; 8.3%) and training or activities (9.9%; 11.3%) were least prevalent. Technologies supporting training or activities were associated with improved continuity of care (OR 1.75, p=.001), reduced loneliness (OR 1.48, p=.013), and increased participation (OR 1.81, p<.001). They were also linked to higher work ability (β = 0.29, p=.023) and job satisfaction (β = 0.287, p=.019). No significant associations were found for monitoring or documentation technologies and worker well-being.  Conclusions: Technologies enabling meaningful interaction between care workers and recipients are associated with better care outcomes and improved worker well-being, but remain least prevalent. Prioritizing the implementation of such technologies can strengthen workforce retention by improving workforce well-being and care delivery outcomes for ageing population.  Key messages: • Not all welfare technologies support care quality or worker well-being; those enabling meaningful interaction shows more favourable outcomes.  • Investment should shift toward technologies enabling shared activities and interaction, which remain less prevalent but can strengthen care outcomes and worker well-being.
SN  - 1101-1262
SN  - 1464-360X
ER  -