Skip to main content
. 2020 Dec 7;10(12):e042658. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-042658

Table 2.

Characteristics and results of included studies

Authors (country) Study design Setting, participants Person-centred care measure Staff outcomes: measurement tool Results
den Boer et al47 (Netherlands) Cross-sectional Community care,
registered nurses (RNs)
n=153
Adapted version of the Patient- Centred Care Questionnaire 35 items Job satisfaction: a 38-item job satisfaction questionnaire Job satisfaction: significant positive association with PCC
Dichter et al56 (Germany) Quasi-experimental
6-month and 18- month follow-up
Nursing home,
caregivers
n=201
The subscale ‘recognition of personhood’ of the Approach to Dementia Questionnaire (ADQ) 11 items Job satisfaction: Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire 4-items
Burnout: Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI) 6-items
Job satisfaction: significant positive effect of PCC intervention
Burnout: no significant effect of PCC intervention
Edvardsson et al53 (Australia) Cross-sectional Residential aged care,
all staff
n=297
Person-Centred Care Assessment Tool (P-CAT), 13 items Job satisfaction: measure of job satisfaction (MJS)
22 items
Job satisfaction: significant positive association with PCC
Edvardsson et al40 (Sweden) Quasi-experimental
12 months follow-up
Residential aged care,
all staff
n=171 (baseline)
n=143 (follow-up)
P-CAT 13 items
Person-Centred Climate Questionnaire-Staff version (PCQ-S)
14 items
Stress of conscience: Stress of Conscience questionnaire (SCQ) 9 items
Job strain: Demand-Control-Support Questionnaire (DCSQ) 11 items
Stress of conscience: significant negative effect of PCC intervention
Job strain: no significant effect of PCC intervention
Elfstrand Corlin and Kazemi46 (Sweden) Cross-sectional Nursing homes,
all staff
n=322
Individualized Care Inventory (ICI) 43 items Job satisfaction: a single question Job satisfaction: significant association to subscales of PCC
Jeon et al54 (Australia) Cluster randomised controlled trial
8 months follow-up
Residential aged care,
all staff
n=194
Burnout: Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) 22 items Burnout: significant effect of DCM intervention but not the PCC intervention
Lehuluante et al41 (Sweden) Cross-sectional Hospital,
RNs
n=206
PCQ-S 14 items Job satisfaction: satisfaction with nursing care and work scale 34 items Job satisfaction: significant association to subscales of PCC
Lewis et al51 (USA) Cross-sectional Safety net clinic,
all staff
n=603
5 PCMH subscales 22 items Job satisfaction: a single question
Burnout: a single question
Job satisfaction: significant association to subscales of PCC
Burnout: significant association to subscales of PCC
Nocon et al52 (USA) Quasi-experimental
4-year follow-up
Safety net clinic,
all staff
n=536 (baseline)
n=589 (postintervention)
5 PCMH subscales 24 items Job satisfaction: a single question
Burnout: a single question
Job Satisfaction: no significant effect of PCC intervention
Burnout: no significant effect of PCC intervention
Wallin et al44 (Sweden) Cross-sectional Residential aged care,
nurse assistants and nurse’s aides
n=225
P-CAT 13 items, PCQ-S 14 items Job satisfaction: Job Satisfaction Questionnaire
20 items
Job satisfaction: significant positive association with PCC
Røen et al55 (Norway) Cross-sectional Nursing homes,
managers, unit head nurses and staff
n=175
P-CAT 13 items Job satisfaction: a single question
work-related psychosocial factors: the General Nordic Questionnaire for Psychosocial and Social Factors at Work
32 items
Job satisfaction: significant association to PCC
Work-related psychosocial factors: significant association to PCC
Schaap et al48 (Netherlands) Quasi- experimental
14 months follow-up
Residential aged care,
all staff
n=227
P-CAT 13 items Job satisfaction: the Maastricht Work Satisfaction Scale in Health Care 21 items
Burnout: MBI 6 items
Job satisfaction: no significant effect of PCC intervention
Burnout: no significant effect of PCC intervention
Silén et al42 (Sweden) Cross-sectional Nursing home,
all staff
n=212
P-CAT 13 items, PCQ-S 14 items Work-related psychosocial factors: Swedish version of the Conditions of Work Effectiveness Questionnaire 19 items Work-related psychosocial factors: significant association with PCC
Sjögren et al43 (Sweden) Cross-sectional Residential aged care,
all staff
n=1169
P-CAT 13 items, PCQ-S 14 items Job satisfaction: Satisfaction with Nursing Care and Work Scale 34 items
Stress of Conscience: SCQ 9 items
Job strain: DCSQ 11 items
Job satisfaction: significant positive association with PCC
Stress of conscience: significant negative association with PCC
Job stress: significant negative association with PCC
Van der Meer et al49 (Netherlands) Cross-sectional Residential aged care,
all staff
n=466
8 dimensions Person-Centred Care Questionnaire 35 items Job satisfaction: MJS 38 items Job satisfaction: significant positive association with PCC
Vassbø et al57 (Sweden, Norway, Australia) Cross-sectional Nursing homes,
all staff
n=341
P-CAT 13 items, PCQ-S 14 items Job satisfaction: MJS 37 items Job satisfaction: significant positive association with PCC
Willemse et al50 (Netherlands) Cross-sectional Nursing homes,
all staff
n=1147
The subscale ‘recognition of personhood’ of ADQ 11 items Job satisfaction: 3-item scale derived from the Leiden Quality of Work Questionnaire.
Burnout: MBI 8 items.
Intent to leave: Subscale Leiden Quality of Work Questionnaire 3 items
Job satisfaction: significant association to PCC
Burnout: significant association to PCC
Intent to leave: significant association to PCC
Åhlin et al45 (Sweden) Longitudinal cohort study
1-year follow-up
Residential aged care,
RNs and nurse assistants
n=488
PCQ-S 14 items Stress of conscience: SCQ 9 items Stress of conscience: no significant association to PCC

PCC, person-centred care.