Scholarlink

Background <p>In institutional long-term care facilities, the care environment and the psychosocial status of the staff are closely associated with the quality of care. The aim of this study is to examine how staff members in long-term care facilities in Germany and Türkiye understand their duties and develop caring relationships.</p> Methods <p>In this qualitative descriptive comparative study, sixteen participants (eight from each country) were interviewed using a sociodemographic form and a semi-structured interview guide. Data were analysed using thematic analysis following Braun and Clarke’s approach. Coding was conducted by the first author and independently reviewed by a second researcher, with differences discussed and resolved through comparison.</p> Results <p>The study suggests that both countries face similar challenges related to staffing needs and the care of residents with cognitive impairments, while also showing differences in organizational structures and care approaches. German participants emphasized the efficiency of fixed schedules and ergonomic aids, while Turkish participants highlighted shift irregularities and dependence on manual handling techniques. In terms of interaction, German staff described using structured dialogue and pragmatic cultural adaptations, while Turkish participants more frequently referred to relational approaches characterized by familial forms of address and religious sensitivity. Furthermore, although emotional rewards were described as outweighing material incentives in both settings, institutional frameworks in Germany were often associated with sustaining motivation, whereas intrinsic personal dedication in Türkiye was frequently mentioned in the context of limited systemic support.</p> Conclusion <p>This study suggests that whilst empathy and respect are fundamental in both contexts, participants in Türkiye more frequently described motivation in relation to social bonds and personal commitment, whereas German participants more often associated motivation with institutional stability and defined professional roles. The comparison further suggests that both systems reflect distinct strengths within their respective contexts and may provide points for reflection in future cross-national discussions on long-term care practices.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Comparative insights into working conditions and care relationships in long-term care facilities in Germany and Türkiye: a qualitative study

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年3月4日

查看全文
  • Sezen Soner Aykut,
  • Asli Kilavuz

摘要

Background

In institutional long-term care facilities, the care environment and the psychosocial status of the staff are closely associated with the quality of care. The aim of this study is to examine how staff members in long-term care facilities in Germany and Türkiye understand their duties and develop caring relationships.

Methods

In this qualitative descriptive comparative study, sixteen participants (eight from each country) were interviewed using a sociodemographic form and a semi-structured interview guide. Data were analysed using thematic analysis following Braun and Clarke’s approach. Coding was conducted by the first author and independently reviewed by a second researcher, with differences discussed and resolved through comparison.

Results

The study suggests that both countries face similar challenges related to staffing needs and the care of residents with cognitive impairments, while also showing differences in organizational structures and care approaches. German participants emphasized the efficiency of fixed schedules and ergonomic aids, while Turkish participants highlighted shift irregularities and dependence on manual handling techniques. In terms of interaction, German staff described using structured dialogue and pragmatic cultural adaptations, while Turkish participants more frequently referred to relational approaches characterized by familial forms of address and religious sensitivity. Furthermore, although emotional rewards were described as outweighing material incentives in both settings, institutional frameworks in Germany were often associated with sustaining motivation, whereas intrinsic personal dedication in Türkiye was frequently mentioned in the context of limited systemic support.

Conclusion

This study suggests that whilst empathy and respect are fundamental in both contexts, participants in Türkiye more frequently described motivation in relation to social bonds and personal commitment, whereas German participants more often associated motivation with institutional stability and defined professional roles. The comparison further suggests that both systems reflect distinct strengths within their respective contexts and may provide points for reflection in future cross-national discussions on long-term care practices.