ArticleBMC health services research2026
"You're not just there to do a job": a qualitative examination of Canadian long-term care worker strengths.
Article in BMC health services research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundResearch on the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on long-term care workers has largely emphasized the negative outcomes of crisis conditions and workforce distress, leaving strengths-based perspectives on workers’ experiences during this period underexplored. Recognizing the potential of strengths-focused inquiry to inform sector transformation and workforce renewal, we conducted a secondary qualitative analysis of Canadian long-term care worker experiences during the pandemic using an Appreciative Inquiry lens to examine and more fully represent workers’ strengths.
methodsA qualitative secondary analysis was conducted using an Appreciative Inquiry theoretical lens. Data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic through semi-structured interviews with 50 long-term care staff members spanning diverse roles across 12 facilities in Alberta, British Columbia, and Ontario. Transcripts were analysed thematically in a process of moving from inductive familiarisation to deliberate application of an appreciative lens to identify successes, assets, and positive capacities within the long-term care workforce.
resultsWe present three themes identifying interlocking expressions of strength. First, during crisis, workers stretched roles, redistributed tasks, and supported one another to sustain care under extreme constraint. Second, staff upheld person-centred care in their daily actions, working from values of dignity, relationships, and residents’ goals. Third, workers translated experience into learning and advocacy, articulating ideas to improve staffing, role clarity, leadership practices, and visitation approaches. Across these expressions, workers’ tenacity, togetherness, and shared purpose enabled collective action, although these strengths often entailed costs such as fatigue and moral strain.
conclusionOur findings add to existing literature on long-term care worker experiences during the pandemic by demonstrating that workers’ capacities for adaptability, person-centred care, and advocacy are vital assets for sector renewal. While amplifying and supporting worker strengths can enable meaningful transformation, these strengths alone cannot substitute for systemic investment and reform. To sustain care quality, workforce well-being, and crisis preparedness, interventions and policy design should embed worker perspectives to advance recognition and resourcing of their contributions. Deeper renewal also requires rewriting longstanding public narratives that undervalue LTC work.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.