Throughout a career of reporting and writing, I’ve learned that readers typically use articles and reports for whatever purpose they’re inclined to. 

Sometimes the reader will hold up a report as validation (“We’re ranked No. 1!” cries the elated high school football coach.)

Sometimes as a reason for indignation or even outrage (“What? We’re not ranked No. 1?!” Or even better, for the coach worried about over-confidence: “We’re No. 1? What does that newspaper know?!”). 

To test this theory, consult any recent coverage of US politics or political polls, at just about any level. The often shameful behavior seems to lead to the conclusion: Find your own truth.

Then there are the academic studies that make you wonder: Who gave these eggheads the approval to do these scientific inquiries?

We’re talking about serious research into the difference between apples and oranges. (It’s true.) And whether it’s better to smash an empty or full bottle of beer over someone’s head. (Empty, of course. Why risk wasting the beer in a full bottle? Is my personal rock-solid conclusion.)

There also have been serious examinations to find the mathematical formula for the “perfect cheese on toast.” As well as a scientific investigation into the best way to walk to not risk spilling coffee from your cup. (Now you’re glad you kept reading, I bet.)

At first blush, some might find any of the above silly, or at best self-evident. 

But there’s a place and use for such studies, especially when they extend into the long-term care sphere. Take new study findings out of Spain, for example.

As is probably no shock to anyone who worked in a nursing home from 2020 to 2023, caregivers in that setting were found to suffer more profound psychological and related stresses than their counterparts who worked in acute care hospitals.

Duh! you say? Agreed, but hold on just a viral moment.

The value of this study is quite real. Ostensibly, it was conducted to lead to better strategies in future public health emergencies. 

But the results also work to solidify that, well, skilled nursing workers truly did have it harder than anyone else during the pandemic. And that’s in ways both openly and not so outwardly visible.

The observable, cross-sectional study of 54 hospital workers and 54 nursing home workers (from many facility departments, not just the nursing corps) show that the nursing homes had higher scores and wider anxiety (74% vs. 42%), depression (41% vs. 15%) and post-traumatic stress disorder (56% vs. 26%) than their hospital counterparts.

Higher purpose in life, as the researchers sought and found, protected better against psychopathology and burnout. Moral courage, by the same token, guarded against depression and acute stress.

In brief, there was a greater presence of psychopathology — defined as anxiety, depression and PTSD — in nursing home workers.

Workplace and occupational contexts, as well as personal worries about family members possibly having COVID, and “internal dimensions such as purpose in life and moral courage” are the key factors, the researchers concluded.

Join the crowd, amigos.

The higher number of resident deaths in nursing homes vs. hospitals likely tipped the scales since both settings had to contend with long work shifts, huge work loads and contagious people all around them.

Building up workers’ purpose in life and moral courage is the way to solidify caregivers’ mental health in trying times like the COVID-19 scourge, the experts seem to be shouting through their tables and theorems published by Scientific Reports.

Not always pretty stuff, but good ammunition to take to the next strategy war room when a pandemic or other public health emergency breaks out.

James M. Berklan is McKnight’s Long-Term Care News’ Executive Editor and a Best Commentary award winner in the 2024 Neal Awards, which are given annually for the nation’s best specialized business journalism.

Opinions expressed in McKnight’s Long-Term Care News columns are not necessarily those of McKnight’s.