Background and Objectives: Demand for home-based care is growing, yet the attractiveness of this sector remains low due to poor working conditions. This threatens the sustainability of this service, which is often preferred by older adults. To address this issue, it is necessary to understand of the home care environment. Thus, the aim of this review is to develop a theory-informed framework that explains how multilevel conditions influence the well-being of home care workers. Research Design and Methods: A mixed methods systematic review was conducted. The last updated search was conducted on April 8, 2026. Searches covered Jan 2000–April 2026. 2 reviewers independently coded the data, synthesized the findings using a convergent integrated approach, and integrated the evidence using the Job Demands–Resources and Work–Home Resources theories. Results: Seventy-nine studies were included. High workload volume and intensity and, emotional demands with limited organizational resources were linked to strain, while adequate supervision, information flow, training, access to material resources, and supportive relationships mitigated harm and sustained motivation. The patterns were most pronounced among direct-hire and migrant workers. Negative consequences of the devaluation of care work and the crucial role of legal rights awareness emerged as novel contributions to the field. Discussion and Implications: This theory-informed review addresses fragmented evidence on home care workers’ well-being, identifies where demand rises and resources thin under efficiency pressures, and points decision-makers—especially in direct-hire and migrant-reliant systems—to specific practices for retaining the workforce and safeguarding care quality.

Background/Objectives: Therapeutic adherence remains a critical challenge in the management of chronic conditions, yet most research has focused on pharmacological adherence from the perspective of physicians and pharmacists. The views of non-physician healthcare professionals—particularly physiotherapists, podiatrists, psychologists, and nurses—remain underrepresented. This study aims to explore how these four healthcare disciplines perceive the factors influencing therapeutic adherence, the strategies they use to support it, and how they address patient resilience in clinical practice. Methods: An exploratory qualitative study was conducted using semi-structured interviews with 32 healthcare professionals (8 per discipline) recruited through purposive sampling across diverse care settings across Spain. Data were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis following a hybrid deductive–inductive approach. Quality criteria were applied in accordance with the standards proposed by Lincoln and Guba. Results: Three thematic domains emerged. Patient-related factors, especially motivation, health literacy, illness beliefs, and socioeconomic constraints, emerged as central determinants across all disciplines. Health system barriers, particularly limited consultation time and fragmented continuity of care, also constituted significant barriers. Discipline-specific strategies ranged from the teach-back technique and customized visual aids in nursing and podiatry to functional goal-setting and group-based dynamics in physiotherapy and expectation-setting and digital follow-up in psychology. Resilience was consistently described as a key mediating factor enabling patients to sustain adherence despite adversity. Conclusions: Therapeutic adherence is a multifactorial and discipline-sensitive phenomenon. The complementary strategies identified across professions support the value of coordinated interdisciplinary approaches. Resilience-informed interventions and profession-specific adherence training represent promising directions for improving clinical practice and professional education.

The aim of this chapter is to provide evidence-based recommendations for improving the working conditions and well-being of home health aides; a cornerstone of community-based long-term care systems in Europe. Their role in supporting older people to remain at home is vital; yet this workforce continues to face precarious employment conditions and low occupational esteem. Drawing on the Care4Care project (Horizon Europe) and using the Job Demands–Resources (JD-R) framework; the chapter combines quantitative and qualitative evidence from six European countries; analysing job characteristics and wellbeing of home care workers. The comparative analysis reveals both shared patterns and country-specific differences. Across contexts; home health aides reported moderate levels of strain; while also expressing relatively high levels of well-being. Workload intensity; tasks beyond care duties; emotional labour; and social frictions were risk factors that consistently led to worsened health and well-being. Protective factors—such as autonomy; predictability; possibilities for development; and emotional support—were the main aspects of the job that helped mitigate the negative effects of risk factors and contributed to improved well-being. The way these factors manifested varied across countries. Based on these findings; the chapter offers practical recommendations at three levels: (1) policy measures to ensure fair labour standards; regulate workload; and protect workers’ rights; (2) organisational actions to improve staffing; scheduling; supervision; and training opportunities; and (3) guidelines for individual employers—care recipients and their families—to promote respect; clear communication; and realistic expectations in everyday home care. By integrating comparative evidence with concrete recommendations; the chapter provides actionable guidance for employers and policymakers to strengthen the resilience of home-based care systems and safeguard both worker well-being and the quality of care delivered in the community.

The aim of this chapter is to provide evidence-based recommendations for designing and implementing interventions that promote the well-being of institutional care workers in Europe. Nursing homes; residential facilities; and hospitals are central to Long-Term Care (LTC) systems; yet their sustainability depends on ensuring healthy and decent working conditions for staff who face demanding and emotionally intense environments. Drawing on the Care4Care project (Horizon Europe) and guided by the Job Demands–Resources (JD-R) theory; the chapter integrates quantitative and qualitative evidence from six European countries. The analysis highlights common challenges—such as excessive workload; interpersonal conflict; and workplace incivility—associated with burnout; work–life conflict; and physical exhaustion. Protective factors including autonomy; emotional support; and opportunities for professional development were also identified; though their availability varied depending on institutional and national frameworks. Moreover; emotionally intense situations and blurred boundaries between professional and personal life emerged as recurring issues; with cultural and organisational contexts shaping the way these experiences were managed. In light of this evidence; the chapter offers multilevel recommendations: organisational measures to promote supportive leadership; participatory decision-making; and structured peer-support systems; professional development initiatives to strengthen autonomy; recognition; and career pathways; and policy actions to ensure adequate staffing ratios; protections against workplace incivility; and fairer working conditions across Europe. By integrating comparative evidence with actionable recommendations; the chapter provides guidance for employers; policymakers; and professional associations to foster healthier and more sustainable institutional care environments that safeguard both worker well-being and the quality of care delivered.

Background/Objectives: Therapeutic adherence remains a critical challenge in the management of chronic conditions, yet most research has focused on pharmacological adherence from the perspective of physicians and pharmacists. The views of non-medical professionals — particularly physiotherapists, podiatrists, psychologists, and nurses — remain underrepresented. This study aims to explore how these four healthcare disciplines perceive the factors influencing therapeutic adherence, the strategies they use to support it, and how they address patient resilience in clinical practice. Methods: An exploratory qualitative study was conducted using semi-structured interviews with 32 healthcare professionals (8 per discipline) recruited through purposive sampling across diverse care settings in Seville, Spain. Data were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis following a hybrid deductive–inductive approach. Quality criteria were applied in accordance with the standards proposed by Lincoln and Guba. Results: Three thematic domains emerged. Patient-related factors; especially motivation, health literacy, illness beliefs, and socioeconomic constraints, were the most frequently identified determinants across all disciplines. Health system barriers, particularly limited consultation time and fragmented continuity of care, were also prominent. Discipline-specific strategies ranged from the teach-back technique and customized visual aids in nursing and podiatry, to functional goal-setting and group-based dynamics in physiotherapy, and expectation-setting and digital follow-up in psychology. Resilience was consistently described as a key mediating factor enabling patients to sustain adherence despite adversity. Conclusions: Therapeutic adherence is a multifactorial and discipline-sensitive phenomenon. The complementary strategies identified across professions support the value of coordinated interdisciplinary approaches. Resilience-informed interventions and profession-specific adherence training represent promising directions for improving clinical practice and professional education.