Peer-reviewed article
A systematic review of occupational well-being among child welfare workers
Karmen Toros, Rafaela Lehtme ·
Summary
Written by AI, not yet AICS's view · claude-haiku-4-5-20251001This systematic review examines occupational well-being among child welfare workers, identifying risk and protective factors at individual, organizational, and systemic levels. The review synthesized 30 peer-reviewed studies published between 2012 and 2025 following PRISMA guidelines. Key risks include burnout, secondary traumatic stress, high workloads, and policy instability, while protective factors include resilience, coping strategies, positive work climate, and adequate resources. The authors recommend multi-level strategies to sustain worker well-being and support retention.
Key points
- Individual risks for child welfare workers include burnout, secondary traumatic stress, and work-life conflict
- Organizational risks centre on high workloads, role ambiguity, and limited support
- Systemic risks include policy instability, underfunding, and negative societal perceptions
- Protective factors at organizational level include positive work climate, adequate resources, and professional development
- Multi-level strategies are needed to sustain worker well-being and ensure quality services for children and families
Limitations
This review focuses on the well-being of workers rather than direct outcomes for children. The document does not evaluate specific interventions to improve child welfare or assess impacts on child safety and development.
Abstract
Abstract This systematic review examines the occupational well-being of child welfare workers, a group highly vulnerable to stress and burnout. Following PRISMA guidelines, 30 peer-reviewed studies published between 2012 and 2025 were analyzed. Thematic synthesis identified risk and protective factors at individual, organizational, and systemic levels. Individual risks included burnout, secondary traumatic stress, and work–life conflict, while resilience, coping strategies, and occupational commitment emerged as protective resources. Organizational risks centred on high workloads, role ambiguity, and limited support, whereas positive work climate, adequate resources, and professional development were protective. Systemic risks included policy instability, underfunding, and negative societal perceptions, with coherent frameworks and workforce investment providing protection. The findings highlight the need for multi-level strategies to sustain worker well-being, support retention, and ensure quality services for children and families.