A Care Paradox: The Relationship Between Older Adults' Caregiving Arrangements and Institutionalization and Mortality.

IF 1.8 3区 社会学 Q2 GERONTOLOGY Research on Aging Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-22 DOI:10.1177/01640275241229416
Meggan Jordan, Kenzie Latham-Mintus, Sarah E Patterson
{"title":"A Care Paradox: The Relationship Between Older Adults' Caregiving Arrangements and Institutionalization and Mortality.","authors":"Meggan Jordan, Kenzie Latham-Mintus, Sarah E Patterson","doi":"10.1177/01640275241229416","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We investigate how the type of caregiving arrangement is associated with older Americans' outcomes. We use the Health and Retirement Study (2004-2018) and discrete-time event history analysis to assess the odds of institutionalization or death over a 14-year period among older adults with limitations in Activities of Daily Living (ADLs; e.g., bathing). We consider caregiving arrangements as conventional (i.e., spouse or adult child), unconventional (e.g., extended family, employee, friend), or self-directed (i.e., no caregiver). We find a \"care paradox\" in that self-directing one's own care was associated with a lower risk of institutionalization or death compared with having conventional care (spouse/adult caregiver) and unconventional care (employee). Relative to conventional care, having an employee caregiver was associated with increased risk of institutionalization. Findings are still observed when controlling for level of impairment and various health-related factors. More research is needed to understand older adults who self-direct their own care.</p>","PeriodicalId":47983,"journal":{"name":"Research on Aging","volume":" ","pages":"363-385"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11629336/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research on Aging","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01640275241229416","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We investigate how the type of caregiving arrangement is associated with older Americans' outcomes. We use the Health and Retirement Study (2004-2018) and discrete-time event history analysis to assess the odds of institutionalization or death over a 14-year period among older adults with limitations in Activities of Daily Living (ADLs; e.g., bathing). We consider caregiving arrangements as conventional (i.e., spouse or adult child), unconventional (e.g., extended family, employee, friend), or self-directed (i.e., no caregiver). We find a "care paradox" in that self-directing one's own care was associated with a lower risk of institutionalization or death compared with having conventional care (spouse/adult caregiver) and unconventional care (employee). Relative to conventional care, having an employee caregiver was associated with increased risk of institutionalization. Findings are still observed when controlling for level of impairment and various health-related factors. More research is needed to understand older adults who self-direct their own care.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
护理悖论:老年人的护理安排与入住养老院和死亡率之间的关系》(A Care Paradox: The Relationship Between Older Adults' Caregiving Arrangements and Institutionalization and Mortality.
我们调查了护理安排类型与美国老年人的结果之间的关系。我们利用《健康与退休研究》(2004-2018 年)和离散时间事件历史分析,评估了 14 年间日常生活活动(ADLs)受限的老年人入住养老院或死亡的几率。我们将照护安排视为传统的(即配偶或成年子女)、非传统的(如大家庭、雇员、朋友)或自主的(即没有照护者)。我们发现了一个 "照护悖论",即与传统照护(配偶/成年照护者)和非传统照护(雇员)相比,自我照护与较低的入院或死亡风险相关。与传统护理方式相比,由雇员提供护理则会增加入院风险。在控制了受损程度和各种健康相关因素后,研究结果仍然可以被观察到。需要进行更多的研究,以了解自我指导护理的老年人。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Research on Aging
Research on Aging GERONTOLOGY-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
59
期刊介绍: Research on Aging is an interdisciplinary journal designed to reflect the expanding role of research in the field of social gerontology. Research on Aging exists to provide for publication of research in the broad range of disciplines concerned with aging. Scholars from the disciplines of sociology, geriatrics, history, psychology, anthropology, public health, economics, political science, criminal justice, and social work are encouraged to contribute articles to the journal. Emphasis will be on materials of broad scope and cross-disciplinary interest. Assessment of the current state of knowledge is as important as provision of an outlet for new knowledge, so critical and review articles are welcomed. Systematic attention to particular topics will also be featured.
期刊最新文献
Spousal Caregiving Types and Cognitive Trajectories Among Middle-Aged and Older Adults in China. Linking Multi-Dimensional Religiosity in Childhood and Later Adulthood: Implications for Later Life Health. Key Informants' Visions and Solutions to Improve Home- and Community-Based Services for Older Adults and Persons With Dementia. Religious Involvement and Cognitive Function Among White, Black, and Hispanic Older Adults. Dyadic Appraisals of Family Decisions and Health Tasks in Midlife-Older Couples.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1