Shabnam Ghasemyani, M. Jafari, Ahmad Ahmadi Teymourlouy, Reza Faday-Vatan
{"title":"Components of Elderly Long-term Care System in Iran and Selected Countries: A Comparative Study","authors":"Shabnam Ghasemyani, M. Jafari, Ahmad Ahmadi Teymourlouy, Reza Faday-Vatan","doi":"10.5812/jhealthscope.109140","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Context: With the increasing number of the elderly suffering from chronic diseases and disabilities, elderly long-term care (LTC) has been the subject of attention by health and welfare policymakers. This study aimed to compare the components of LTC for the elderly in Iran and selected countries. Methods: This comparative study was conducted in 2020. The search was conducted in three databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science), two search engines (Google Scholar and Google), and the websites of WHO and the Ministry of Health and Welfare of the selected countries from 2000 to 2020 to find relevant documents on the subject. The selection of countries was based on three criteria: the type of health system, having the highest percentage of the elderly population, and the development status. Finally, Germany, France, Sweden, Japan, South Korea, Turkey, Thailand, and Iran were included in the study. The findings were organized using a common LTC framework. Results: In this study, the common framework of LTC systems, including beneficiaries, benefits packages, providers, and financing, was used. The study results showed that developed countries had formal LTC systems with specific mechanisms, but each country had differences in the implementation of different components of this system. On the other hand, in most developing countries, sporadic measures were taken in this field. Conclusions: In general, developed countries have adopted different LTC system approaches in the organization, financing, type of services, and generosity of benefits. In choosing the appropriate LTC model in developing countries, factors such as the health system, resource constraints, social, and cultural status should be considered.","PeriodicalId":12857,"journal":{"name":"Health Scope","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Scope","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5812/jhealthscope.109140","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4
Abstract
Context: With the increasing number of the elderly suffering from chronic diseases and disabilities, elderly long-term care (LTC) has been the subject of attention by health and welfare policymakers. This study aimed to compare the components of LTC for the elderly in Iran and selected countries. Methods: This comparative study was conducted in 2020. The search was conducted in three databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science), two search engines (Google Scholar and Google), and the websites of WHO and the Ministry of Health and Welfare of the selected countries from 2000 to 2020 to find relevant documents on the subject. The selection of countries was based on three criteria: the type of health system, having the highest percentage of the elderly population, and the development status. Finally, Germany, France, Sweden, Japan, South Korea, Turkey, Thailand, and Iran were included in the study. The findings were organized using a common LTC framework. Results: In this study, the common framework of LTC systems, including beneficiaries, benefits packages, providers, and financing, was used. The study results showed that developed countries had formal LTC systems with specific mechanisms, but each country had differences in the implementation of different components of this system. On the other hand, in most developing countries, sporadic measures were taken in this field. Conclusions: In general, developed countries have adopted different LTC system approaches in the organization, financing, type of services, and generosity of benefits. In choosing the appropriate LTC model in developing countries, factors such as the health system, resource constraints, social, and cultural status should be considered.
背景:随着越来越多的老年人患有慢性疾病和残疾,老年人长期护理(LTC)已成为卫生和福利政策制定者关注的主题。本研究旨在比较伊朗和选定国家老年人LTC的成分。方法:本对比研究于2020年进行。检索在三个数据库(PubMed、Scopus和Web of Science)、两个搜索引擎(谷歌Scholar和谷歌)以及选定国家的世界卫生组织和卫生福利部网站上进行,检索时间为2000年至2020年,以查找与该主题相关的文件。国家的选择基于三个标准:卫生系统类型、老年人口比例最高和发展状况。最后,德国、法国、瑞典、日本、韩国、土耳其、泰国和伊朗也被纳入了研究。这些发现是使用一个通用的LTC框架进行组织的。结果:在本研究中,使用了LTC系统的共同框架,包括受益人、福利方案、提供者和融资。研究结果表明,发达国家拥有具有特定机制的正式LTC制度,但各国在实施该制度不同组成部分方面存在差异。另一方面,在大多数发展中国家,在这方面采取了零星的措施。结论:总的来说,发达国家在组织、融资、服务类型和福利慷慨方面采用了不同的长期服务中心系统方法。在发展中国家选择适当的长期合作模式时,应考虑卫生系统、资源限制、社会和文化地位等因素。