确定老年人的长期护理需求水平:走向标准化的欧洲分类。

IF 2 3区 社会学 Q2 GERONTOLOGY Journal of Aging & Social Policy Pub Date : 2023-11-02 Epub Date: 2022-08-11 DOI:10.1080/08959420.2022.2110810
Platon Tinios, Zafiris Valvis
{"title":"确定老年人的长期护理需求水平:走向标准化的欧洲分类。","authors":"Platon Tinios,&nbsp;Zafiris Valvis","doi":"10.1080/08959420.2022.2110810","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>International comparisons of long-term care (LTC) are hampered by inconsistencies in how to define the need for care. This is especially relevant for the European Union, whose Aging Working Group, which is tasked to project aging expenditure in the long term, has over time used two competing definitions - one based on inability to perform Activities of Daily Living (ADL) and another based on the more subjective Global Activity Limitation Index (GALI). The inconsistency in measurement, as well as problems in defining the intensity of needs, will acquire growing significance as longevity progresses. This paper investigates how the two measures are linked, by analyzing a large European sample survey where respondents replied to both questions. This allows a calibration of the two measures and an investigation of their areas of overlap and difference. The paper concludes by proposing a simple new 4-scale measure of care needs which, by combining the two metrics, introduces some gradation of the intensity of care. Using a consistent measure incorporating intensity, such as the one proposed, will facilitate international comparisons, improve long-term expenditure projections, and aid policy discussion, including the transfer of best practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":47121,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Aging & Social Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Defining Long-Term-Care Need Levels for Older Adults: Towards a Standardized European Classification.\",\"authors\":\"Platon Tinios,&nbsp;Zafiris Valvis\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/08959420.2022.2110810\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>International comparisons of long-term care (LTC) are hampered by inconsistencies in how to define the need for care. This is especially relevant for the European Union, whose Aging Working Group, which is tasked to project aging expenditure in the long term, has over time used two competing definitions - one based on inability to perform Activities of Daily Living (ADL) and another based on the more subjective Global Activity Limitation Index (GALI). The inconsistency in measurement, as well as problems in defining the intensity of needs, will acquire growing significance as longevity progresses. This paper investigates how the two measures are linked, by analyzing a large European sample survey where respondents replied to both questions. This allows a calibration of the two measures and an investigation of their areas of overlap and difference. The paper concludes by proposing a simple new 4-scale measure of care needs which, by combining the two metrics, introduces some gradation of the intensity of care. Using a consistent measure incorporating intensity, such as the one proposed, will facilitate international comparisons, improve long-term expenditure projections, and aid policy discussion, including the transfer of best practice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47121,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Aging & Social Policy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Aging & Social Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/08959420.2022.2110810\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/8/11 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GERONTOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Aging & Social Policy","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08959420.2022.2110810","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/8/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

长期护理(LTC)的国际比较因如何定义护理需求的不一致而受到阻碍。这对欧盟来说尤其重要,其老龄化工作组的任务是长期预测老龄化支出,随着时间的推移,它使用了两个相互竞争的定义——一个基于无法进行日常生活活动,另一个基于更主观的全球活动限制指数。随着寿命的延长,测量的不一致性以及定义需求强度的问题将变得越来越重要。本文通过分析一项大型欧洲抽样调查,调查了这两项指标是如何联系在一起的,受访者对这两个问题都做出了回答。这允许校准这两种测量,并调查它们的重叠和差异区域。最后,本文提出了一个简单的新的护理需求4尺度衡量标准,通过将这两个指标相结合,引入了护理强度的一些等级。使用一种包含强度的一致措施,如拟议的措施,将有助于国际比较,改善长期支出预测,并促进援助政策讨论,包括最佳做法的转让。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Defining Long-Term-Care Need Levels for Older Adults: Towards a Standardized European Classification.

International comparisons of long-term care (LTC) are hampered by inconsistencies in how to define the need for care. This is especially relevant for the European Union, whose Aging Working Group, which is tasked to project aging expenditure in the long term, has over time used two competing definitions - one based on inability to perform Activities of Daily Living (ADL) and another based on the more subjective Global Activity Limitation Index (GALI). The inconsistency in measurement, as well as problems in defining the intensity of needs, will acquire growing significance as longevity progresses. This paper investigates how the two measures are linked, by analyzing a large European sample survey where respondents replied to both questions. This allows a calibration of the two measures and an investigation of their areas of overlap and difference. The paper concludes by proposing a simple new 4-scale measure of care needs which, by combining the two metrics, introduces some gradation of the intensity of care. Using a consistent measure incorporating intensity, such as the one proposed, will facilitate international comparisons, improve long-term expenditure projections, and aid policy discussion, including the transfer of best practice.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
13.00
自引率
3.90%
发文量
57
期刊介绍: The Journal of Aging & Social Policy offers a platform for insightful contributions from an international and interdisciplinary group of policy analysts and scholars. It provides an in-depth examination and analysis of critical phenomena that impact aging and the development and implementation of programs for the elderly from a global perspective, with a broad scope that encompasses not only the United States but also regions including Europe, the Middle East, Australia, Latin America, Asia, and the Asia-Pacific rim. The journal regularly addresses a wide array of issues such as long-term services and supports, home- and community-based care, nursing-home care, assisted living, long-term care financing, financial security, employment and training, public and private pension coverage, housing, transportation, health care access, financing, and quality, family dynamics, and retirement. These topics are of significant importance to the field of aging and social policy, reflecting the journal's commitment to presenting a comprehensive view of the challenges and solutions related to aging populations around the world.
期刊最新文献
Does Social Support Alleviate the Caregiving Burden of Adult Children? Evidence from Chinese Long-Term Care Insurance Pilot Program. Mass Media Exposure Moderates the Association of Education and Wealth with Enrollment in Health Insurance Among Older Adults Aged 60 Years and Older in India. The Impact of Age-Based COVID-19 Pandemic Regulations on Older People in Turkey: A Capability Approach. Provision of Home & Community Based Services to Veterans by Race, Rurality, and Neighborhood Deprivation Index. Understanding Organizational Resilience of Care Homes for Older People During COVID-19 in China: A Qualitative Study with Post-Pandemic Policy Implications.
×
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