Abstract
Abstract
Purpose
The provision and funding of long-term care (LTC) for older people varies between European countries. Despite differences, there is limited information about the comparative performance of LTC systems in Europe. In this study, we compared quality of life (QoL) of informal carers of home care service users in Austria, England and Finland.
Methods
Informal carers were surveyed in Austria, England and Finland. The study data (n = 835) contained information on social care-related quality of life (SCRQoL) associated with the ASCOT-Carer measure, and characteristics of carers and care recipients from each country. We applied risk-adjustment methods using a fractional regression model to produce risk-adjusted SCRQoL scores for the comparative analysis. In a sensitivity analysis, we applied multiple imputation to missing data to validate our findings.
Results
We found that the mean values of the risk-adjusted SCRQoL of informal carers in England were 1.4–2.9% and 0.3–0.5% higher than in Finland and Austria, and the mean values of the risk-adjusted SCRQoL of carers in Austria were 0.8–2.7% higher than in Finland. Differences in the mean values of the country-specific risk-adjusted SCRQoL scores were small and statistically non-significant. English informal carers were less healthy and co-resided with care resipients more often than carers in Austria or Finland.
Conclusion
Small differences between the risk-adjusted SCRQoL scores between Austria, England and Finland are consistent with the observation that the countries provide different types of support for informal carers. Our results help local and national decision-makers in these countries to benchmark their informal care support systems.
Funder
University of Eastern Finland
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference53 articles.
1. Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs (2021). The 2021 Ageing Report. Economic and budgetary projections for the EU-28 member states (2019–2070) Publications Office, 2021, Retrieved March 7, 2023, from https://doi.org/10.2765/84455
2. Fujisawa, R., & Colombo, F. (2009). The Long-Term Care Workforce: Overview and Strategies to Adapt Supply to a Growing Demand. OECD Health Working Papers, Retreived March 7, 2023, from https://doi.org/10.1787/225350638472.
3. Colombo, F., Llena-Nozal, A., Mercier, J., & Tjadens, F. (2011). Help wanted? Providing and Paying for Long-Term Care. OECD Health Policy Studies, OECD Publishing, Paris, Retrieved March 7, 2023, from https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264097759-en.
4. European Commission, Directorare-General for Economic and Financial Affairs (2016). Joint report on health care and long-term care systems and fiscal sustainability, Volume 1, Publications Office, Retrieved March 7, 2023, from https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2765/680422.
5. Häkkinen, U., Iversen, T., Peltola, M., Rehnberg, C., & Seppälä, T. T. (2015). Towards explaining international differences in health care performance: Results of the EuroHOPE project. Health Economics, 24(Suppl 2), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.3282.