Author:
Jiang Wenjing,Yang Hongyan
Abstract
Abstract
Background
To alleviate the shortage of caregivers associated with disabled persons, China has implemented a pilot policy for long-term care insurance. This policy has the characteristics of "familialization" and "de-familialization" policy orientation, and it is indeed essential to clarify whether the policy has a positive spillover effect on the health of family caregivers, which is of great value to the pilot from local practice to national institutional arrangement.
Methods
Based on the China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study microdata and time-varying DID method, our study used the implementation of the pilot policy as a "quasi-natural experiment" to assess the health spillover effects of the pilot policy on family spousal caregivers.
Results
This policy significantly improved the health of spousal caregivers, increasing self-rated health and life satisfaction, and reducing depression; Compared with female, urban and central-western spousal caregivers, male, rural and eastern spousal caregivers were "beneficiaries" in more dimensional health.
Conclusions
Our research indicated that spousal caregivers of disabled people, particularly male, rural and eastern spousal caregivers, experienced positive health spillovers after implementing long-term care insurance. These results suggest that the imbalance between supply and demand of nursing staff could be solved in terms of de-familialization and familialization, spousal caregivers should be promoted to equally enjoy the policy benefits on gender, urban–rural and regions.
Funder
the Planning Fund Project of the Ministry of Education of the People's Republic of China
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Health Policy
Reference27 articles.
1. OECD. Spending on long-term care. 2020. https://www.oecd.org/health/health-systems/Spending-on-long-term-care-Brief-November-2020.pdf. Accessed 7 Aug 2023.
2. OECD. Health at a Glance 2021. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1787/ae3016b9-en.
3. Tan X. Familism in the Welfare Regimes: Concept, Connotation and Controversy. Ningxia Soc Sci. 2020;57–66. https://kns.cnki.net/KXReader/Detail?invoice=v94Z9HakW33GZu8oo2J9zxNQjLmMrlaIhrapfgt%2FiGsxpkt%2BkuoOvbTQPXNAZfpujTgokJaKhvdfsJJKREk2%2BCakQKhfEWYpXov8llBR8ur%2BZbyAKaXR860ONr%2B2eDAlgmHrZ4UQYHhYHqED5DHSeKmME4JkQu61ML50Izwmzoc%3D&DBCODE=CJFD&FileName=LXSK202006009&TABLEName=cjfdlast2020&nonce=F9A97853B5004D20A6CA849E36CE4A7E&TIMESTAMP=1688553301590&uid.
4. Calvó-Perxas L, Vilalta-Franch J, Litwin H, Mira P, Garre-Olmo J. A longitudinal study on public policy and the health of in-house caregivers in Europe. Health Policy. 2021;125:436–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2021.02.001.
5. Ma C, Yu Q, Song Z, Chen H. Long-term care insurance, the control of medical expenses and “Value-Based Health Care". China Ind Econ. 2019;12:42–59. https://doi.org/10.19581/j.cnki.ciejournal.2019.12.003.
Cited by
6 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献