Going Formal or Informal, Who Cares? The Influence of Public Long-Term Care Insurance

P. Bakx, Claudine de Meijer, E. Schut, E. van Doorslaer
{"title":"Going Formal or Informal, Who Cares? The Influence of Public Long-Term Care Insurance","authors":"P. Bakx, Claudine de Meijer, E. Schut, E. van Doorslaer","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2211670","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"International differences in long-term care (LTC) use are well documented, but not well understood. Using comparable data from two countries with universal public LTC insurance, the Netherlands and Germany, we examine how institutional differences relate to differences in the choice for informal and formal LTC. Although the overall LTC utilization rate is similar in both countries, use of formal care is more prevalent in the Netherlands and informal care use in Germany. Decomposition of the between-country differences in formal and informal LTC use reveals that these differences are not chiefly the result of differences in population characteristics but mainly derive from differences in the effects of these characteristics that are associated with between-country institutional differences. These findings demonstrate that system features such as eligibility rules and coverage generosity and, indirectly, social preferences can influence the choice between formal and informal care. Less comprehensive coverage also has equity implications: for the poor, access to formal LTC is more difficult in Germany than in the Netherlands.","PeriodicalId":177602,"journal":{"name":"Health Care Delivery & Financing eJournal","volume":"121 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-02-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"77","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Care Delivery & Financing eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2211670","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 77

Abstract

International differences in long-term care (LTC) use are well documented, but not well understood. Using comparable data from two countries with universal public LTC insurance, the Netherlands and Germany, we examine how institutional differences relate to differences in the choice for informal and formal LTC. Although the overall LTC utilization rate is similar in both countries, use of formal care is more prevalent in the Netherlands and informal care use in Germany. Decomposition of the between-country differences in formal and informal LTC use reveals that these differences are not chiefly the result of differences in population characteristics but mainly derive from differences in the effects of these characteristics that are associated with between-country institutional differences. These findings demonstrate that system features such as eligibility rules and coverage generosity and, indirectly, social preferences can influence the choice between formal and informal care. Less comprehensive coverage also has equity implications: for the poor, access to formal LTC is more difficult in Germany than in the Netherlands.
正式还是非正式,谁在乎?公共长期护理保险的影响
长期护理(LTC)使用的国际差异有充分的记录,但尚未得到很好的理解。利用荷兰和德国这两个拥有普遍公共LTC保险的国家的可比数据,我们研究了制度差异与非正式和正式LTC选择差异之间的关系。尽管两国长期护理中心的总体使用率相似,但荷兰使用正规护理更为普遍,德国使用非正规护理。对国家间正式和非正式LTC使用差异的分解表明,这些差异主要不是人口特征差异的结果,而是主要源于与国家间制度差异相关的这些特征的影响差异。这些发现表明,诸如资格规则和覆盖范围慷慨以及间接的社会偏好等制度特征可以影响正式和非正式护理之间的选择。覆盖面不够全面也会对公平产生影响:对于穷人来说,在德国获得正式的长期医疗服务比在荷兰更难。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信