A Care Paradox: The Relationship Between Older Adults' Caregiving Arrangements and Institutionalization and Mortality.

IF 1.8 3区 社会学 Q2 GERONTOLOGY
Research on Aging Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-22 DOI:10.1177/01640275241229416
Meggan Jordan, Kenzie Latham-Mintus, Sarah E Patterson
{"title":"A Care Paradox: The Relationship Between Older Adults' Caregiving Arrangements and Institutionalization and Mortality.","authors":"Meggan Jordan, Kenzie Latham-Mintus, Sarah E Patterson","doi":"10.1177/01640275241229416","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We investigate how the type of caregiving arrangement is associated with older Americans' outcomes. We use the Health and Retirement Study (2004-2018) and discrete-time event history analysis to assess the odds of institutionalization or death over a 14-year period among older adults with limitations in Activities of Daily Living (ADLs; e.g., bathing). We consider caregiving arrangements as conventional (i.e., spouse or adult child), unconventional (e.g., extended family, employee, friend), or self-directed (i.e., no caregiver). We find a \"care paradox\" in that self-directing one's own care was associated with a lower risk of institutionalization or death compared with having conventional care (spouse/adult caregiver) and unconventional care (employee). Relative to conventional care, having an employee caregiver was associated with increased risk of institutionalization. Findings are still observed when controlling for level of impairment and various health-related factors. More research is needed to understand older adults who self-direct their own care.</p>","PeriodicalId":47983,"journal":{"name":"Research on Aging","volume":" ","pages":"363-385"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research on Aging","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01640275241229416","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We investigate how the type of caregiving arrangement is associated with older Americans' outcomes. We use the Health and Retirement Study (2004-2018) and discrete-time event history analysis to assess the odds of institutionalization or death over a 14-year period among older adults with limitations in Activities of Daily Living (ADLs; e.g., bathing). We consider caregiving arrangements as conventional (i.e., spouse or adult child), unconventional (e.g., extended family, employee, friend), or self-directed (i.e., no caregiver). We find a "care paradox" in that self-directing one's own care was associated with a lower risk of institutionalization or death compared with having conventional care (spouse/adult caregiver) and unconventional care (employee). Relative to conventional care, having an employee caregiver was associated with increased risk of institutionalization. Findings are still observed when controlling for level of impairment and various health-related factors. More research is needed to understand older adults who self-direct their own care.

护理悖论:老年人的护理安排与入住养老院和死亡率之间的关系》(A Care Paradox: The Relationship Between Older Adults' Caregiving Arrangements and Institutionalization and Mortality.
我们调查了护理安排类型与美国老年人的结果之间的关系。我们利用《健康与退休研究》(2004-2018 年)和离散时间事件历史分析,评估了 14 年间日常生活活动(ADLs)受限的老年人入住养老院或死亡的几率。我们将照护安排视为传统的(即配偶或成年子女)、非传统的(如大家庭、雇员、朋友)或自主的(即没有照护者)。我们发现了一个 "照护悖论",即与传统照护(配偶/成年照护者)和非传统照护(雇员)相比,自我照护与较低的入院或死亡风险相关。与传统护理方式相比,由雇员提供护理则会增加入院风险。在控制了受损程度和各种健康相关因素后,研究结果仍然可以被观察到。需要进行更多的研究,以了解自我指导护理的老年人。
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
Research on Aging
Research on Aging GERONTOLOGY-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
59
期刊介绍: Research on Aging is an interdisciplinary journal designed to reflect the expanding role of research in the field of social gerontology. Research on Aging exists to provide for publication of research in the broad range of disciplines concerned with aging. Scholars from the disciplines of sociology, geriatrics, history, psychology, anthropology, public health, economics, political science, criminal justice, and social work are encouraged to contribute articles to the journal. Emphasis will be on materials of broad scope and cross-disciplinary interest. Assessment of the current state of knowledge is as important as provision of an outlet for new knowledge, so critical and review articles are welcomed. Systematic attention to particular topics will also be featured.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信