COVID-19 and policies for care homes in the first wave of the pandemic in European welfare states: Too little, too late?

IF 2.7 1区 社会学 Q2 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Mary Daly, Margarita León, Birgit Pfau-Effinger, Costanzo Ranci, Tine Rostgaard
{"title":"COVID-19 and policies for care homes in the first wave of the pandemic in European welfare states: Too little, too late?","authors":"Mary Daly,&nbsp;Margarita León,&nbsp;Birgit Pfau-Effinger,&nbsp;Costanzo Ranci,&nbsp;Tine Rostgaard","doi":"10.1177/09589287211055672","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article examines COVID-19 and residential care for older people during the first wave of the pandemic in 2020, comparing a range of countries - Denmark, England, Germany, Italy and Spain - to identify the policy approaches taken to the virus in care homes and set these in institutional and policy context. Pandemic policies towards care homes are compared in terms of lockdown, testing and the supply of personal protective equipment. The comparative analysis shows a clear cross-national clustering: Denmark and Germany group together by virtue of the proactive approach adopted, whereas England, Italy and Spain had major weaknesses resulting in delayed and generally inadequate responses. The article goes on to show that these outcomes and country clustering are embedded in particular long-term care (LTC) policy systems. The factors that we highlight as especially important in differentiating the countries are the resourcing of the sector, the regulation of LTC and care homes, and the degree of vertical (and to a lesser extent horizontal) coordination in the sector and between it and the health sector.</p>","PeriodicalId":47919,"journal":{"name":"Journal of European Social Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8841898/pdf/10.1177_09589287211055672.pdf","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of European Social Policy","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09589287211055672","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

This article examines COVID-19 and residential care for older people during the first wave of the pandemic in 2020, comparing a range of countries - Denmark, England, Germany, Italy and Spain - to identify the policy approaches taken to the virus in care homes and set these in institutional and policy context. Pandemic policies towards care homes are compared in terms of lockdown, testing and the supply of personal protective equipment. The comparative analysis shows a clear cross-national clustering: Denmark and Germany group together by virtue of the proactive approach adopted, whereas England, Italy and Spain had major weaknesses resulting in delayed and generally inadequate responses. The article goes on to show that these outcomes and country clustering are embedded in particular long-term care (LTC) policy systems. The factors that we highlight as especially important in differentiating the countries are the resourcing of the sector, the regulation of LTC and care homes, and the degree of vertical (and to a lesser extent horizontal) coordination in the sector and between it and the health sector.

COVID-19和欧洲福利国家在第一波大流行中的养老院政策:太少,太晚了?
本文研究了2020年第一波大流行期间的COVID-19和老年人寄宿护理,比较了丹麦、英格兰、德国、意大利和西班牙等一系列国家,以确定在养老院采取的应对病毒的政策方法,并将这些方法置于制度和政策背景下。在封锁、检测和个人防护装备供应方面,对养老院的大流行政策进行了比较。比较分析显示了一个明显的跨国聚类:丹麦和德国由于采取了积极主动的方法而归为一类,而英格兰、意大利和西班牙则有重大弱点,导致反应迟缓和普遍不充分。本文进一步表明,这些结果和国家集群已嵌入特定的长期护理(LTC)政策体系中。我们强调,在区分国家方面特别重要的因素是该部门的资源、长期护理中心和护理院的监管,以及该部门及其与卫生部门之间的垂直(在较小程度上是水平)协调程度。
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
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
6.70%
发文量
40
期刊介绍: The Journal of European Social Policy publishes articles on all aspects of social policy in Europe. Papers should make a contribution to understanding and knowledge in the field, and we particularly welcome scholarly papers which integrate innovative theoretical insights and rigorous empirical analysis, as well as those which use or develop new methodological approaches. The Journal is interdisciplinary in scope and both social policy and Europe are conceptualized broadly. Articles may address multi-level policy making in the European Union and elsewhere; provide cross-national comparative studies; and include comparisons with areas outside Europe.
×
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