Role and potential influence of technologies on the most relevant challenges for long-term care. ENEPRI Research Report No. 113, 26 June 2012

This report considers three case studies (namely diabetes, dementia and obesity) for setting up a framework to assess the systemic influences of technologies in the long-term care milieu, using a problem-driven approach in relation to health care. Such technologies could be an enabling factor or a catalyser of advances taking place in the health and social sectors. They offer opportunities to support and amplify relevant organisational changes in the context of innovative care models, which stem from overall policies and regulations of a national or regional jurisdiction to address the future sustainability of health and social care.

Technological Solutions Potentially Influencing the Future of Long-Term Care. ENEPRI Research Report No. 114, April 2012

This report provides a forecast of the potential direct and indirect influences of various kinds of technologies on the LTC milieu, answering the following question: from a technology-driven perspective: “Consider each technological solution. What could be its future usage in the LTC sector?” Future technological deployments will induce changes in the respective roles of the care recipient and of the formal and informal carers, with an impact on three major concerns: the transformation of the care recipient into a proactive subject, the augmented potentiality for home care and the new functions that informal carers could assume.

Performance of long-term care systems in Europe. ENEPRI Policy Brief No. 13, December 2012

The evaluation of long-term care (LTC) systems carried out in Work Package 7 of the ANCIEN project shows which performance criteria are important and – based on the available information – how European countries score on those criteria. This paper summarises the results and discusses the policy implications. An overall evaluation was carried out for four representative countries: Germany, the Netherlands, Spain and Poland. Of the four countries, the Dutch system has the highest scores on quality of life of LTC users, quality of care and equity of the LTC system, and it performs the secondbest after Poland in terms of the total burden of care (consisting of the financial burden and the burden of informal caregiving). The German system has somewhat lower scores than the Dutch on all four dimensions. The Polish system excels in having a low total burden of care, but it scores the lowest on quality of care and equity. The Spanish system has few extreme scores. Some important lessons are the following. The performance of a LTC system is a complex concept where many dimensions have to be included. Specifically, the impact of informal caregiving on the caregivers and on society should not be forgotten. The role of the state in funding and organising LTC versus individual responsibilities is one of the most important differences among countries. Choices concerning private funding and the role of informal care have a large effect not only on the public expenditures but also on the fairness of the system. International research into the relative preferences for the different performance criteria could produce a sound basis for the weights used in the overall evaluation.

Performance of Long-Term Care Systems in Europe. ENEPRI Research Report No. 117, 21 December 2012

This report evaluates the performance of long-term care (LTC) systems in Europe, with a special emphasis on four countries that were selected in Work Package 1 of the ANCIEN project as representative of different LTC systems: Germany, the Netherlands, Spain and Poland. Based on a performance framework, we use the following four core criteria for the evaluation: the quality of life of LTC users, the quality of care, equity of LTC systems and the total burden of LTC (consisting of the financial burden and the burden of informal caregiving). The quality of life is analysed by studying the experience of LTC users in 13 European countries, using data from the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE). Older persons with limitations living at home have the highest probability of receiving help (formal or informal) in Germany and the lowest in Poland. Given that help is available, the sufficiency of the help is best ensured in Switzerland, Italy and the Netherlands. The indirectly observed properties of the LTC system are most favourable in France. An older person who considers all three aspects important might be best off living in Belgium or Switzerland. The horizontal and vertical equity of LTC systems are analysed for the four representative countries. The Dutch system scores highest on overall equity, followed by the German system. The Spanish and Polish systems are both less equitable than the Dutch and German systems. To show how ageing may affect the financial burden of LTC, projections until 2060 are given for LTC expenditures for the four representative countries. Under the base scenario, for all four countries the proportions of GDP spent on public and private LTC are projected to more than double between 2010 and 2060, and even treble in some cases. The projections also highlight the large differences in LTC expenditures between the four countries. The Netherlands spends by far the most on LTC. Furthermore, the report presents information for a number of European countries on quality of care, the burden of informal caregiving and other aspects of performance. The LTC systems for the four representative countries are evaluated using the four core criteria. The Dutch system has the highest scores on all four dimensions except the total burden of care, where it has the second-best score after Poland. The German system has somewhat lower scores than the Dutch on all four dimensions. The relatively large role for informal care lowers the equity of the German system. The Polish system excels in having a low total burden of care, but it scores lowest on quality of care and equity. The Spanish system has few extreme scores. Policy implications are discussed in the last chapter of this report and in the Policy Brief based on this report.

Statistical Appendices to “Performance of Long-Term Care Systems in Europe”. ENEPRI Research Report 117A, 21 December 2012

This document provides statistical appendices underpinning the research presented in ENEPRI Research Report No. 117, “Performance of Long-Term Care Systems in Europe”, December 2012. Esther Mot is Senior Researcher in the Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis (CPB) and Riemer Faber is researcher at CPB. Joanna Geerts is researcher and Peter Willemé is health economist in the Social Security Research Group at the Federal Planning Bureau (FPB).

Preventing Social Death in Long Term Care: Fostering Social Connectivity in the U.S. and The Netherlands. ACES Working Papers, July 2012

Long term care (LTC) is both costly and of increasing concern as baby boomers age and more people live longer with chronic conditions. Today, people receive formal and informal LTC supports in homes, nursing homes, and alternative settings around the world. Where people live and the way LTC is delivered has an important impact on whether person’s receiving care thrive as they age. This paper is about how different LTC environments in the U.S. and The Netherlands foster or impede social connectivity, suggesting that quality of life will be impeded and types of social death, or disconnection from social life, more often the result in environments that limit choice and self determination, limit access to privacy and social connection, and limit access to reciprocal exchanges, a key component of participating in relationships typical of the concept of “the gift” introduced by anthropologist Marcel Mauss in 1954. Building on ethnographic data from a 15-month study of LTC in The Netherlands and a review of staffing practices in LTC environments in the U.S. and The Netherlands, I will explore concepts of reciprocity and social connectivity impacted by various LTC environments in two countries known to experiment with different models of care. This research builds on social constructivist notions of death and dying explored throughout this edited volume and adds to this effort examination of social death in anthropological perspective.