Hughes Jane, Reilly Siobhan, Berzins Kathryn, Abell Jessica, Stewart Karen, Challis David
Personal Social Services Research Unit, University of Manchester, Manchester.
Care Manag J. 2011;12(4):194-201. doi: 10.1891/1521-0987.12.4.194.
For many years, there has been an international concern about the fragmented nature of health and social care services for vulnerable older people and younger adults. This article examines the implementation of two major policies in England designed to ensure frail adults and older people receive services appropriate to their needs. First, care management, which was introduced in 1993 and provided by local government, and second case management, which was introduced in 2005 and provided by primary care through the National Health Service. An analysis of the implementation of the two policies is presented, and data from two national surveys are used to describe similarities and differences between the two approaches in terms of goals, arrangements, service characteristics, and indicators of integration and differentiation within care coordination arrangements. Both were designed to promote the provision of care at home as an alternative to more costly alternatives. Discretion within the policy implementation process has militated against the development of a more differentiated approach to care management in local authorities as compared with case management in primary care trusts and more generally, integration between the two. Future developments within both service settings will be influenced by the introduction of personal budgets.
多年来,弱势老年人和年轻人的健康与社会护理服务碎片化问题一直受到国际关注。本文考察了英格兰旨在确保体弱成年人和老年人获得符合其需求的服务的两项主要政策的实施情况。一是1993年引入、由地方政府提供的护理管理,二是2005年引入、由初级保健通过国民医疗服务体系提供的病例管理。本文对这两项政策的实施情况进行了分析,并利用两项全国性调查的数据,从目标、安排、服务特点以及护理协调安排中的整合与分化指标等方面,描述了这两种方法的异同。两者都旨在促进居家护理的提供,作为更昂贵替代方案的一种选择。与初级保健信托机构的病例管理相比,政策实施过程中的自由裁量权不利于地方当局发展更具差异化的护理管理方法,更普遍地说,不利于两者之间的整合。两种服务环境的未来发展都将受到个人预算引入的影响。