• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

长期护理对生活质量的影响。

The impact of long-term care on quality of life.

作者信息

Forder Julien, Vadean Florin, Rand Stacey, Malley Juliette

机构信息

Quality and Outcomes of Person-centred Care Policy Research Unit (QORU), PSSRU, University of Kent, UK.

Quality and Outcomes of Person-centred Care Policy Research Unit (QORU), PSSRU, London School of Economics, UK.

出版信息

Health Econ. 2018 Mar;27(3):e43-e58. doi: 10.1002/hec.3612. Epub 2017 Nov 3.

DOI:10.1002/hec.3612
PMID:29098741
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5901009/
Abstract

Long-term care services are provided to help people manage the consequences of impairment, but their impact goes beyond the meeting of basic needs. Accordingly, the main aim was to explore the marginal effectiveness of care when measured in terms of people's overall care-related quality of life (CRQoL) and assess changes in marginal effect for increasing intensity. The associated aim was to refine and apply an observational method to estimate marginal effectiveness. A "production function" approach was used with survey data, including Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit-measured CRQoL, whereby we statistically modelled the expected relationship between service utilisation rates and CRQoL. This method seeks to limit endogeneity issues by controlling on observables and using instrumental variable. Using a survey of publicly funded long-term care service users in England, we found that community-based long-term care significantly improved people's CRQoL but with diminishing marginal effects and effects differentiated by baseline impairment levels. There are implications for how the care system should respond to changes in global public budgets. For example, where there is unmet need, a system aimed to maximise (unadjusted) CRQoL would put more emphasis on access (more recipients) than intensity of support compared to a system operating on a needs basis.

摘要

长期护理服务旨在帮助人们应对功能受损的后果,但其影响远不止于满足基本需求。因此,主要目的是探讨以人们的整体护理相关生活质量(CRQoL)衡量护理的边际效果,并评估随着护理强度增加边际效果的变化。相关目的是完善并应用一种观察方法来估计边际效果。我们使用“生产函数”方法和调查数据,包括用成人社会护理结果工具包测量的CRQoL,通过统计建模服务利用率与CRQoL之间的预期关系。该方法旨在通过控制可观测因素并使用工具变量来限制内生性问题。通过对英格兰公共资助的长期护理服务使用者的调查,我们发现基于社区的长期护理显著改善了人们的CRQoL,但边际效果递减,且效果因基线受损水平而异。这对护理系统应如何应对全球公共预算的变化具有启示意义。例如,在存在未满足需求的情况下,如果一个旨在使(未经调整的)CRQoL最大化的系统,与一个基于需求运作的系统相比,会更强调获得护理的机会(更多接受者)而非支持强度。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/936f/5901009/929502883748/HEC-27-e43-g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/936f/5901009/50445dce517b/HEC-27-e43-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/936f/5901009/3b20152472bc/HEC-27-e43-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/936f/5901009/a3b443108f65/HEC-27-e43-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/936f/5901009/a338a9475646/HEC-27-e43-g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/936f/5901009/929502883748/HEC-27-e43-g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/936f/5901009/50445dce517b/HEC-27-e43-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/936f/5901009/3b20152472bc/HEC-27-e43-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/936f/5901009/a3b443108f65/HEC-27-e43-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/936f/5901009/a338a9475646/HEC-27-e43-g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/936f/5901009/929502883748/HEC-27-e43-g005.jpg

相似文献

1
The impact of long-term care on quality of life.长期护理对生活质量的影响。
Health Econ. 2018 Mar;27(3):e43-e58. doi: 10.1002/hec.3612. Epub 2017 Nov 3.
2
Does public long-term care expenditure improve care-related quality of life of service users in England?在英格兰,公共长期护理支出是否能提高服务使用者的与护理相关的生活质量?
Health Econ. 2021 Sep;30(10):2561-2581. doi: 10.1002/hec.4396. Epub 2021 Jul 27.
3
Is extending eligibility for adult social care better than investing more in existing users in England? A cross-sectional evidence for multiple financial years.在英格兰,延长成人社会护理资格的期限是否优于在现有使用者身上投入更多资金?跨多个财政年度的横截面证据。
BMJ Open. 2023 Sep 11;13(9):e070833. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-070833.
4
Using cost-effectiveness estimates from survey data to guide commissioning: an application to home care.利用调查数据中的成本效益评估来指导委托安排:居家护理的应用
Health Econ. 2014 Aug;23(8):979-92. doi: 10.1002/hec.2973. Epub 2013 Aug 27.
5
Unpacking the care-related quality of life effect of England's publicly funded adult social care. A panel data analysis.剖析英国公共资助的成人社会护理对与护理相关的生活质量的影响。一项面板数据分析。
Health Econ. 2025 Feb;34(2):246-266. doi: 10.1002/hec.4907. Epub 2024 Oct 5.
6
Measuring the productivity of residential long-term care in England: methods for quality adjustment and regional comparison.衡量英格兰住宅式长期护理的生产率:质量调整与区域比较方法
Eur J Health Econ. 2017 Jun;18(5):635-647. doi: 10.1007/s10198-016-0816-z. Epub 2016 Jul 16.
7
Positive behaviour support training for staff for treating challenging behaviour in people with intellectual disabilities: a cluster RCT.工作人员积极行为支持培训以治疗智障人士的挑战性行为:一项群组 RCT 研究。
Health Technol Assess. 2018 Mar;22(15):1-110. doi: 10.3310/hta22150.
8
Personal healthcare budgets: what can England learn from the Netherlands?个人医疗保健预算:英格兰能从荷兰学到什么?
BMJ. 2012 Mar 6;344:e1383. doi: 10.1136/bmj.e1383.
9
CollAborative care and active surveillance for Screen-Positive EldeRs with subthreshold depression (CASPER): a multicentred randomised controlled trial of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.针对筛查呈阳性的亚阈值抑郁症老年患者的协作护理与主动监测(CASPER):一项关于临床有效性和成本效益的多中心随机对照试验
Health Technol Assess. 2017 Feb;21(8):1-196. doi: 10.3310/hta21080.
10
Personalization in the health care system: do personal health budgets have an impact on outcomes and cost?医疗保健系统中的个性化:个人健康预算对结果和成本有影响吗?
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2013 Oct;18(2 Suppl):59-67. doi: 10.1177/1355819613503152. Epub 2013 Sep 18.

引用本文的文献

1
Use of the adult social care outcomes toolkit (ASCOT) in research studies: an international scoping review.成人社会护理结果工具包(ASCOT)在研究中的应用:一项国际范围综述
Qual Life Res. 2025 Apr 18. doi: 10.1007/s11136-025-03958-3.
2
There Is No Place Like Home: The Impact of Public Home-Based Care on the Mental Health and Well-Being of Older People.没有地方比得上家:居家公共护理对老年人心理健康和幸福感的影响。
Health Econ. 2025 Jun;34(6):1085-1102. doi: 10.1002/hec.4948. Epub 2025 Feb 20.
3
Unpacking the care-related quality of life effect of England's publicly funded adult social care. A panel data analysis.

本文引用的文献

1
Do hospital-owned skilled nursing facilities provide better post-acute care quality?医院拥有的专业护理机构能提供更高质量的急性后期护理吗?
J Health Econ. 2016 Dec;50:36-46. doi: 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2016.08.004. Epub 2016 Sep 3.
2
Quality of life instruments for economic evaluations in health and social care for older people: a systematic review.用于老年人健康和社会护理经济评估的生活质量工具:系统评价。
Soc Sci Med. 2014 Feb;102:83-93. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2013.11.050. Epub 2013 Dec 4.
3
Using cost-effectiveness estimates from survey data to guide commissioning: an application to home care.
剖析英国公共资助的成人社会护理对与护理相关的生活质量的影响。一项面板数据分析。
Health Econ. 2025 Feb;34(2):246-266. doi: 10.1002/hec.4907. Epub 2024 Oct 5.
4
Quality of life outcomes for informal carers of long-term care service users in Austria, England and Finland.奥地利、英国和芬兰长期护理服务使用者的非正式照护者的生活质量结果。
Qual Life Res. 2024 Sep;33(9):2477-2488. doi: 10.1007/s11136-024-03711-2. Epub 2024 Jun 22.
5
Is extending eligibility for adult social care better than investing more in existing users in England? A cross-sectional evidence for multiple financial years.在英格兰,延长成人社会护理资格的期限是否优于在现有使用者身上投入更多资金?跨多个财政年度的横截面证据。
BMJ Open. 2023 Sep 11;13(9):e070833. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-070833.
6
The Impact of Wages on Care Home Quality in England.英国工资对养老院质量的影响。
Gerontologist. 2023 Oct 17;63(9):1428-1436. doi: 10.1093/geront/gnad032.
7
Well-being right before and after a permanent nursing home admission.长期入住养老院前后的幸福感。
Health Econ. 2022 Dec;31(12):2558-2574. doi: 10.1002/hec.4595. Epub 2022 Sep 4.
8
The quality of life of older carers and the people they support: An international scoping review.老年照顾者及其所支持的人的生活质量:国际范围的综述。
Health Soc Care Community. 2022 Nov;30(6):e3342-e3353. doi: 10.1111/hsc.13916. Epub 2022 Jul 21.
9
Social care-related quality of life of people with dementia and their carers in England.英格兰痴呆症患者及其照护者的与社会关怀相关的生活质量。
Health Soc Care Community. 2022 Sep;30(5):e2406-e2418. doi: 10.1111/hsc.13681. Epub 2021 Dec 17.
10
Causal impact of social care, public health and healthcare expenditure on mortality in England: cross-sectional evidence for 2013/2014.社会关怀、公共卫生和医疗保健支出对英格兰死亡率的因果影响:2013/2014 年的横断面证据。
BMJ Open. 2021 Oct 15;11(10):e046417. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-046417.
利用调查数据中的成本效益评估来指导委托安排:居家护理的应用
Health Econ. 2014 Aug;23(8):979-92. doi: 10.1002/hec.2973. Epub 2013 Aug 27.
4
Flat-of-the-curve medicine: a new perspective on the production of health.曲平医学:健康生产的新视角
Health Econ Rev. 2011 Jul 20;1(1):2. doi: 10.1186/2191-1991-1-2.
5
Outcomes of social care for adults: developing a preference-weighted measure.成人社会关怀结局:偏好加权测量的发展。
Health Technol Assess. 2012;16(16):1-166. doi: 10.3310/hta16160.
6
Measuring the outcomes of long-term care.长期护理的效果评估。
Soc Sci Med. 2011 Dec;73(12):1766-74. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.09.023. Epub 2011 Oct 10.
7
ESTIMATING MARGINAL RETURNS TO MEDICAL CARE: EVIDENCE FROM AT-RISK NEWBORNS.评估医疗护理的边际回报:来自高危新生儿的证据。
Q J Econ. 2010 May 1;125(2):591-634. doi: 10.1162/qjec.2010.125.2.591.
8
The value of medical spending in the United States, 1960-2000.1960年至2000年美国医疗支出的价值。
N Engl J Med. 2006 Aug 31;355(9):920-7. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa054744.
9
The return on investment in health care: from 1980 to 2000.医疗保健领域的投资回报率:1980年至2000年
Value Health. 2006 May-Jun;9(3):146-56. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2006.00095.x.
10
The cost-effectiveness of noninstitutional long-term care services: review and synthesis of the most recent evidence.非机构化长期护理服务的成本效益:最新证据综述与综合分析
Med Care Res Rev. 2006 Feb;63(1):3-28. doi: 10.1177/1077558705283120.