Ailshire Jennifer A, Herrera Cristian A, Choi Eunyoung, Osuna Margarita, Suzuki Elina
Leonard Davis School of Gerontology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, USA.
The World Bank Group, Washington, DC, USA.
EClinicalMedicine. 2023 Mar 16;58:101911. doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2023.101911. eCollection 2023 Apr.
Socioeconomic inequality in access to and use of health services and social care provided near the end of life, or end-of-life care (EOLC), is not well understood in many countries. We examined wealth inequality in EOLC-hospital, nursing home, and hospice use and receipt of formal and informal caregiving-in 22 countries in Europe, Asia (South Korea), and North America (United States, Mexico).
We used harmonized data from nationally representative studies of people aged 50 and older that collected information on healthcare utilisation and caregiving receipt in the time preceding death. We categorized countries according to their level of public long-term care (LTC) spending and examined EOLC prevalence across countries. We used logistic regression models to estimate wealth inequality in each type of EOLC.
In the USA the least wealthy had more hospital (OR 1.30, = 0.008) and nursing home/care use (OR 1.88, < 0.001). In South Korea the least wealthy had more nursing home/care use (OR 2.24, = 0.003). The least wealthy in high LTC Europe had less hospice use (OR 0.56, = 0.003). The least wealthy were also less likely to be hospitalized in European countries with low LTC spending (OR 0.81, = 0.04), but more likely to receive informal caregiving (OR 1.25, = 0.033). Formal care was more common among the least wealthy in high LTC Europe (OR 1.57, = 0.002), the USA (OR 1.42, < 0.001) and South Korea (OR 1.69, = 0.028), but less common among the least wealthy in Mexico (OR 0.17, < 0.001).
Wealth inequality in EOLC exists across countries and reflects differences in the organization, financing, and delivery of care in different countries. The findings highlight the need to consider equity in current and future plans to improve EOLC access.
United States National Institute on Aging Grant R01AG030153.
在许多国家,人们对临终时获得和使用卫生服务及社会护理(即临终护理,EOLC)方面的社会经济不平等现象了解不足。我们研究了欧洲、亚洲(韩国)和北美洲(美国、墨西哥)22个国家在临终护理(医院、养老院和临终关怀机构的使用)以及接受正式和非正式护理方面的财富不平等情况。
我们使用了来自具有全国代表性的针对50岁及以上人群的研究的统一数据,这些数据收集了死亡前一段时间内的医疗保健利用情况和护理接受情况。我们根据公共长期护理(LTC)支出水平对国家进行分类,并研究各国的临终护理患病率。我们使用逻辑回归模型来估计每种临终护理类型中的财富不平等情况。
在美国,最贫困人群的住院率(比值比[OR]为1.30,P = 0.008)和养老院/护理机构使用率(OR为1.88,P < 0.001)更高。在韩国,最贫困人群的养老院/护理机构使用率更高(OR为2.24,P = 0.003)。在长期护理支出高的欧洲国家,最贫困人群的临终关怀机构使用率较低(OR为0.56,P = 0.003)。在长期护理支出低的欧洲国家,最贫困人群住院的可能性也较小(OR为0.81,P = 0.04),但接受非正式护理的可能性更大(OR为1.25,P = 0.033)。在长期护理支出高的欧洲国家、美国(OR为1.42,P < 0.001)和韩国(OR为1.69,P = 0.028),正式护理在最贫困人群中更为常见,但在墨西哥最贫困人群中则不太常见(OR为0.17,P < 0.001)。
各国在临终护理方面存在财富不平等,这反映了不同国家在护理组织、融资和提供方面的差异。研究结果凸显了在当前和未来改善临终护理可及性的计划中考虑公平性的必要性。
美国国立衰老研究所资助项目R01AG030153。