Suchergebnisse

AbstractLong-term care for older people is increasingly turning to consumer-directed approaches. As a case in point, the Hong Kong Government recently implemented a new voucher programme for community-based aged care based on a consumer-directed approach: the Community Care Service Voucher for the Elderly (CCSV). The objectives of this study were to explore the lived experience of professional workers vis-à-vis the new programme and to identify barriers to effective voucher use by older people in Hong Kong. In-depth individual interviews were conducted with 16 professionals who had primary responsibility for the voucher programme for community-based aged care. The interview guide covered five main areas: (a) professional's perception and experience on the voucher programme; (b) the decision-making process around the voucher programme; (c) personal capacities of older people; (d) family support and social networks; and (e) institutional support. Findings indicate several barriers to effective use of the CCSV including: lack of self-awareness of service needs, lower education level, poor health condition, lack of financial resources, lack of family support, inadequate family involvement in decision-making, lack of peer and professional support, lack of available services and poor service accessibility. Suggestions for strengthening the voucher programme include institution of a case management model and public education. Different factors or elements are required to facilitate older people to make sound and informed choices, and a case manager can assist in combining different resources and forms of support towards effective use of the CCSV.

Abstract
There has been considerable interest in the concept of consumer-directed care (CDC) for ageing populations. One type of CDC employs vouchers that older people can use to procure a panel of social services that best fits their needs. The voucher-based strategy has been institutionalised in Hong Kong as the Community Care Service Voucher for the Elderly (CCSV). Using a qualitative, semi-structured interview method, researchers probed the experiences of two groups (twenty-six CCSV users and twenty-seven CCSV non-users) with the voucher programme between March 2014 and September 2015 during the first phase of CCSV. The interviews revealed a set of social and institutional supports needed to empower clients to effectively utilise the voucher. These supports (or forms of capital) were consistently present amongst active CCSV users and deficient amongst non-users. The research demonstrates that instituting a voucher does not, by itself, lead to optimised choices but, rather, that a network of institutional and social resources must be assembled in support of the voucher programme. In some instances, a case management approach may be needed, as older people (and family) need to combine different forms of institutional and social support to comprehend the voucher programme and utilise it for their particular needs.

This Element argues that relational policy analysis can provide deeper insights into the career of any policy and the dynamics of any policy situation. This task is all the more difficult as the relational often operates unseen in the backstages of a policy arena. Another issue is the potentially unbounded scope of a relational analysis. But these challenges should not dissuade policy scholars from beginning to address the theme of relationality in public policy. This Element sketches a conceptual framework for the study of relationality and illustrates some of the promise of relational analysis using an extended case study. This title is also available as Open Access on Cambridge Core.

The aims of this study were to assess the impairment levels of users and waitlisted applicants for Hong Kong's Integrated Home Care Services (Ordinary Cases) (IHCS [OC]), reveal their possible hidden needs and potential demand for higher level services, assess their unmet needs for IHCS (OC) and explore whether not using IHCS (OC) was associated with any deterioration in impairment. In all, 567 respondents were clinically assessed twice, over a 6‐month interval, by the Minimal Data Set Home Care questionnaire. The results showed that some moderately or severely impaired respondents had only limited access to higher level services. Some respondents with either no impairment or only low‐level impairment had applied for higher level services. Most waitlisted applicants had not received any IHCS (OC), even after 6 months of waiting. Using IHCS (OC) or not had no significant impact on the deterioration in impairment. Several ways of improving home and community care services are discussed.