Mercedes Rodríguez1. 1. Department of International and Spanish Economics, University of Granada, Spain m_rodrig@ugr.es.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Faced with increased public spending for care, knowledge of the determinants of the choices between informal and formal care is of particular importance for estimating the need for care in the future. METHODS: Using a representative sample of Spanish dependent elderly from the Disabilities, Independence and Dependency Situations Survey (DIDSS) 2008, we compare the factors associated with the reception of informal, formal and mixed care. The study included 10 703 dependent persons living at home aged ≥ 65 years. RESULTS: Overall, the percentage of those receiving only informal care was high in Spain, 47.5%. Formal care was most often received in combination with informal care (9.8%) than alone (4.9%). Five out of the seven factors analysed were found to influence the reception of all types of care: age, gender, income, self-rated health and suffering a chronic condition. CONCLUSIONS: There is a high coincidence among how factors affect the reception of care although some differences can be noted. Curiously, a high income level and the availability of informal care (as measured by living with a partner) can negatively affect the reception of only formal care. Living in a capital can also have an impact on the type of care a dependent elderly person receives.
BACKGROUND: Faced with increased public spending for care, knowledge of the determinants of the choices between informal and formal care is of particular importance for estimating the need for care in the future. METHODS: Using a representative sample of Spanish dependent elderly from the Disabilities, Independence and Dependency Situations Survey (DIDSS) 2008, we compare the factors associated with the reception of informal, formal and mixed care. The study included 10 703 dependent persons living at home aged ≥ 65 years. RESULTS: Overall, the percentage of those receiving only informal care was high in Spain, 47.5%. Formal care was most often received in combination with informal care (9.8%) than alone (4.9%). Five out of the seven factors analysed were found to influence the reception of all types of care: age, gender, income, self-rated health and suffering a chronic condition. CONCLUSIONS: There is a high coincidence among how factors affect the reception of care although some differences can be noted. Curiously, a high income level and the availability of informal care (as measured by living with a partner) can negatively affect the reception of only formal care. Living in a capital can also have an impact on the type of care a dependent elderly person receives.