Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39044146›Full record

ArticleBMC geriatrics2024

Trends over the past 15 years in long-term care in Switzerland: a comparison with Germany, Italy, Norway, and the United Kingdom.

Clara Lussi, Jerome Bickenbach, Rune Halvorsen, Carla Sabariego

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC geriatrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Clara LussiSwiss Paraplegic Research, Guido A. Zäch-Strasse 4, Nottwil, 6207, Switzerland. clara.lussi@paraplegie.ch.
Jerome BickenbachSwiss Paraplegic Research, Guido A. Zäch-Strasse 4, Nottwil, 6207, Switzerland.
Rune HalvorsenOslo Metropolitan University, Stensberggata 26, Oslo, 0170, Norway.
Carla SabariegoSwiss Paraplegic Research, Guido A. Zäch-Strasse 4, Nottwil, 6207, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe demographic changes affecting Switzerland and other European countries, including population ageing, will continue to challenge policymakers in building accessible, affordable, comprehensive and high-quality long-term care (LTC) systems. The purpose of this paper is to investigate how Switzerland's LTC system compares to other European countries, in order to inform how to respond to the increasing need for LTC. We carried out a descriptive study using secondary data from key national and international organizations.

methodsBy comparing the financing, workforce, service delivery and need for LTC in Switzerland, Germany, Italy, Norway and the United Kingdom, we described similarities and differences in these five European countries between 2005-2019. Thirty-three indicators within five domains were analysed: (1) Population statistics and health expenditure, (2) Need for LTC, (3) LTC financing, (4) LTC service delivery, and (5) LTC workforce.

resultsSwitzerland has the highest life expectancy in comparison to the other four high-income countries. However, similarly to other countries, the years lived with disability are increasing in Switzerland. Switzerland's public expenditure on LTC as a share of GDP is lower than that of Norway and Germany, yet out-of-pocket expenditure on LTC is highest in Switzerland. Switzerland has the highest proportion of persons receiving formal LTC both in institutions and at home. Switzerland has had the most pronounced increase in the proportion of over 65-year-olds receiving LTC at home. Even though more than fourfold more persons receive care at home, Switzerland still has more workforce in LTC institutions than in home-care. In comparison to Germany and the UK, Switzerland has a lower number of informal carers as a proportion of 50-year-olds and over, as well as fewer nationally available services for informal carers compared to Germany, Italy, Norway and the UK.

conclusionsOur comparative study corroborates the importance of improving the affordability of LTC, continuing to support the movement towards home care services, improving the support given to both the professional workforce and informal carers, and improving the amount and quality of LTC data. It also provides a valuable contrast to other European countries to support evidence-informed policymaking.

Indexed as

Long-Term CareAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleGermanyHealth ExpendituresHumansItalyLife ExpectancyMaleNorwaySwitzerlandUnited KingdomComparative studyLong-term careNursing servicesPublic policySwitzerland

Identifiers

PMID39044146
PMCPMC11265318

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.