ArticleBMC geriatrics2024
Trends over the past 15 years in long-term care in Switzerland: a comparison with Germany, Italy, Norway, and the United Kingdom.
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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Towards a typology of medical care in European long-term care homes.European geriatric medicine · 2026Article
- Transforming vacant rural school buildings into age-friendly facilities under China's aging and low-fertility context: a natural language processing-based evaluation framework.BMC geriatrics · 2026Article
- Daily staffing trends and variation in Swiss long-term care from 2018-2023: A retrospective longitudinal analysis.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2025Article
- Barriers to providing long-term care for persons with spinal cord injury in Switzerland: a qualitative study of service delivery and workforce challenges.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Towards a Multidimensional Understanding of "Being Relative" in Residential Long-Term Care: Findings From a Qualitative Multiperspective Study.Global qualitative nursing researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.