Too many 'false dichotomies'? Investigating the division between ageing and disability in social care services in Ireland: A study with statutory and non-statutory organisations

Cross-sector learning collaboratives can improve post-diagnosis care integration for people with young onset dementia

Post-diagnosis young onset dementia (YOD) care is often fragmented, with services delivered across aged care, healthcare, and social care sectors. The aim of this project was to test the feasibility and potential effectiveness of a learning collaborative implementation strategy for improving the cross-sector integration of care for people with YOD and to generate data to refine the implementation strategy for scaleup. We conducted a longitudinal mixed methods process evaluation and recruited one representative from three Australian aged care organisations, three disability care organisations and three organisations (n = 9) contracted to deliver care navigation services. One representative from each organisation joined a learning collaborative within their local area and completed a six-module online education package incorporating written resources, webinars, collaboration and expert mentoring. Participants identified gaps in services in their region and barriers to care integration and developed a shared plan to implement change. Normalisation Process Theory was applied to understand the acceptability, penetration and sustainability of the implementation strategy as well as barriers and enabling factors. Dementia knowledge measured by the Dementia Knowledge and Awareness Scale was high among the professionals at the start of the implementation period (mean = 39.67, SD = 9.84) and did not change by the end (mean = 39.67, SD = 8.23). Quantitative data demonstrated that clinicians dedicated on average half of the recommended time commitment to the project. However, qualitative data identified that the learning collaborative strategy enhanced commitment to implementing integrated care and promoted action towards integrating previously disparate care services. Participant commitment to the project was influenced by their sense of obligation to their team, and teams that established clear expectations and communication strategies early were able to collaborate and use the implementation plan more effectively (demonstrating collective action). Teams were less likely to engage in the collective action or reflexive monitoring required to improve care integration if they did not feel engaged with their learning collaborative. Learning collaboratives hold promise as a strategy to improve cross-sector service collaboration for people with YOD and their families but must maximise group cohesion and shared commitment to change.

Equality according to whom? Debating an age-related restriction in the upcoming disability legislation reform in Finland

Within many countries, the policies of disability and old age have been developing on distinct paths. Even though the prevalence of disability is higher in older populations, older persons tend to be excluded from disability discourses. Taking Finland's disability service legislation reform as an example, this article elaborates on the justifications for excluding or including older persons from disability policies. The paper analyses the public statements given in 2017 to a proposal that introduced an age-related restriction to disability services in order to understand how the restriction is argued for and against, and what kind of conceptualisations of old age and disability the statements portray. This study found that although equality is the most important principle underlying the reform, the conceptualisation of equality varies. Depending on who is included in the disability discourse, the idea of what is fair differs. Hence, it is necessary to recognise the differing understandings of equality in the debate regarding the age-related restriction. In addition, I argue that equality research can be helpful in assessing the fairness of public policies at the intersection of ageing and disability.

Influences of service characteristics and older people's attributes on outcomes from direct payments

Background

Direct payments (DPs) are cash-payments that eligible individuals can receive to purchase care services by themselves. DPs are central to current social care policy in England, but their advantages remain controversial. This controversy is partly due to their lack of historical visibility: DPs were deployed in stages, bundled with other policy instruments (first individual budgets, then personal budgets), and amidst increasing budgetary constraints. As a result, little unequivocal evidence is available about the effectiveness of DPs as an instrument for older people’s care. This study aims to partially fill that gap using data obtained during an early evaluation of DP’s that took place between 2005 and 07.

Methods

Semi-structured 81 face-to-face interviews with older people (and their proxies) using DPs are analyzed. DPs contribution to outcomes was measured using a standardized utility scale. Data on individual characteristics (dependency, informal support) and received services (types and amount of services) was also gathered. Multiple regression analyses were performed between measured outcome gains and individual and service characteristics. A Poisson log-functional form was selected to account for the low mean and positive skew of outcome gains.

Results

Levels of met need compared very favorably to average social care outcomes in the domains of social participation, control over daily living and safety, and user satisfaction was high. Benefit from DPs was particularly affected by the role and function of unpaid care and availability of recruitment support. The freedom to combine funded care packages with self-funded care enhanced the positive impact of the former. The ability to purchase care that deviated from standardized care inputs improved service benefits. Large discrepancies between total care input and that supported through DPs negatively affected outcomes.

Conclusions

The results offer clarity regarding the benefit derived from receiving DPs. They also clarify contested aspects of the policy such as the influence of unpaid care, types of care received, funding levels and the role of wider support arrangements. Tangible benefits may results from direct payments but those benefits are highly dependent on policy implementation practices. Implementation of DPs should pay special attention to the balance between DP funded care and unpaid care.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12877-020-01943-8.