To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure email@example.com
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This study examined the differences in the preference for long-term care (LTC) by age, period and cohort (A-P-C) in Japanese older adults through repeated cross-sectional surveys from 1998 – before the establishment of LTC insurance – to 2016, in a suburban city of metropolitan Tokyo. We analysed the direct effects of A-P-C on the preference for LTC, as well as the interaction effects of A-P-C on preference by gender, family structure and activities of daily living. Data were obtained at six time-points using repeated cross-sectional surveys for people aged 65 and older; surveys were conducted in 1998, 2002, 2004, 2010, 2013 and 2016. The preference for LTC was composed of three categories: informal care, community LTC services (CLTCS) and institutional LTC services (ILTCS). The cross-classified random-effect model was used to specify A-P-C effects. Informal care, CLITCS, ILTCS and other/no answer composed 35, 23, 33 and 9 per cent of preferences, respectively. In terms of the period effect, while there was an increase in levels of preference for CLTC between 1998 and 2010 as compared to informal care, the levels of preference were almost identical after 2010. In terms of the age effect, younger participants were more likely to prefer CLTCS and ILTCS over informal care. Moreover, the age influence was stronger in females and respondents who lived alone. We did not observe a cohort effect for preference. This study suggests that there are gaps by period and age between the preference for LTC services and the actual LTC use in Japanese older adults, and as a result, the use of actual LTC services cannot fully reflect the intentions and preference for LTC in them.
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.