Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-7drxs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-22T23:27:44.740Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Part II - Long-term care quality systems based on ‘professionalism’

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2014

Vincent Mor
Affiliation:
Brown University, Rhode Island
Tiziana Leone
Affiliation:
London School of Economics and Political Science
Anna Maresso
Affiliation:
London School of Economics and Political Science
Get access

Summary

Long-term care quality systems based on ‘professionalism’

This first set of country case studies includes Austria, Germany, Switzerland and Japan. All have universal long-term care insurance, although the structure of the insurance system and how the funds are disbursed varies substantially between these countries. All have long traditions of federal and state (regional) partnership in implementing social welfare and health policies and this sharing of responsibility creates certain conflicts and barriers to the operation of systematic quality assurance systems. Like most of the countries described in this volume, these four have relatively standardized approaches to determining which institutions and agencies can become licensed to provide services to the frail elderly; however, the standards that emerged have generally been the product of a negotiated settlement between various segments of the interested parties, with particular emphasis on the role of the organizations of professionals involved in caring for those requiring long-term care. In a sense the ‘institution’ of the health professions assumed a significant role in the setting of standards for long-term care quality which the professionals were assumed to police themselves in much the same way that physicians are almost always the arbiters of what constitutes quality care which is determined by local practice standards, largely based upon medical boards. Society accepts this notion of professionals policing themselves and in some of the countries included in this segment it is clear that government actually delegates the authority for regulatory oversight to the professional organizations.

Type
Chapter
Information
Regulating Long-Term Care Quality
An International Comparison
, pp. 29 - 32
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2014

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org 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.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

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 Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

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 Google Drive.

Available formats
×