Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T12:58:32.603Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Linkages between informal and formal care-givers in home-care networks of frail older adults

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 June 2015

MARIANNE JACOBS ,
THEO VAN TILBURG ,
PETER GROENEWEGEN  and
MARJOLEIN BROESE VAN GROENOU
MARIANNE JACOBS*
Affiliation:
Department of Sociology, VU University Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
THEO VAN TILBURG
Affiliation:
Department of Sociology, VU University Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
PETER GROENEWEGEN
Affiliation:
Department of Organization Sciences, VU University Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
MARJOLEIN BROESE VAN GROENOU
Affiliation:
Department of Sociology, VU University Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
*
Address for correspondence: Marianne Jacobs, Department of Sociology, VU University Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1081, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In ageing societies, policy makers aim for more contact between informal and formal care-givers as it may enhance the quality of care. So far, the linkage between formal and informal care-givers is generally studied from a one-sided or a single dyadic perspective, without taking into account that care networks of community-dwelling older adults often exist of multiple informal and formal care-givers. The current study examines discussion of care between all potential informal–formal care-giver dyads in a care network, and relates this to characteristics of the older care recipient, the care network and the care-givers. Seventy-four Dutch older care recipients provided information on all care-givers who helped with five different types of tasks; 410 care-givers reported on the contact between all care-givers identified. Multi-level logistic regression was conducted in 2,150 informal–formal care-giver dyads and revealed that in 26 per cent of all these dyads discussion on care occurred. This was more likely when both care-givers performed multiple types of tasks, the informal care-giver was residing with the care recipient, and contact within the formal and the informal sub-network was higher. To enhance discussion of care between informal and formal care-givers in care networks where no discussion occurs at all, home-care organisations may need to allocate formal care-givers who form a bridge with an extra-residential care-giver of care recipients living alone.

Keywords

care networkfrail older adultsinformal care-giversformal care-givers
Type
Articles
Information
Ageing & Society , Volume 36 , Issue 8 , September 2016 , pp. 1604 - 1624
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015 

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.)

References

Argyle, M. 1989. The Social Psychology of Work. Penguin, Baltimore, Maryland.Google Scholar
Åstedt-Kurki, P., Paavilainen, E., Tammentie, T. and Paunonen-Ilmonen, M. 2001. Interaction between adult patients’ family members and nursing staff on a hospital ward. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences, 15, 2, 142–50.Google Scholar
Bastiaens, H., Van Royen, P., Pavlic, D. R., Raposo, V. and Baker, R. 2007. Older people's preferences for involvement in their own care: a qualitative study in primary health care in 11 European countries. Patient Education and Counseling, 68, 1, 33–42.Google Scholar
Bauer, M. and Nay, R. 2011. Improving family–staff relationships in assisted living facilities: the views of family. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 67, 6, 1232–41.Google Scholar
Bell, D. and Rutherford, A. 2013. Individual and geographic factors in the formation of care networks in the UK. Population, Space and Place, 19, 6, 727–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benzein, E., Johansson, B. and Saveman, B. I. 2004. Families in home care: a resource or a burden? District nurses’ beliefs. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 13, 7, 867–75.Google Scholar
Carpentier, N. and Ducharme, F. 2003. Care-giver network transformations: the need for an integrated perspective. Ageing & Society, 23, 4, 507–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carpentier, N. and Grenier, A. 2012. Successful linkage between formal and informal care systems: the mobilization of outside help by caregivers of persons with Alzheimer's disease. Qualitative Health Research, 22, 10, 1330–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Da Roit, B. 2012. The Netherlands: the struggle between universalism and cost containment. Health & Social Care in the Community, 20, 3, 228–37.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eurostat 2015. Main scenario–Population on 1st January by sex and single year age. Available online at http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/data/database. [Accessed 1 June 2015].Google Scholar
Feld, S. L. 1981. The focused organization of social ties. American Journal of Sociology, 86, 5, 1015–35.Google Scholar
Friedemann, M. L., Montgomery, R. J., Maiberger, B. and Smith, A. A. 1997. Family involvement in the nursing home: family-oriented practices and staff–family relationships. Research in Nursing & Health, 20, 6, 527–37.3.0.CO;2-O>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gittell, J. H. 2002. Coordinating mechanisms in care provider groups: relational coordination as a mediator and input uncertainty as a moderator of performance effects. Management Science, 48, 11, 1408–26.Google Scholar
Guberman, N., Lavoie, J. P., Pepin, J., Lauzon, S. and Montejo, M. E. 2006. Formal service practitioners’ views of family caregivers’ responsibilities and difficulties. Canadian Journal on Aging/Revue canadienne du vieillissement, 25, 1, 43–53.Google Scholar
Haesler, E., Bauer, M. and Nay, R. 2007. Staff–family relationships in the care of older people: a report on a systematic review. Research in Nursing & Health, 30, 4, 385–98.Google Scholar
Hansen, T. and Slagsvold, B. 2014. Feeling the squeeze? The effects of combining work and informal caregiving on psychological well-being. European Journal of Ageing, 12, 1, 51–60. doi:10.1007/s10433–014–0315-y.Google Scholar
Hertzberg, A. and Ekman, S. L. 2000. ‘We, not them and us?’ Views on the relationships and interactions between staff and relatives of older people permanently living in nursing homes. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 31, 3, 614–22.Google Scholar
Hertzberg, A., Ekman, S. L. and Axelsson, K. 2001. Staff activities and behaviour are the source of many feelings: relatives’ interactions and relationships with staff in nursing homes. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 10, 3, 380–8.Google Scholar
Hertzberg, A., Ekman, S. L. and Axelsson, K. 2003. ‘Relatives are a resource, but…’: Registered Nurses’ views and experiences of relatives of residents in nursing homes. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 12, 3, 431–41.Google Scholar
Huber, M. and Hennessy, P. 2005. Long-term Care for Older People. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris.Google Scholar
Katz, S., Ford, A. B., Moskowitz, R. W., Jackson, B. A. and Jaffe, M. W. 1963. Studies of illness in the aged: the index of ADL: a standardized measure of biological and psychosocial function. Journal of the American Medical Association, 185, 12, 914–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keating, N. and Dosman, D. 2009. Social capital and the care networks of frail seniors. Canadian Review of Sociology/Revue canadienne de sociologie, 46, 4, 301–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kemp, C. L., Ball, M. M., Perkins, M. M., Hollingsworth, C. and Lepore, M. J. 2009. ‘I get along with most of them’: Direct care workers’ relationships with residents’ families in assisted living. The Gerontologist, 49, 2, 224–35.Google Scholar
Kruijswijk, W., Da Roit, B. and Hoogenboom, W. 2014. Elasticity of care networks and the gendered division of care. Ageing & Society, 35, 4, 675–703. doi:10.1017/S0144686X13000822.Google Scholar
Lawton, M. P. and Brody, E. M. 1969. Assessment of older people: self-maintaining and instrumental activities of daily living. The Gerontologist, 9, 3, 179–86.Google Scholar
Mollenhorst, G., Völker, B. and Flap, H. 2011. Shared contexts and triadic closure in core discussion networks. Social Networks, 33, 4, 292–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nembhard, I. M. and Edmondson, A. C. 2006. Making it safe: the effects of leader inclusiveness and professional status on psychological safety and improvement efforts in health care teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27, 7, 941–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piercy, K. W. and Dunkley, G. J. 2004. What quality paid home care means to family caregivers. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 23, 3, 175–92.Google Scholar
Pinquart, M. and Sorensen, S. 2002. Older adults’ preferences for informal, formal, and mixed support for future care needs: a comparison of Germany and the United States. International Journal of Aging & Human Development, 54, 4, 291–314.Google Scholar
Rasbash, J., Charlton, C., Browne, W. J., Healy, M. A. and Cameron, B. 2009. MLwiN Version 2.1. Centre for Multilevel Modelling, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.Google Scholar
Ryan, D. P., Puri, M. and Liu, B. A. 2013. Comparing patient and provider perceptions of home- and community-based services: social network analysis as a service integration metric. Home Health Care Services Quarterly, 32, 2, 92–105.Google Scholar
Sims-Gould, J. and Martin-Matthews, A. 2010. We share the care: family caregivers’ experiences of their older relative receiving home support services. Health & Social Care in the Community, 18, 4, 415–23.Google Scholar
Tucker, A. L. and Edmondson, A. C. 2003. Why hospitals don't learn from failures: organisational and psychological dynamics that inhibit system change. California Management Review, 45, 2, 55–72.Google Scholar
Ward-Griffin, C. and McKeever, P. 2000. Relationships between nurses and family caregivers: partners in care? Advances in Nursing Science, 22, 3, 89–103.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wiles, J. 2003. Informal caregivers’ experiences of formal support in a changing context. Health & Social Care in the Community, 11, 3, 189–207.Google Scholar