Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T02:53:06.114Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

L’assurance autonomie: Une innovation essentielle pour répondre aux défis du vieillissement

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 February 2012

Réjean Hébert
Réjean Hébert*
Affiliation:
Faculté de médecine et des sciences de la santé, Université de Sherbrooke Centre de recherche sur le vieillissement, Sherbrooke
*
*La correspondance et les demandes de tirés-à-part doivent être adressées à : / Correspondence and requests for offprints should be sent to : Réjean Hébert, M.D., M.Phil. Professeur, Faculté de médecine et des sciences de la santé Université de Sherbrooke Médecin-conseil, Institut national de santé publique du Québec Chercheur, Centre de recherche sur le vieillissement 1036, Belvédère Sud Sherbrooke, QC J1H 4C4 ([email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The aging population and the epidemic of chronic diseases requires an accompanying finance reform of long-term care that will become increasingly dominant. Many countries have faced this situation and have set up a separate public funding for such care on the basis of a universal insurance covering both home care and institutions. Canada and Quebec must adopt such autonomy insurance and create a separate fund financed partly by a more judicious use of current budgets and tax credits, and also by a significant investment in home care. An autonomy support benefit could be allocated in kind to fund public services and by contract to pay for services delivered by private, voluntary, and social economy agencies. This benefit would be established following a standardized assessment of functional autonomy achieved by the case manager who will manage the services and control their quality.

Résumé

Le vieillissement de la population et la pandémie de maladies chroniques qui l’accompagne obligent une réforme du financement des soins de longue durée qui deviendront de plus en plus prépondérants. De nombreux pays ayant fait face à cette situation ont mis sur pied un financement public distinct pour ces soins sur la base d’une assurance universelle couvrant tant les soins à domicile qu’en institution. Le Canada et le Québec doivent se doter d’une telle assurance autonomie et créer une caisse financée d’une part par une utilisation plus judicieuse des budgets actuels et des crédits d’impôt, et d’autre part par un investissement significatif dans les soins à domicile. Une allocation de soutien à l’autonomie pourrait ainsi être versée en nature pour financer les services publics ou en espèce pour rembourser des organisations privées, bénévoles ou d’économie sociale. Cette allocation serait établie suite à une évaluation standardisée de l’autonomie fonctionnelle réalisée par le gestionnaire de cas qui assurerait la gestion et la qualité des prestations.

Keywords

long-term caresocial insurancecase managerfundinghome caredisabilitiessoins à long termeassurance socialegestionnaire de casfinancementsoins à domicileincapacités
Type
Articles
Information
Canadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissement , Volume 31 , Issue 1 , March 2012 , pp. 1 - 11
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Association on Gerontology 2012

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

Références

Barr, N. (2010). Long-term care: A suitable case for social insurance. Social Policy & Administration, 44(4), 359–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Béland, F., Bergman, H., Lebel, P., Clarfield, A.M., Tousignant, P., Contandriopoulos, A.P., et al. . (2006). A system of integrated care for older persons with disabilities in Canada: Results from a randomized controlled trial. Journal of Gerontology. Series A, Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences, 61A, 367–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cellule d’évaluation et d’orientation de l’assurance dépendance. (2009). L’assurance dépendance: guide pratique. Luxembourg, Luxembourg: Ministère de la sécurité sociale.Google Scholar
Chen, J., et Millar, W.J. (2000). Les générations récentes sont-elles en meilleure santé? Rapports sur la santé, 11(4), 9–26.Google Scholar
Clair, M. (2000). Commission d’étude sur la santé et les services sociaux. Des solutions émergentes. Rapport de la Commission d’étude sur la santé et les services sociaux. Québec, Québec, Canada: Gouvernement du Québec.Google Scholar
Comas-Herrera, A., Wittenberg, R., et Pickard, L. (2010). The long road to Universalism? Recent developments in the financing of long-term care in England. Social Policy and Administration, 44(4), 375–391.Google Scholar
Costa-Font, J. (2010). Devolution, diversity and welfare reform: Long-term care in the “Latin rim.” Social Policy and Administration, 44(4), 481–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costa-Font, J., et Gonzalez, A.G. (2010). Long-term care reform in Spain. Health Policy Development. Eurohealth, 13(1), 20–22.Google Scholar
Da Roit, B., et Le Bihan, B. (2010). Similar and yet so different: Cash-for-care in six European countries’ long-term care policies. The Milbank Quarterly, 88(3), 286–309.Google Scholar
Debout, C., et Lo, S.H. (2009). L’allocation personnalisée d’autonomie et la prestation de compensation du handicap au 30 juin 2009. Études et analyses DREES, 710, 1–6.Google Scholar
Doty, P., Cohen, M.A., Miller, J., et Shi, X. (2010). Private long-term care insurance: Value to claimants and implications for long-term care financing. The Gerontologist, 50(5), 613–622.Google ScholarPubMed
Dubuc, N., Hébert, R., Desrosiers, J., Buteau, M., et Trottier, L. (2006). Disability-based classification system for older people in integrated long-term care services: The Iso-SMAF profiles. Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics, 42, 191–206.Google Scholar
Fernandes, N., et Spencer, B.G. (2010). The private cost of long-term care in Canada: Where you live matters. Canadian Journal on Aging, 29(3), 307–316.Google Scholar
Finkelstein, A., et McGarry, K. (2003). Private information and its effect on market equilibrium: New evidence from LTC market. Washington, DC: NBER WP 9957.Google Scholar
Gabel, M. (2004). L’inévitable réforme de l’assurance dépendance. Bulletin économique du CIRAC, 68.Google Scholar
Gibeault, A. (2009). La fiscalité, les soins de longue durée et le maintien à domicile. Sherbrooke, Québec, Canada: Université de Sherbrooke.Google Scholar
Hébert, R. (2003). Oui aux services à domicile, mais n’oublions pas les personnes âgées. Éditorial: Perspectives sur le Rapport de la Commission Romanow. Canadian Journal on Aging/La Revue canadienne du vieillissement, 22(1), 11–12.Google Scholar
Hébert, R. (2010a). Home care: From adequate funding to integration of services. Health Care Papers, 10(1), 68–69.Google Scholar
Hébert, R. (2010b). An urgent need to improve life conditions of seniors. Journal of Nutrition, Health and Aging, 14(8), 711–714.Google Scholar
Hébert, R. (2011). Public Long-Term Care Insurance: A way to ensure sustainable continuity of care for frail older people. Health Care Papers, 11(1), 69–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hébert, R., Desrosiers, J., Dubuc, N., Tousignant, M., Guilbeault, J., et Pinsonnault, E. (2003). Le système de mesure de l’autonomie fonctionnelle (SMAF). La Revue de gériatrie, 28(4), 323–334.Google Scholar
Hébert, R., Dubuc, N., Buteau, M., Desrosiers, J., Bravo, G., Trottier, L., et al. . (2001). Resources and costs associated with disabilities of elderly people living at home and in institutions. Canadian Journal on Aging, 20(1), 1–21.Google Scholar
Hébert, R., Raîche, M., Dubois, M.-F., Gueye, N.R., Dubuc, N., Tousignant, M., et the PRISMA Group. (2010). Impact of PRISMA, a coordination-type integrated service delivery system for frail older people in Quebec (Canada): A quasi-experimental study. The Journals of Gerontology. Series B, Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 65B, 107–118.Google Scholar
Huber, M., Rodrigues, R., Hoffmann, F., Gasior, K., et Marin, B. (2009). Facts and figures on long-term care: Europe and North America. Vienna, Austria: European Centre for Social Welfare Policy and Research.Google Scholar
Ikegami, N. (2007). Rationale, design and sustainability of Long-Term care insurance in Japan – In retrospect. Social Policy and Society, 6(3), 423–434.Google Scholar
Joël, M.E., et Dufour-Kippelen, S. (2002). Financing systems of care for older persons in Europe. Aging Clinical and experimental research, 14(4), 293–299.Google Scholar
Kemper, P., Komisar, H.L., et Alecxih, L. (2005). Long-Term Care over an uncertain future: What can current retirees expect? Inquiry, 42, 335–350.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lafortune, G., Balestat, G., et the Disability Study Expert Group Members. (2007). Trends in severe disability among elderly people: Assessing the evidence in 12 OECD countries and the future implications. OECD Health Working Papers No. 26. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
Lafortune, L., Béland, F., et Bergman, H. (2008). Fragilité, incapacité et dépendance des personnes âgées: Comment compléter l’architecture du système de santé? In Béland, F., Contandriolpoulos, A.P., Quesnel-Vallée, A., & Robert, L. (Eds.), Le privé en santé: les discours et les faits. Montréal, Québec, Canada: Les Presses de l’Université de Montréal.Google Scholar
Le Bihan, B., et Martin, C. (2010). Reforming long-term care policy in France: Private-public complementarities. Social Policy and Administration, 44(4), 392–410.Google Scholar
Le Goff, P. (2003). Home Care, and caring for persons suffering from a long-term loss of independence: A funding model for Canada. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Parliamentary Research Branch of the Library of Parliament.Google Scholar
Manton, K.G., Gu, X., et Lamb, V.L. 2006. Change in chronic disability from 1982 to 2004/2005 as measured by long-term changes in function and health in the US elderly population. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 103(48):18374–18379Google ScholarPubMed
Ménard, J. (2005). Comité de travail sur la pérennité du système de santé et de services sociaux du Québec. Pour sortir de l’impasse: la solidarité entre les générations. Rapport du Comité de travail sur la pérennité du système de santé et de services sociaux du Québec. Québec, Québec, Canada: Gouvernement du Québec.Google Scholar
Ng, G.T. (2007). Learning from Japanese experience in aged care policy. Asian Social Work and Policy Review, 1, 36–51.Google Scholar
OECD. (2006). Projecting OECD Health and Long-term Care Expenditures: What are the main drivers? OECD Economics Department Working Papers, No. 477. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
OECD. (2010). Health Data 2010. Statistics and indicators for 30 countries. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
Pestieau, P., et Ponthière, G. (2010). Long-term care insurance Puzzle. Working Paper No. 2010-14. Paris: School of Economics.Google Scholar
Rochon, M. (2002). Vieillissement démographique et dépenses de santé et de prise en charge de la dépendance au Québec, 1981-2051. Santé, société et solidarité, 2, 155–171.Google Scholar
Rothgang, H. (2010). Social insurance for long-term care: An evaluation of the German model. Social Policy and Administration, 44(4), 436–460.Google Scholar
Schulz, E. (2010a). The long-term care system in Denmark. Discussion Papers No. 1038. Berlin, Germany: German Institute for Economic Research (DIM Berlin).Google Scholar
Schulz, E. (2010b). The long-term care system in Germany. Discussion papers No. 1039. Berlin, Germany: German Institute for Economic Research (DIM Berlin).Google Scholar
Schut, F., et Van den Berg, B. (2010). Sustainability of comprehensive universal long-term care insurance in the Netherlands. Social Policy and Administration, 44(4), 411–435.Google Scholar
Seok, J.E. (2010). Public long-term care insurance for the elderly in Korea: Design, characteristics, and tasks. Social Work in Public Health, 25, 185–209.Google Scholar
Stuart, M., et Weinrich, M. (2001). Home- and community-based long-term care: Lessons from Denmark. The Gerontologist, 41(4), 474–480.Google Scholar
Tousignant, M., Dubuc, N., Hébert, R., et Coulombe, C. (2007). Home-care programmes for older adults with disabilities in Canada: How can we assess the adequacy of services provided compared with the needs of users? Health and Social Care in the Community, 15(1), 1–7.Google Scholar
Tousignant, M., Hébert, R., Dubuc, N., Simoneau, F., et Dieleman, L. (2003). Application of a case-mix classification based on the functional autonomy of the residents for funding long-term care facilities. Age and Ageing, 32(1), 60–66.Google Scholar
Trydegard, G.B., et Thorslund, M. (2010). One uniform welfare state or a multitude of welfare municipalities? The evolution of local variation in Swedish elder care. Social Policy and Administration, 44(4), 495–511.Google Scholar
Tsutsui, T., et Maramatsu, N. (2005). Care-needs certification in the long-term care insurance system in Japan. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 53, 522–527.Google Scholar
Tsutsui, T., et Maramatsu, N. (2007). Japan’s universal long-term care system reform of 2005: Containing costs and realizing a vision. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 55, 1458–1463.Google Scholar