...
首页> 外文期刊>BMC Public Health >Predictive factors for entry to long-term residential care in octogenarian Māori and non-Māori in New Zealand, LiLACS NZ cohort
【24h】

Predictive factors for entry to long-term residential care in octogenarian Māori and non-Māori in New Zealand, LiLACS NZ cohort

机译:新西兰八百甲裔毛利和非毛利人入境的预测因素,Lilacs NZ Cohort

获取原文
           

摘要

BACKGROUND:Long-term residential care (LTC) supports the most vulnerable and is increasingly relevant with demographic ageing. This study aims to describe entry to LTC and identify predictive factors for older Māori (indigenous people of New Zealand) and non-Māori.METHODS:LiLACS-NZ cohort project recruited Māori and non-Māori octogenarians resident in a defined geographical area in 2010. This study used multivariable log-binomial regressions to assess factors associated with subsequent entry to LTC including: self-identified ethnicity, demographic characteristics, self-rated health, depressive symptoms and activities of daily living [ADL] as recorded at baseline. LTC entry was identified from: place of residence at LiLACS-NZ interviews, LTC subsidy, needs assessment conducted in LTC, hospital discharge to LTC, and place of death.RESULTS:Of 937 surveyed at baseline (421 Māori, 516 non-Māori), 77 already in LTC were excluded, leaving 860 participants (mean age 82.6 /-?2.71?years Māori, 84.6 /-?0.52?years non-Māori). Over a mean follow-up of 4.9?years, 278 (41% of non-Māori, 22% of Māori) entered LTC; of the 582 who did not, 323 (55%) were still living and may yet enter LTC. In a model including both Māori and non-Māori, independent risks factors for LTC entry were: living alone (RR?=?1.52, 95%CI:1.15-2.02), self-rated health poor/fair compared to very good/excellent (RR?=?1.40, 95%CI:1.12-1.77), depressive symptoms (RR?=?1.28, 95%CI:1.05-1.56) and more dependent ADLs (RR?=?1.09, 95%CI:1.05-1.13). For non-Māori compared to Māori the RR was 1.77 (95%CI:1.39-2.23). In a Māori-only model, predictive factors were older age and living alone. For non-Māori, factors were dependence in more ADLs and poor/fair self-rated health.CONCLUSIONS:Non-Māori participants (predominantly European) entered LTC at almost twice the rate of Māori. Factors differed between Māori and non-Māori. Potentially, the needs, preferences, expectations and/or values may differ correspondingly. Research with different cultural/ethnic groups is required to determine how these differences should inform service development.
机译:背景:长期住宅护理(LTC)支持最脆弱的且与人口老龄化越来越相关。本研究旨在描述LTC的进入,识别年龄较大的毛利人(新西兰土着人民)和非毛利人的预测因素。本研究使用了多变量的对数回归来评估与LTC的后续进入相关的因素,包括:在基线记录的自我识别的种族,人口统计学特征,自我评价的健康,抑郁症状和日常生活[ADL]的活动。 LILACS-NZ访谈的居住地,LTC补贴,LTC补贴的居住地,在LTC,医院排放到LTC和死亡地点的居住地。结果:937年在基线调查(421毛利,516名非毛利) ,77岁已经排除在LTC中,留下了860名参与者(平均年龄82.6 / -?2.71?YearsMāori,84.6 / -On0.52?years non-māori)。在4.9的平均随访4.9?年,278(占非毛利人的41%,22%的毛利人)进入了LTC;在没有,323(55%)的582年仍然生活,也可能进入LTC。在包括毛利人和非毛利人的模型中,LTC进入的独立风险因素是:单独生活(RR?= 1.52,95%CI:1.15-2.02),与非常好/优秀的自我评价的健康差/公平(RR?=?1.40,95%CI:1.12-1.77),抑郁症状(RR?=α= 1.28,95%CI:1.05-1.56)和更多依赖性ADL(RR?=?1.09,95%CI:1.05- 1.13)。对于与毛利生物相比的非毛利人,RR为1.77(95%CI:1.39-23)。在仅毛利人的模型中,预测因素是年龄较大的人,独自生活。对于非毛利人来说,因素是更多的ADL和穷人/公平的自我评价的健康。结论:非毛利参与者(主要是欧洲)以毛利人的率几乎进入LTC。毛利人和非毛利人之间的因素不同。可能,需要,偏好,期望和/或值相应地不同。有不同文化/民族的研究是必要的,以确定这些差异应该如何告知服务发展。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号