Search results for ‘Subject term:"older people"’ Sort:
Results 1 - 6 of 6
We're in charge: cohousing communities of older people in the Netherlands; lessons for Britain?
- Author:
- BRENTON Maria
- Publisher:
- Policy Press
- Publication year:
- 1998
- Pagination:
- 87p.,bibliog.
- Place of publication:
- Bristol
Research study looking at fifteen groups of people aged fifty-five to eighty plus who, anticipating the possibility of a life alone, or increased frailty, have taken steps to start or join a CoHousing community. CoHousing is an arrangement whereby groups of older people live in their own residential project and form a community in the process, promoting independent and collaborative living in separate, self contained units.
Dutch large-scale dementia-care environments: a village within the community
- Authors:
- EERDEN William J. van der, JONES Gemma M. M.
- Journal article citation:
- Journal of Care Services Management, 5(3), July 2011, pp.137-146.
- Publisher:
- Taylor and Francis
Traditional Dutch, large-scale residential/nursing homes are unique in the world. They combine residential and nursing home care, as well as other types of specialist care, making it possible for each health and social care profession to specialise in dementia care as well as making genuine use of the multi-disciplinary care model. This article starts by summarising the development and some characteristics of Dutch large-scale residential/nursing care homes, and dementia care. These are considered from the perspective of the changing landscape of policy on housing, home-care services, and financial priorities, and the vogue towards smaller-scale group-living settings. The article then provides a short description of the largest care home in the Netherlands, the award-winning ‘De Drie Hoven’, which was built 35 years ago. It has 520 beds, and pioneered the ‘village within the community’ concept of care. The features of this care home setting are described as they relate to current thinking about good dementia care, and against the backdrop of concerns coming out of the new small-scale group living unit pilot projects. The article argues that the traditional large-scale accommodation can offer a safe and valuable home-like environment, and that there will always be a need for them, despite the modernisations and adaptations required.
Meanings of ‘lifecycle robust neighbourhoods’: constructing versus attaching to places
- Authors:
- VAN HEES Susan, et al
- Journal article citation:
- Ageing and Society, 38(6), 2018, pp.1148-1173.
- Publisher:
- Cambridge University Press
In Western welfare states, notions of age-friendly communities and ageing-in-place are increasingly important in new health policies. In the Netherlands, care reforms are modifying the former welfare state to be more participatory; local governments are seeking collaborative solutions. Municipalities and housing, care and welfare organisations in the southern part of the country developed the concept of ‘lifecycle robust neighbourhoods’, envisioned as places where older people can age-in-place. Although many scholars have used the concept ageing-in-place in their studies of neighbourhoods, we aim to unravel this concept further by exploring how this particular ageing policy plays out in practice. This paper explores what the development of ‘lifecycle robust neighbourhoods’ means in relation to notions of ageing-in-place and age-friendly communities. We used ethnography (interviews, observations and focus groups) to reveal how, on the one hand, the policy makers, housing, care and welfare directors and representatives of older people, as developers of ‘lifecycle robust neighbourhoods’ and, on the other hand, older people, give meaning to places to age-in-place. It becomes clear that ageing-in-place has a different meaning in policy discourses than in practice. While developers mainly considered place as something construable, older people emotionally attached to place through lived experiences. (Edited publisher abstract)
The ideal neighbourhood for ageing in place as perceived by frail and non-frail community-dwelling older people
- Authors:
- DIJK Hanna M. van, et al
- Journal article citation:
- Ageing and Society, 35(8), 2015, pp.1771-1795.
- Publisher:
- Cambridge University Press
Due to demographic changes and a widely supported policy of ageing in place, the number of community-dwelling older people will increase immensely. Thus, supportive neighbourhoods enabling older people to age in place successfully are required. Using Q-methodology, this study examined older people's perceptions of the comparative importance of neighbourhood characteristics for ageing in place. Based on the World Health Organization's Global Age-friendly Cities guide and the eight domains identified (outdoor spaces and buildings, transportation, housing, social participation, respect and social approval, civic participation, communication and information, and community support and health services), the authors developed 26 statements about physical and social neighbourhood characteristics. Thirty-two older people in Rotterdam, half of whom were frail, rank-ordered these statements. Q-factor analysis revealed three distinct viewpoints each among frail and non-frail older people. Comparisons within and between groups are discussed. Although both frail and non-frail older people strongly desired a neighbourhood enabling them to age in place, they have divergent views on such a neighbourhood. Older people's dependence on the neighbourhood seems to be dynamic, affected by changing social and physical conditions and levels of frailty. (Edited publisher abstract)
Reducing disability in community-dwelling frail older people: cost-effectiveness study alongside a cluster randomised controlled trial
- Authors:
- METZELTHIN Silke F., et al
- Journal article citation:
- Age and Ageing, 44(3), 2015, pp.390-396.
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
Background: Although proactive primary care, including early detection and treatment of community-dwelling frail older people, is a part of the national healthcare policy in several countries, little is known about its cost-effectiveness. Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a proactive primary care approach in community-dwelling frail older people. Design and setting: Embedded in a cluster randomised trial among 12 Dutch general practitioner practices, an economic evaluation was performed from a societal perspective with a time horizon of 24 months. Method: Frail older people in the intervention group received an in-home assessment and interdisciplinary care based on a tailor-made treatment plan and regular evaluation and follow-up. Practices in the control group delivered usual care. The primary outcome for the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis was disability and health-related quality of life, respectively. Results: Multilevel analyses among 346 frail older people showed no significant differences between the groups regarding disability and health-related quality of life at 24 months. People in the intervention group used, as expected, more primary care services, but there was no decline in more expensive hospital and long-term care. Total costs over 24 months tended to be higher in the intervention group than in the control group (€26,503 versus €20,550, P = 0.08). Conclusions: The intervention under study led to an increase in healthcare utilisation and related costs without providing any beneficial effects. This study adds to the scarce amount of evidence of the cost-effectiveness of proactive primary care in community-dwelling frail older people. (Edited publisher abstract)
Joined-up thinking: a co-housing community pilot project
- Author:
- BRENTON Maria
- Journal article citation:
- Housing Care and Support, 3(3), September 2000, pp.20-22.
- Publisher:
- Emerald
The Government's welfare and housing agenda focuses on 'joined-up' thinking, choice, balanced communities and social inclusion. Because there is also much concern about the impact of an ageing population, local planners and service providers are encouraged to think creatively and work together. Presents a example from research in the Netherlands that shows how local authorities and the non-profit sector can work together in an integrated approach to older people.