Proximity to death and participation in the long-term care market.
The extent to which increasing longevity increases per capita demand for long-term care depends on the degree to which utilization is concentrated at the end of life. We estimate the marginal effect of proximity to death, measured by being within 2 years of death, on the probabilities of nursing home and formal home care use, and we determine whether this effect differs by availability of informal care--i.e. marital status and co-residence with an adult child. The analysis uses a sample of elderly aged 70+ from the 1993-2002 Health and Retirement Study. Simultaneous probit models address the joint decisions to use long-term care and co-reside with an adult child. Overall, proximity to death significantly increases the probability of nursing home use by 50.0% and of formal home care use by 12.4%. Availability of informal support significantly reduces the effect of proximity to death. Among married elderly, proximity to death has no effect on institutionalization. In conclusion, proximity to death is one of the main drivers of long-term care use, but changes in sources of informal support, such as an increase in the proportion of married elderly, may lessen its importance in shaping the demand for long-term care.
Weaver
France
F
Swiss Health Observatory, Neuchâtel, Switzerland. france.weaver@bfs.admin.ch
Stearns
Sally C
SC
Norton
Edward C
EC
Spector
William
W
D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D017028:Caregivers; D005260:Female; D006301:Health Services Needs and Demand; D006699:Home Care Services; D006801:Humans; D007407:Interviews as Topic; D008136:Longevity; D008297:Male; D015233:Models, Statistical; D009735:Nursing Homes / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D013727:Terminal Care; D014481:United States
N Engl J Med. 2003 Sep 11;349(11):1048-55
12968089
Health Econ. 2007 Oct;16(10):1109-26
17311357
Health Econ. 2004 Apr;13(4):303-14
15067669
Milbank Q. 2007 Jun;85(2):213-57
17517114
Inquiry. 2002 Fall;39(3):279-97
12479539
J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 1996 Mar;51(2):S61-9
8785694
N Engl J Med. 2000 May 11;342(19):1409-15
10805827
Milbank Q. 2000;78(3):347-74, table of contents
11028188
J Health Econ. 2004 Mar;23(2):217-35
15019753
Health Econ. 2004 Apr;13(4):315-27
15067670
Health Econ. 2001 Oct;10(7):669-71
11747048
J Health Econ. 2000 Sep;19(5):679-95
11184799
Stat Med. 2006 Feb 15;25(3):389-413
16382420
Health Econ. 2006 Sep;15(9):947-63
16958079
J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 1998 Jan;53(1):B59-70
9467424
J Health Econ. 2003 Sep;22(5):781-803
12946459
J Health Econ. 2008 Jan;27(1):134-56
17462764
J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2003 Jan;58(1):S2-10
12496303
J Health Econ. 2005 Nov;24(6):1174-90
15979742
Health Aff (Millwood). 2005;24 Suppl 2:W5R77-80
16186153
J Health Econ. 2004 Nov;23(6):1159-80
15556241
Med Care. 2002 Oct;40(10):965-75
12395029
Health Econ. 1999 Sep;8(6):485-96
10544314
J Gerontol. 1990 Sep;45(5):S173-83
2118556
Demography. 2001 May;38(2):215-26
11392909
NBER Work Pap Ser. 1998 Dec;(6866):33, [21] p
12179490
Med Care. 2003 Jan;41(1):8-20
12544538
Med Care. 2003 Jan;41(1):21-4
12544539
N Engl J Med. 1995 Apr 13;332(15):999-1003
7885430
Demography. 1999 Aug;36(3):287-97
10472494