Hostname: page-component-6b989bf9dc-cvxtj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-13T03:22:54.623Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

International Comparisons of Long-Term Care: Norway and the Scandinavian Solution

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 November 2010

Tor Inge Romøren
Affiliation:
National Institute for Public Health, Oslo, Norway

Abstract

Using routine data, surveys, and data from a local area study, this article describes the long-term care sector in Norway. Some comparisons with Denmark and Sweden are also presented. Typical for the Scandinavian solution is tax-financed formal care, provided as a highly decentralized public service. In Norway, three stages of development have been identified since 1955: establishing a basic structure of long-term care (LTC) (1955–70), expansion (1970–80), and reorganization (1980–90). The current Norwegian system is characterized by well-staffed, small institutional units integrated with home care. The turn-over rate in nursing homes is high. Most admissions and live discharges constitute an interchange with the home-care system. Although Norway occupies an intermediate position between Denmark and Sweden, there is now a strong tendency of convergence among these three LTC systems.

Résumé

Cet article fournit une description du secteur des soins de longue durée en Norvège, en puisant dans les informations courantes, dans les enquêtes et dans les données d'une étude régionale. Il compare ces données à celles du Danemark et de la Suède. À l'image des solutions scandinaves, des services gouvernementaux de soins, financés à même les impôts, sont offerts de façpn décentralisée. On dénote trois phases d'évolution en Norvège depuis 1955: l'établissement d'une structure fondamentale de soins de longue durée (1955 à 1970); le développement de la structure (1970 à 1980); la réorganisation du système (1980 à 1990). Le système norvégien actuel se caractérise par des unités institutionnelles de petite taille et bien pourvues en personnel qui sont intégrées à des services de soins à domicile. La population des centres d'hébergement est très mobile. La majorité des admissions et des départs s'effectuent en réciprocité avec le réseau des soins communautaires. Bien que le système norvégien fait le compromis entre ceux de la Suède et du Danemark, les trois systèmes de soins de longue durée tendent de plus en plus à se rejoindre.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Association on Gerontology 1996

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

Central Bureau of Statistics. (1987). Befolkningsstatistikk 1985, Hefte III. Oslo: Central Bureau of Statistics.Google Scholar
Central Bureau of Statistics. (1991). NOS B 983, Alternativ KM1. Oslo: Central Bureau of Statistics.Google Scholar
Daatland, S.O. (1990). Ressurser og ressursbruk i eldresektoren. Rapport 5–1990. Oslo: Norsk Gerontologisk Institutt.Google Scholar
De gamles helsekomite. (1956). Gamle-og pleiehjem i Norge. Norske Gerontologiske Skrifter, 2. Oslo.Google Scholar
Ellefsen, B. (1989). Forandring fryder? En analyse av prosessene rundt overføringen av sykehjemmene fra fylkeskommunalt til kommunalt nivå Rapport nr.6–1989. Oslo: Statens institutt for folkehelse — Avdeling for helsetjenesteforskning.Google Scholar
Erikson, R., Hansen, E.J., Ringen, S., & Uusitalo, H. (Eds.). (1986). The Scandinavian model: Welfare states and welfare research. New York: Sharpe.Google Scholar
Hammervold, R., & Jørgensen, S. (1989). Regionale variasjoner i bruk av sykehus. Somatiske sykehustjenester i 1986 og de eldres bruk av sykehus/kommunehel-setjeneste, Rapport 5189. Trondheim: Norsk Institutt for Sykehusforskning.Google Scholar
Lingsom, S. (1989). Gammel og sprek. Rapport 89:8. Oslo: Institutt for sosialforskning.Google Scholar
Romøren, T.I. (1984). Ut av sykehjemmet. Oslo: Magistergradsavhandling i sosiologi, Institutt for sosiologi, Universitetet i Oslo.Google Scholar
Romøren, T.I. (1988). Helse og velferd. Oslo: Cappelen.Google Scholar
Romøren, T.I. (1990). Kommunehelsetjenestens fem første år. I St. meld.nr.36 (1989–90). Oslo: Sosialdepartementet.Google Scholar
Romøren, T.I. (1991). Forløp av avhengighet, tjenesteforbruk og familieomsorg i høy alder. Oslo: Arbeidsrapport nr. 3, INAS.Google Scholar
Seip, A.L. (1981). Om velferdsstatens framvekst. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
Søbye, E. (1990). Institusjoner for eldre 1989. Rapporter 90/22. Oslo: Statistisk sentralbyrå.Google Scholar
Sosialdepartementet. (1968). Ot.prp.nr.36 (1967–68) — Om lov om sykehus m.v. Oslo: Sosialdepartementet.Google Scholar
Sosialdepartementet. (1979). NOU 1979:28 — Helse- og sosialtjenesten i kommunene. Oslo: Sosialdepartementet.Google Scholar
Sosialdepartementet. (1982). NOU 1982:10 — Spesialistene i helsetjenesten, pleieh jemmene m.v. Oslo: Sosialdepartementet.Google Scholar
Sosialdepartementet. (1985). St.meld.nr.68 (1984–85) — Sykehjemmene i endesentralisert helse- og sosialtjeneste. Oslo: Sosialdepartementet.Google Scholar
Sosialdepartementet. (1990). St.meld.nr.36 (1989–90) — Røynsler med lova om helsetenesta i kommunane. Oslo: Sosialdepartementet.Google Scholar
Statskontoret. (1988). Äldreomsorg i Norden — kostnader, kvalitet, styrning. Rapport 1987:34. Stockholm: Statskontoret.Google Scholar
Thorslund, M., & Johansson, L. (1987). Elderly people in Sweden: Current realities and future plans. Ageing and Society, 7, 345355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar