:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:臺北市居家服務方案論時計酬適切性之研究
書刊名:臺灣社會福利學刊
作者:陳正芬 引用關係王正 引用關係
作者(外文):Chen, Chen-fenWang, Cheng
出版日期:2007
卷期:6:1
頁次:頁93-129
主題關鍵詞:居家服務論量計酬老人福利Home careFee-for-serviceElderly welfare
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(14) 博士論文(2) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:11
  • 共同引用共同引用:83
  • 點閱點閱:317
台北市政府考量失能人數隨人口老化速度增加,家庭照顧負擔沈重,其居家照顧服務方案自1998年9月起擴大補助,辦理情形轉型為按時計價委託民間機構辦理。惟,服務項目採按時計費標準的方式,雖可依服務時間長短申報服務費用,但卻無法反映個案的失能嚴重程度及服務項目的難易程度,違背在人、時間、空間等主客觀條件相同之情況下,提供相同服務應獲得相同酬勞之計費公平原則。為瞭解居家服務員為不同失能程度案主提供不同項目之服務所需技術等級及時間長度,本研究以2000年接受居家服務的個案為研究對象,由訪員實地觀測居家服務員為不同失能程度案主,提供服務時間及服務結果,釐清各項服務項目耗用資源的情況,提供我國居家服務方案制訂之政策參考。
In order to provide home care service for the rapidly increasing disabled elder people in the community, the city government of Taipei has not only expanded the budget for home care program since September 1998, but has also authorized private organizations to take over the home care service based on the fee-for-service principle. However, although the principle could be more easily applied to household tasks in terms of the length of time of the service work, when it comes to body care tasks for the disabled people, the principle does not seem to reflect fairly the degree of disability and the difficulty of the service work. The main purpose of this study is to do a systematic overview of the pricing strategy of home care in Taipei city. This study targets those home care cases in the year 2000. Based on the interviewers’ on-the-spot observations of services for cases of different degrees of disability, this study aims at ascertaining the various categories of home care services to provide a guide to the formulation of home care policy and program for the disabled.
期刊論文
1.Liu, K.、Manton, K. G.、Aragon, C.(2000)。Changes in Home Care Use by Disabled Elderly Persons: 1982-1994。The Journals of Gerontology:Series B, Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences,55(4),S245-S253。  new window
2.王增勇(19971200)。殘補式或普及式福利?--臺北市居家照顧政策的抉擇。社區發展季刊,80,213-232。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.吳淑瓊、陳正芬(20001200)。長期照護資源的過去、現在、與未來。社區發展季刊,92,19-31。new window  延伸查詢new window
4.吳淑瓊、楊紅玉(19970600)。長期照護機構院民之病例組合研究。中華公共衛生雜誌,16(3),218-230。new window  延伸查詢new window
5.蔡啟源(20001000)。老人居家服務之探討。社區發展季刊,91,252-268。new window  延伸查詢new window
6.Fries, B. E.、Schneider, D. P.、Foley, W. J.(1994)。Refining a case-mix measure for nursing homes: Resource Utilization Groups (RUG-III)。Medical Care,32(7),668-685。  new window
7.施教裕、賴建仲(19980900)。老人居家服務現況及整合之探討。社區發展季刊,83,74-91。new window  延伸查詢new window
8.吳凱勳(19970400)。「高齡化社會」與「長期照護保險」(上)--介紹德國長期照護保險法。長期照護雜誌,1(1),3-14。  延伸查詢new window
9.中華民國老人福利推動聯盟(1998)。老盟87年大事記。盟訊。  延伸查詢new window
10.Yamada, Y.、Sekiya, M.(2003)。Licensing and Training Requirements for Direct Workers in Japan: What Can the United States and Japan Learn from Each Other?。Journal of Aging and Social Policy,15(4),113-129。  new window
11.Aronson, J.、Neysmith, S.(1996)。You Are Not Just in There to Do the Work: Sepersonalizing and the Exploitation of Home Care Workers’ Labor。Gender & Society,10(1),59-77。  new window
12.Nyman, J. A.、Mary(1989)。Does the Average Cost of Home Care Vary with Case Mix?。Public Health Reports,104(4),335-349。  new window
13.Schlenker, R. E.(1986)。Case Mix Reimbursement for Nursing Home。Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law,11(3),445-461。  new window
14.Schneider, D. P.、Fries, B. E.、Foley, W. J.、Desmond, M.、Gormley, W. J.(1988)。Case Mix for Nursing Home Payment: Resource Utilization Groups, Version II。Health Care Financing Review,9(suppl),39-52。  new window
15.Torpe, K. E.、Gertler, P.、Goldman, P.(1991)。The Resource Utilization Group System: It’s Effect on Nursing Home Case Mix and Cost。Inquiry,28(4),357-365。  new window
會議論文
1.李光廷(2002)。日本的介護保險與福利事業民營化對市民生活的影響。《民主政治與社會福利》研討會。嘉義:社會福利學會。  延伸查詢new window
2.朱澤民、周麗芳、梁正德、鄭文輝(1999)。老年長期照顧支付方式與給付範圍之探討。台北:國家衛生研究院。  延伸查詢new window
研究報告
1.行政院社會福利推動委員會長期照顧制度規劃小組(2006)。改善長期照顧居家式服務各項措施規劃報告。臺北。  延伸查詢new window
2.李玉春、黃意雯(1994)。居家照護成本之分析研究 (計畫編號:DOH84-HP-5E09)。台北。  延伸查詢new window
3.林正介(2001)。護理之家病例組合及其成本估算之研究。台北。  延伸查詢new window
學位論文
1.陳亮汝(2002)。社區居家身心功能障礙者居家支持服務使用分析(碩士論文)。國立臺灣大學。  延伸查詢new window
2.楊紅玉(1996)。養護中心病例組合之初探性研究(碩士論文)。中國醫藥學院。  延伸查詢new window
3.陳婉茗(2004)。模擬DRGs實施對我國醫院的衝擊(碩士論文)。國立陽明大學。  延伸查詢new window
4.曾桂琴(2002)。運用衛生服務利用行為模式探討影響主要照顧者對長期照護服務利用及滿意度之相關研究(碩士論文)。台北醫學院。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.Stone, R.I.、Wiener, J. M.(2001)。Who will care for us? Addressing the long-term care workforce crisis。Washington, DC:The Urban Institute and the American Association of Homes and Services for the aging。  new window
2.中華民國老人福利推動聯盟(1999)。居家援助員相關通知集。臺北:中華民國老人福利推動聯盟。  延伸查詢new window
3.Brodsky, J.、Habib, J.、Hirschfeld, M.(2003)。Key policy issues in long-term care。Geneva:World Health Organization collection on long-term care。  new window
4.Hutten, J. B. F.、Kerkstra, A.(1996)。Home Care in Europe: A Countryspecific Guide to Its Organization and Financing。Aldershot:Arena。  new window
5.Rosen, S.(1988)。Home Care and Home Care Workers in Five Countries: Britain, Sweden, Norway, and Canada。New York:Centre for labor Management Poilcy Studies。  new window
6.Stone, R. I.、Dawson, S. L.、Harahan, M.(2003)。Why Work force Development Should be Part of the Long-Term Care Quality Debate。Washington, DC:Institute for the Future of Aging Services。  new window
其他
1.台北市政府社會局(2001)。台北市政府社會局辦理居家照顧服務計畫。  延伸查詢new window
2.吳淑瓊,蕭玉煌,劉玉蘭,林萬億,陳永豐,李貴榮(2001)。考察英國、德國及瑞典長期照護制度報告書,台北。,https://report.nat. gov.tw/ReportFront/ReportDetail/detail?sysId=C09003633,(09003633)。  延伸查詢new window
3.呂寶靜(1998)。家庭照顧者與居家服務機構工作員關係之初探,台北:行政院國家科學委員會專題研究。  延伸查詢new window
圖書論文
1.Cancian, F. M.(2000)。Paid Emotional Care。Care Work: Gender,Class, and the Welfare State。New York:Routledge。  new window
2.Knijn, T.(2000)。Marketization and the Struggling Lgics of (Home) Care in the Netherlands。Care Work: Gender labor, Class and the Welfare State。New York:Routledge。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
無相關點閱
 
QR Code
QRCODE