Objectives: Typologies are frequently utilised in analyses of the quality, funding, and efficiency of aged care systems. This review aims to provide a comprehensive resource identifying and critiquing existing aged care typologies. Methods: Systematic search of MEDLINE, Econlit, Google Scholar, greylit.org and Open Grey databases from inception to July 2020, including typologies of national, regional or provider aged care systems. Article screening, data extraction, and quality appraisal were conducted in duplicate. Results: 14 aged care typologies were identified; five applied to residential care, two to home care and seven to mixed settings; eight examined national systems and seven regional or provider systems. Five typologies classifying national financing or home care services, provider financing of staff and services and quality of residential care were considered high quality. The schematic provided summarises the focus area and aids in typology selection. Discussion: The aged care typologies identified cover a wide range of areas and contexts of aged care provision. This schematic, summary and critique will aid researchers, providers, and aged care policy makers to examine their own setting, compare it to other approaches to aged care provision and assist in identifying alternatives and important considerations, when undertaking aged care reform.
DyerSMValeriMAroraN, et al.Review of international systems for long-term care of older people. Adelaide, Australia: Flinders University, 2019.
2.
GoodwinNDixonAAnsersonG, et al.Providing integrated care for older people with complex needs: lessons from seven international case studies. London, UK: The King’s Fund, 2014.
KrausMRiedelMMotE, et al.A typology of long-term care systems in Europe. London, UK: European Network of Economic Policy Research Institutes, 2010, p. 91.
RobertK. International aged care: a quick guide. In: Department of parliamentary services. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia, 2017.
8.
CollierDLaPorteJSeawrightJ. Chapter 7 typologies: forming concepts and creating categorial variables. In: Box-SteffensmeierJMBradyHECollierD (eds). The oxford handbook of political methodology. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2008.
9.
ShortelSMBazzoliGJDubbsNL, et al.Classifying health networks and systems: managerial and policy implications. Health Care Management Review2000; 25: 9–17.
10.
JoshuaL. Aging and long term care systems: a review of finaance and governance arrangements in Europe, North America and Asia-Pacific. Washington, DC: World Bank Group, 2017
11.
World Health Organization. Framework for countries to achieve an integrated continuum of long-term care. Geneva: World Health Organisation, 2021.
12.
WeinerJCoeNBHoffmanA, et al.Policy options for financing long-term care in the. U.S. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania, 2020.
13.
LongoFClaxtonKLomasJ, et al.Does public long-term care expenditure improve care-related quality of life of service users in England?Health Econ2021; 30(10): 2561–2581.
14.
HwangHRoehnO. Tackling the challenges of population ageing in the Slovak Republic. Paris, France: OECD, 2022.
15.
KimMYSubramaniamPFlickerL. The Australian aged care and its implications for the Korean aging Crisis. Ann Geriatr Med Res2018; 22(1): 9–19.
16.
DyerSMValeriMAroraN, et al.Is Australia over-reliant on residential aged care to support our older population?Med J Aust2020; 213(4): 156–157.
17.
Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety. Final Report. Sydney: Commonwealth of Australia, 2021
AyresLKnaflKA. Typological analysis. In: The Sage Encyclopedia of qualitative research methods [Internet]. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc, 2012.
20.
PageMJMcKenzieJEBossuytPM, et al.The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ2021; 74: 790–799.
21.
MoherDLiberatiATetzlaffJ, et al.Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med2009; 6(7): e1000097.
22.
GodinKStapletonJKirkpatrickSI, et al.Applying systematic review search methods to the grey literature: a case study examining guidelines for school-based breakfast programs in Canada. Syst Rev2015; 4: 138.
23.
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. Proposal for a taxonomy of health insurance. Paris, France: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, 2004.
24.
BeeberASZimmermanSReedD, et al.Licensed nurse staffing and health service availability in residential care and assisted living. J Am Geriatr Soc2014; 62(5): 805–811.
25.
CorazziniKNAndersonRAMuellerC, et al.Jurisdiction over nursing care systems in nursing homes: latent class analysis. Nurs Res2012; 61(1): 28–38.
26.
DuanYMuellerCAYuF, et al.An empirical typology of nursing home culture change implementation. J Appl Gerontol2020; 40(9): 073346482091236.
27.
MarquardtG. Wayfinding for people with dementia: a review of the role of architectural design. Herd2011; 4(2): 75–90.
28.
TriggL. Improving the quality of residential care for older people: a study of government approaches in England and Australia. London: London School of Economics, 2018.
29.
LehningAScharlachAWolfJP. An emerging typology of community aging initiatives. Journal of Community Practice2012; 20(3): 293–316.
30.
Van EenooLvan der RoestHOnderG, et al.Organizational home care models across Europe: a cross sectional study. Int J Nurs Stud2018; 77: 39–45.
31.
ColomboF. Typology of public coverage for long-term care in OECD Countries. In: Costa-FontJCourbageC (eds). Financing long-term care in Europe: institutions, markets and models. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan UK, 2012, pp. 17–40.
32.
Da RoitBLe BihanB. Similar and yet so different: cash-for-care in six European countries' long-term care policies. Milbank Q2010; 88(3): 286–309.
33.
HaláskováRBednářPHaláskováM. Forms of providing and financing long-term care in OECD Countries. Review of Economic Perspectives2017; 17(2): 159–178.
34.
MalleyJTrukeschitzBTriggL. Policy instruments to promote good quality long-term care services. Long-term care reforms in OECD countries: successes and failures. Paris, France: OECD, 2016.
35.
NusemEWrigleyCMatthewsJ. Exploring aged care business models: a typological study. Ageing and Society2017; 37(2): 386–409.
World Health Organization. World report on ageing and health. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2015.
38.
van der RoestHGvan EenooLvan LierLI, et al.Development of a novel benchmark method to identify and characterize best practices in home care across six European countries: design, baseline, and rationale of the IBenC project. BMC Health Serv Res2019; 19(1): 310.
39.
EagarKWesteraASnoekM, et al.How Australian residential aged care staffing levels compare with international and national benchmarks. Wollongong: University of Wollongong, 2019.
40.
Weech-MaldonadoRMeret-HankeLNeffMC, et al.Nurse staffing patterns and quality of care in nursing homes. Health Care Manage Rev2004; 29(2): 107–116.
41.
BostickJERantzMJFlesnerMK, et al.Systematic review of studies of staffing and quality in nursing homes. J Am Med Dir Assoc2006; 7(6): 366–376.
42.
AndersonKBirdMMacPhersonS, et al.How do staff influence the quality of long-term dementia care and the lives of residents? A systematic review of the evidence. Int Psychogeriatr2016; 28(8): 1263–1281.
43.
AikenLHCimiottiJPSloaneDM, et al.Effects of nurse staffing and nurse education on patient deaths in hospitals with different nurse work environments. J Nurs Adm2012; 42(10 Suppl): S10–S16.
44.
KaneRLShamliyanTMuellerC, et al.Nurse staffing and quality of patient care. Evid Rep Technol Assess2007; 151: 1–115.
45.
NeffDFCimiottiJSloaneDM, et al.Utilization of non-US educated nurses in US hospitals: implications for hospital mortality. Int J Qual Health Care2013; 25(4): 366–372.
46.
HarringtonCChoiniereJGoldmannM, et al.Nursing home staffing standards and staffing levels in six countries. J Nurs Scholarsh2012; 44(1): 88–98.
47.
BowblisJRGhattasAE. The impact of minimum quality standard regulations on nursing home staffing, quality, and exit decisions. Rev Ind Organ2017; 50: 43–68.
48.
SharkeySSHudakSHornSD, et al.Frontline caregiver daily practices: a comparison study of traditional nursing homes and the Green House project sites. J Am Geriatr Soc2011; 59(1): 126–131.
49.
ZimmermanSShierVSalibaD. Transforming nursing home culture: evidence for practice and policy. Gerontologist2014; 54(Suppl 1): S1–5.
50.
CollierDLaPorteJSeawrightJ. Putting typologies to work: concept formation, measurement, and analytic Rigor. Political Research Quarterly2012; 65(1): 217–232.
51.
BurauVBlankRHPavoliniE. Typologies of Healthcare Systems and Policies. In: The palgrave international handbook of healthcare policy and governance [internet]. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015.
52.
Scheil-AdlungX. Long-term care protection for older persons: a review of coverage deficits in 46 countries. Geneva: International Labour Office, 2015.
53.
LagardeMHainesAPalmerN. The impact of conditional cash transfers on health outcomes and use of health services in low and middle income countries. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2009; 2009(4): Cd008137.
54.
HeWMuenchrathMNKowalP. Shades of gray: a cross-Country study of health and well-being of the older populations in Sage Countries, 2007–2010: International population reports. Washington, DC, USA: United States Census Bureau; 2012
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
