4.4 Article

Factors affecting unmet healthcare needs of older people in Korea

期刊

INTERNATIONAL NURSING REVIEW
卷 60, 期 4, 页码 510-519

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/inr.12055

关键词

Assessment of Healthcare Needs; Chronic Diseases; Older People

类别

资金

  1. National Research of Korea Grant
  2. Korean Government [NRF-2010-413-B00024]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Despite the fact that the National Health Insurance programmes have ensured universal coverage for Koreans, disparities in access to health care and unmet healthcare needs still exist in Korea. Aim: The purpose of this study was to analyse factors affecting unmet healthcare needs of older people in Korea. Methods: This study had a cross-sectional, descriptive design using secondary data taken from the Korean National Health and Nutrition Survey conducted in 2007-2009. A complex sampling design was used, and the participants included a nationally representative sample of 3943 people older than 64 years. Socio-demographic variables, subjective health, existence of chronic diseases, quality of life and unmet healthcare needs were included in the study instruments. Logistic regression analyses were performed in order to examine the relationship between unmet healthcare needs and independent variables. Results: According to the results, 29.4% of older women and 14.0% of older men had not visited clinics or hospitals when they needed to obtain healthcare services (unmet healthcare needs) during the past 12 months. Older women [odds ratio (OR) = 1.831, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.428-2.347] and those with poor subjective health (OR = 1.708, 95% CI = 1.371-2.126) and arthritis (OR = 1.278, 95% CI = 1.029-1.586) were more likely to have unmet healthcare needs than their counterparts. Conclusions: Efforts to decrease unmet healthcare needs, targeting high-risk groups (especially for older women), are needed in order to prevent disability, decrease mortality and promote the quality of life of older people.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据