Social care for older people - a blind spot in the Norwegian care system.

A growing number of older people in Norway receive care services at home. Public policy aims at promoting social safety, preventing social problems and providing recipients of care with the means to live an active and meaningful everyday life together with others. However, health-related services have long been prioritized at the expense of other care services. Our aims are to investigate how professional caregivers in Norwegian home care for older people relate their professional mandate to social care to assess what different professional positions regarding social care imply for realizing the ideal of integrated and person-centered care. Interviews with 16 professional caregivers are analyzed within the framework of positioning theory. A variety of discursive positions relating the own professional mandate to social care are identified. Findings suggest that the absence of common standards leaves it up to the individual caregiver if social care needs are met or not. Common standards for social care delivery and a more suitable skill mix among health and social care professionals are proposed.

An ideal-typical model for comparing interprofessional relations and skill mix in health care.

BACKGROUND: Comparisons of health system performance, including the regulations of interprofessional relations and the skill mix between health professions are challenging. National strategies for regulating interprofessional relations vary widely across European health care systems. Unambiguously defined and generally accepted performance indicators have to remain generic, with limited power for recognizing the organizational structures regulating interprofessional relations in different health systems. A coherent framework for in-depth comparisons of different models for organizing interprofessional relations and the skill mix between professional groups is currently not available. This study aims to develop an ideal-typical framework for categorizing skill mix and interprofessional relations in health care, and to assess the potential impact for different ideal types on care coordination and integrated service delivery. METHODS: A document analysis of the Health Systems in Transition (HiT) reports published by the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies was conducted. The HiT reports to 31 European health systems were analyzed using a qualitative content analysis and a process of meaning condensation. RESULTS: The educational tracks available to nurses have an impact on the professional autonomy for nurses, the hierarchy between professional groups, the emphasis given to negotiating skill mix, interdisciplinary teamwork and the extent of cooperation across the health and social service interface. Based on the results of the document analysis, three ideal types for regulating interprofessional relations and skill mix in health care are delimited. For each ideal type, outcomes on service coordination and holistic service delivery are described. CONCLUSIONS: Comparisons of interprofessional relations are necessary for proactive health human resource policies. The proposed ideal-typical framework provides the means for in-depth comparisons of interprofessional relations in the health care workforce beyond of what is possible with directly comparable, but generic performance indicators.

Between health care and social security--psychiatric patients and the disability pension system in Norway and Russia.

BACKGROUND: The official statistics of persons with mental disorders who are granted disability pension (DP) in Russia and Norway indicate large differences between the countries. METHODS: This qualitative explorative hypothesis-generating study is based on text analysis of the laws, regulations and guidelines, and qualitative interviews of informants representing all the organisational elements of the DP systems in both countries. RESULTS: The DP application process is initiated much later in Norway than in Russia, where a 3 year occupational rehabilitation and adequate treatment is mandatory before DP is granted. In Russia, two instances are responsible for preparing of the medical certification for DP, a patients medical doctor (PD) and a clinical expert commission (CEC) while there is one in Norway (PD). In Russia, the Bureau of Medical-Social Expertise is responsible for evaluation and granting of DP. In Norway, the local social insurance offices (SIO) are responsible for the DP application. Decisions are taken collectively in Russia, while the Norwegian PD and SIO officer often take decisions alone. In Russia, the medical criterion is the decisive one, while rehabilitation and treatment criteria are given priority in Norway. The size of the DP in Norway is enough to cover of subsistences expenditure, while the Russian DP is less than the level required for minimum subsistence. CONCLUSION: There were noteworthy differences in the time frame, organisation model and process leading to a DP in the two countries. These differences may explain why so few patients with less severe mental disorders receive a DP in Russia. This fact, in combination with the size of the DP, may hamper reforms of the mental health care system in Russia.