The aim of this study was to compare and analyze the awareness of the grading system and satisfaction rate of grading results of long-term care recognition staff, recipients and recipients’ families, in order to understand problems of the grading sy...
The aim of this study was to compare and analyze the awareness of the grading system and satisfaction rate of grading results of long-term care recognition staff, recipients and recipients’ families, in order to understand problems of the grading system and present a direction for improvement of the elderly long-term insurance system.
Research subjects were elderly long-term insurance operation center staff, recipients who received grading, and recipients’ families. A total of 105 people participated in a survey from each category, and surveys were collected from 64 staff and 77 recipients. The preceding studies on the level evaluation system by Tae-hee Hwang (2011) and Ji-woong Kim (2012), and a study on satisfaction rate by Hong-sook Yoon (2011) were referenced for the survey structure. The questions from these preceding studies were revised and supplemented for this study. Satisfaction rate was evaluated based on a 5-point scale consisting of ‘not at all,’ ‘no,’ ‘average,’ ‘yes’ and ‘very much so.’ Independent variables related to satisfaction were divided into variables related to the level evaluation standard according to factors, variables related to the grading committee, variables related to the recognition research process, and variables related to the elderly long-term care insurance system in general.
The research period was after IRB authorization, from December 31, 2013 to March 31, 2013, and conducted through visits or e-mails. The collected material was analyzed using the SPSS Win 18.0 program, and frequency analysis, t-test and technical statistical analysis were conducted to examine the basic characteristics of each variable. Multiple regression analysis and one-way variance analysis were conducted to extract factors that affect grading results satisfaction.
The results of this study can be summarized as follows.
First, the general characteristics of the staff showed that most were women in their forties to fifties who were college graduates. Most were social welfare workers, and in good health. The general characteristics of the recipients and their families showed that most were women over the age of 50 with chronic diseases, and many had a monthly average income of 1 million won or less. Most wanted and currently received nursing visits, and most of the recipients were grade 3 recipients.
Second, a comparison of satisfaction rate of grading results according to general characteristics of staff showed that the satisfaction rate was highest for those without those with other occupations, and there were significant differences in grading satisfaction rate according to disease duration and grading type of recipients.
Third, a comparison of satisfaction rate of grading results according to grading system related categories showed that the satisfaction rate of recipients was lower the more they thought there were problems with the grading, and the more they thought the level standard for elderly with dementia was eased. While staff thought the level standard for elderly with dementia was eased, most recipients said they did not feel like the standard for elderly with dementia was eased, and expressed difficulties with taking care of dementia patients and dissatisfaction with the level for elderly with dementia. The satisfaction rate of staff with the level evaluation results was lower as they felt more difficulties with level evaluation of dementia patients with awareness or action disabilities. The problems that surfaced the most were difficulties in accurately evaluating the range of awareness or action changes of dementia patients in the recognition research process, which depends on the statements of guardians, and difficulties in handling false or exaggerated statements.
Recipients were found to be more satisfied with the grading results the more they were aware of the members of the grading committee, and staff were more satisfied with the grading results the more they thought the recipient’s health condition at the time of recognition research was reflected, and the smaller the deviation of grading results was for each area. In addition, the satisfaction rate was higher for staff the smaller the level of deviation was according to the elderly’s condition at the time of visit for research.
The factors that affect grading satisfaction presented in this study may be used as foundation material for establishing the role of the elderly long-term care insurance system that is continuing to expand. There is a need to provide a solution to improve awareness and satisfaction rate of the level evaluation system, and improve expertise and reliability of long-term care staff.