BackgroundHealth and social services provided at home are becoming increasingly important. Hence, there is a need for information on home care in Europe. The objective of this literature review was to respond to this need by systematically describing what has been reported on home care in Europe in the scientific literature over the past decade.MethodsA systematic literature search was performed for papers on home care published in English, using the following data bases: Cinahl, the Cochrane Library, Embase, Medline, PsycINFO, Sociological Abstracts, Social Services Abstracts, and Social Care Online. Studies were only included if they complied with the definition of home care, were published between January 1998 and October 2009, and dealt with at least one of the 31 specified countries. Clinical interventions, instrument developments, local projects and reviews were excluded. The data extracted included: the characteristics of the study and aspects of home care 'policy & regulation', 'financing', 'organisation & service delivery', and 'clients & informal carers'.ResultsSeventy-four out of 5,133 potentially relevant studies met the inclusion criteria, providing information on 18 countries. Many focused on the characteristics of home care recipients and on the organisation of home care. Geographical inequalities, market forces, quality and integration of services were also among the issues frequently discussed.ConclusionsHome care systems appeared to differ both between and within countries. The papers included, however, provided only a limited picture of home care. Many studies only focused on one aspect of the home care system and international comparative studies were rare. Furthermore, little information emerged on home care financing and on home care in general in Eastern Europe. This review clearly shows the need for more scientific publications on home care, especially studies comparing countries. A comprehensive and more complete insight into the state of home care in Europe requires the gathering of information using a uniform framework and methodology.

BackgroundSocial support has a strong impact on individuals, not least on older individuals with health problems. A lack of support network and poor family or social relations may be crucial in later life, and represent risk factors for elder abuse. This study focused on the associations between social support, demographics/socio-economics, health variables and elder mistreatment.MethodsThe cross-sectional data was collected by means of interviews or interviews/self-response during January-July 2009, among a sample of 4,467 not demented individuals aged 60–84 years living in seven European countries (Germany, Greece, Italy, Lithuania, Portugal, Spain, and Sweden).ResultsMultivariate analyses showed that women and persons living in large households and with a spouse/partner or other persons were more likely to experience high levels of social support. Moreover, frequent use of health care services and low scores on depression or discomfort due to physical complaints were indicators of high social support. Low levels of social support were related to older age and abuse, particularly psychological abuse.ConclusionsHigh levels of social support may represent a protective factor in reducing both the vulnerability of older people and risk of elder mistreatment. On the basis of these results, policy makers, clinicians and researchers could act by developing intervention programmes that facilitate friendships and social activities in old age.

In response to the growing populations of people with multiple chronic diseases, new models of care are currently being developed in European countries to better meet the needs of these people. This paper aims to describe the occurrence and characteristics of various types of integrated care practices in European countries that target people with multimorbidity. Data were analysed from multimorbidity care practices participating in the Innovating care for people with multiple chronic conditions (ICARE4EU) project, covering all 28EU Member States, Iceland, Norway and Switzerland. A total of 112 practices in 24 countries were included: 65 focus on patients with any combination of chronic diseases, 30 on patients with a specific chronic disease with all kinds of comorbidities and 17 on patients with a combination of specific chronic diseases. Practices that focus on a specific index disease or a combination of specific diseases are less extensive regarding the type, breadth and degree of integration than practices that focus on any combination of diseases. The latter type is more often seen in countries where more disciplines, e.g. community nurses, physiotherapists, social workers, work in the same primary care practice as the general practitioners. Non-disease specific practices put more emphasis on patient involvement and provide more comprehensive care, which are important preconditions for person-centered multimorbidity care.

a b s t r a c tIntroduction: Care for people with multimorbidity requires an integrated approach in order to adequately meet their complex needs. In this respect eHealth could be of help. This paper aims to describe the implementation, as well as benefits and barriers of eHealth applications in integrated care programs targeting people with multimorbidity in European countries, including insights on older people 65+. Methods: Within the framework of the ICARE4EU project, in 2014, expert organizations in 24 European countries identified 101 integrated care programs based on selected inclusion criteria. Managers of these programs completed a related on-line questionnaire addressing various aspects including the use of eHealth. In this paper we analyze data from this questionnaire, in addition to qualitative information from six programs which were selected as 'high potential' for their innovative approach and studied in depth through site visits. Results: Out of 101 programs, 85 adopted eHealth applications, of which 42 focused explicitly on older people. In most cases Electronic Health Records (EHRs), registration databases with patients' data and tools for communication between care providers were implemented. Percentages were slightly higher for programs addressing older people. eHealth improves care integration and management processes. Inadequate funding mechanisms, interoperability and technical support represent major barriers. Conclusion: Findings seems to suggest that eHealth could support integrated care for (older) people with multimorbidity.

Country of residence of older people is independent from the four assessed domains associated with AO. Life course perspectives on AO are highly needed to get better insight, and to develop and implement prevention strategies targeted at decreasing prevalence rates of AO.