失智症日間照顧服務使用狀況與其評估－以嘉義聖馬爾定與三鶯地區健順失智症日間照顧中心為例

謝美娥

doi:10.30074/FJMH.200509_18(3).0003

山西大学，您好！

感谢采购，人社期刊库｜人社论文库，期间：2024/01/01~2024/12/31

感谢试用，科学期刊库｜科学论文库，期间：2024/10/20~2025/01/20

浏览高级检索

关闭
检索检索高级检索出版物检索
浏览期刊主题浏览核心期刊浏览期刊拼音浏览

关闭

查询符号(半角)	查询符号意义说明
空格	表示为「AND」两个查询词之交集
双引号 ( " " )	片语以双引号标示开始及结束，而且只寻找出现顺序相同的字词，例： " image process "
?	表示一个字母切截，输入两个?表两个字母，依此类推，例：输入「Appl?」，查得结果应为appl e , appl y … ( 常用于英文字查询 )
*	表示不限字母切截，由0~n. 例：输入「appl*」，查得结果应为appl e , appl es , appl y , appl ied , appl ication … ( 常用于英文字查询 )
AND、OR、NOT	布尔逻辑组合关键字，用来扩大或缩小查询范围的技巧。 (1) AND ：缩小查询范围 (2) OR ：扩大查询范围(3) NOT：排除不相关的范围

DOI 是数位物件识别码（ D igital O bject I dentifier ）的简称，
为物件在网路上的唯一识别码，可用于永久连结并引用目标物件。

使用DOI作为永久连结

每个DOI号前面加上「 http://dx.doi.org/ 」便成为永久网址。
如以DOI号为 10.5297/ser.1201.002 的文献为例，此文献的永久连结便是： http://dx.doi.org/ 10.5297/ser.1201.002 。
日后不论出版单位如何更动此文献位置，永久连结所指向的位置皆会即时更新，不再错失重要的研究。

引用含有DOI的文献

有DOI的文献在引用时皆应同时引用DOI。若使用APA、Chicago以外未规范DOI的引用格式，可引用DOI永久连结。

DOI可强化引用精确性、增强学术圈连结，并给予使用者跨平台的良好使用经验，目前在全世界已有超过五千万个对象申请DOI。如想对DOI的使用与概念有进一步了解，请参考（）。

ACI:

数据来源：Academic Citation Index，简称ACI

台湾最大的引用文献资料库，目前收录台湾与港澳地区所出版的人文学、社会学领域学术期刊之书目资料与参考文献，总期刊量超过690种，每年定期公布收录期刊的影响指数(Impact Factor)等指标给大众，并提供专家学者与学术单位实用的计量与分析功能。

五年影响指数（5-Year Impact Factor）：某一期刊前五年所出版的文章在当年度的平均被引用次数。

公式：（前五年发表论文在统计年的被引用次数）÷（前五年论文产出论文总篇数）

例如：A期刊2017年之五年影响指数

(A期刊2012-2016年发表论文在2017年的被引总次数)/(A期刊2012-2016年发表的论文总数)

什么是预刊文章？

为提供读者最前线之学术资讯，于期刊文献获同意刊登后、纸本印制完成前，率先于网路线上发表之文章即为预刊文章。预刊文章尚未有卷期、页次及出版日期资讯，但可藉由DOI号识别。 DOI号是文献的数位身份证字号，不论预刊或正式出版皆不会改变，读者可点击DOI连结，或于DOI号前面加上「 http://dx.doi.org/ 」连结到文献目前最新版本。

如何引用预刊文章？

请使用预刊文章的线上发表日期及DOI号来引用该篇文献。

引用范例(视不同引文格式规范可能有所差异)：

作者姓名。文章篇名。期刊名称。 YYYY/MM/DD线上预先发表。

doi:DOI 号

来源数据

P39 - 69

社会科学 > 心理学

DOI： 10.30074/FJMH

书目管理工具

相关连结

问题回报

全文下载

失智症日间照顾服务使用状况与其评估－以嘉义圣马尔定与三莺地区健顺失智症日间照顾中心为例

Use and Evaluation of Day Care Services by Older People with Dementia-Two Empirical Experience

谢美娥(Mei-O Hsieh)

中华心理卫生学刊； 18 卷 3 期 (2005 / 09 / 01) ， P39 - 69

繁体中文 DOI： 10.30074/FJMH.200509_18(3).0003

老人；失智症；日间照顾中心；评估；使用； older people ； dementia ； day care services ； use ； evaluation

0 个人觉得这篇文章赞

摘要 │ 参考文献 (41) │ 被引用文献 (4) │ 国际计量

摘要〈TOP〉

并列摘要〈TOP〉

This study examined the use and evaluation of the day care centers (DCCs) in two Taiwanese communities. DCCs were given prominence in a recent initiative: The Pilot Program of Long Term Care of the Executive Yuan set [Aging in place] as the primary goal and planned to construct the system strategically in three years. DCCs were prioritized for Dementia patients as among other nine newly developed facilities or service programs for the disabled elderly in two experimental communities.
The study used Donabedian's approach to measure the quality of care in terms of structure, process, and outcome. Subjective evaluation of user satisfaction was the methodological component of the study. In the evaluation of two DCCs, current primary caregivers were surveyed by using semi-structured questionnaire, including service content cited in the contract and in the literature. Providers were also interviewed about their experiences and difficulties in providing day care services as well as the resolution of difficulties. Focus groups of community care managers and secondary data from two DCCs were also utilized. In addition, factors of whether or not services were used were also explored.
Two Centers with different organizational models were used as study sites. Chiayi Day Care Center was affiliated with a hospital and adopted the medical adult day care model. This model focused on patients care, rehabilitation and health evaluation. San-Ying Day Care Center, not affiliated with a hospital, adopted the social adult day care model, and prioritized a variety of social activities. There were important differences between the two centers in the flow of patient referrals, the underlying rationale for providing services and the overall costs of providing service. At least one explanation of the differences may be related to different levels of socio-economic status of the two communities.
Highlights of important findings were:
(a) Reasons for using DCCs included lowering burden of caregivers, substituting for care during daytime;
(b) Reasons for not using DCCs when needed were: Barthel's index score being below 70, families being resistant taking the elderly to do dementia evaluation, having family members to care, feeling DCCs as one kind of institutionalization, having doubt with DCCs' caring capability, and feeling the expenses being too high;
(c) When caregivers used Day care centers, almost all of them were satisfied with the center and services provided quantitatively, except some opinions where we used open questions.
The policy implications from these results were discussed.

参考文献 ( 41 ) 〈TOP〉

Andersen, R. M.,Newman, J. F.(1973).Societal and individual determinants of medical care utilization the U.S..Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly,51,95-124.
Aneshensel, C. S.,Pearlin, L. I.,Mullan, J. T.,Zarit, S. H.,Whitlatch, C. J.(1995).Profiles in caregiving: The unexpected career.New York:Academic Press.
Baumgarten, M.,Lebel, P.,Laprise, H.,Leclerc, C.,Quinn, C.(2002).Adult day care for the frail elderly: Outcomes, satisfaction, and cost.Journal of Aging and Health,14(2),237-259.
Beisecker, A. E.,Wright, L. J.(1996).Family caregiver perceptions of benefits and barriers to the use of adult day care for individuals with Alzheimer`s disease.Research on Aging,18(4),430-451.
Burnette, D.,Mui, A. C.(1995).In home and community-based service utilization by three groups of elderly Hispanics: A national perspective.Social Work Research,19(4),197-206.

被引用文献 ( 4 ) 〈TOP〉

国际计量

〈TOP〉

E-mail ：

文章公开取用时，将寄通知信至您填写的信箱地址