Abstract：
UNASSIGNED: Older care recipients have different types of care networks, varying from spouse-only to large mixed care networks, that add to different levels of wellbeing. Applying Self-Determination Theory (SDT) to the care context, we argue that the care network composition may foster or hamper the three basic needs for wellbeing: relatedness, autonomy and competence.
UNASSIGNED: Data are from ten observations between 1992 and 2022 of the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam (N = 18,434 observations from 4,837 older Dutch adults). Five care network types are used: no care, partner, informal, formal or privately paid care. Mixed-hybrid-multilevel regression analysis of depressive symptoms as measure of wellbeing is applied on care network type and loneliness, mastery and care sufficiency as indicators of the three basic needs for wellbeing.
UNASSIGNED: Receiving care from a partner care network is, compared to the formal care network, the most negatively associated with depressive symptoms, followed by informal care and privately paid care. Differences in care network types existed in loneliness and care sufficiency, but not in mastery, and in part explained the association between care network types and depressive symptoms. Results of between and within effects are comparable.
UNASSIGNED: Using a rich data set and advanced methodology support the hypotheses that formal care networks hamper wellbeing due to insufficient care and increased loneliness, in particular compared to partner and informal care. The role of mastery was less important, possibly because it does not measure care related level of control.
UNASSIGNED: Data are from ten observations between 1992 and 2022 of the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam (N = 18,434 observations from 4,837 older Dutch adults). Five care network types are used: no care, partner, informal, formal or privately paid care. Mixed-hybrid-multilevel regression analysis of depressive symptoms as measure of wellbeing is applied on care network type and loneliness, mastery and care sufficiency as indicators of the three basic needs for wellbeing.
UNASSIGNED: Receiving care from a partner care network is, compared to the formal care network, the most negatively associated with depressive symptoms, followed by informal care and privately paid care. Differences in care network types existed in loneliness and care sufficiency, but not in mastery, and in part explained the association between care network types and depressive symptoms. Results of between and within effects are comparable.
UNASSIGNED: Using a rich data set and advanced methodology support the hypotheses that formal care networks hamper wellbeing due to insufficient care and increased loneliness, in particular compared to partner and informal care. The role of mastery was less important, possibly because it does not measure care related level of control.
摘要：
■老年护理接受者有不同类型的护理网络，从仅配偶到大型混合护理网络，这增加了不同水平的福祉。将自决理论(SDT)应用于护理环境，我们认为，护理网络的构成可能会促进或阻碍健康的三个基本需求：相关性，自主权和能力。
■数据来自1992年至2022年阿姆斯特丹纵向衰老研究的十项观察结果（N=18434观察结果，来自4,837名荷兰老年人）。使用五种护理网络类型：无护理，合作伙伴,非正式,正式或私人付费护理。抑郁症状的混合-混合-多层次回归分析作为健康的衡量被应用于护理网络类型和孤独感，掌握和护理充分性作为三个基本福祉需求的指标。
■接受来自合作伙伴护理网络的护理是，与正式的护理网络相比，与抑郁症状最负面的关联，其次是非正式护理和私人付费护理。孤独感和护理充分性存在护理网络类型的差异，但不是掌握，部分解释了护理网络类型与抑郁症状之间的关联。效果之间和效果内的结果是可比的。
■使用丰富的数据集和先进的方法支持以下假设：正式护理网络由于护理不足和孤独感的增加而阻碍了健康，特别是与伴侣和非正式护理相比。掌握的作用不那么重要，可能是因为它没有衡量与护理相关的控制水平。
■数据来自1992年至2022年阿姆斯特丹纵向衰老研究的十项观察结果（N=18434观察结果，来自4,837名荷兰老年人）。使用五种护理网络类型：无护理，合作伙伴,非正式,正式或私人付费护理。抑郁症状的混合-混合-多层次回归分析作为健康的衡量被应用于护理网络类型和孤独感，掌握和护理充分性作为三个基本福祉需求的指标。
■接受来自合作伙伴护理网络的护理是，与正式的护理网络相比，与抑郁症状最负面的关联，其次是非正式护理和私人付费护理。孤独感和护理充分性存在护理网络类型的差异，但不是掌握，部分解释了护理网络类型与抑郁症状之间的关联。效果之间和效果内的结果是可比的。
■使用丰富的数据集和先进的方法支持以下假设：正式护理网络由于护理不足和孤独感的增加而阻碍了健康，特别是与伴侣和非正式护理相比。掌握的作用不那么重要，可能是因为它没有衡量与护理相关的控制水平。
