Search

This paper aims to establish strategies of coping with COVID-19 pandemic adopted by the clients of social assistance from the perspective of social workers. The qualitative research among Polish social workers and family assistants was conducted from September to November 2021. Based on 30 in-depth interviews with social work professionals, groups of social assistance clients' behaviours were identified and classified into the theoretical models of reactions to social change by Merton and Giddens. The following types of behaviour have been selected and categorized into four groups of reactions when dealing with social workers in a pandemic situation: coolheaded calculation, defiance, confusion, and adaptation. At the same time, reactions to the situation of social change were categorized into one of the strategies of active or passive behaviour: innovation, contestation, retreat, and acceptance. In addition, we discussed the impact of clients' coping strategies on social workers and established three attitudes of the surveyed social workers: adapting to the pandemic situation and customer behaviour, assuming the role of an emotional buffer and informant, and expecting support from superiors and coworkers. Knowing the behaviour of social assistance clients in a challenging situation makes it possible to adopt tailor-made measures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We examined the costs and cost‐effectiveness of the Meeting Centre Support Programme (MCSP) implemented and piloted in the UK, Poland and Italy, replicating the Dutch Meeting Centre model. Dutch Meeting Centres combine day services for people with dementia with carer support. Data were collected over 2015–2016 from MCSP and usual care (UC) participants (people with dementia‐carer dyads) at baseline and 6 months. We examined participants' health and social care (HSC), and societal costs, including Meeting Centre (MC) attendances. Costs and outcomes in MCSP and UC groups were compared. Primary outcomes: Persons with dementia: quality‐adjusted life years (EQ‐5D‐5L‐derived); QOL‐AD. DQoL was examined as a secondary outcome. Carers: Short Sense of Competence Questionnaire (SSCQ). Incremental cost‐effectiveness ratios (ICER) and cost‐effectiveness acceptability curves were obtained by bootstrapping outcome and cost regression estimates. Eighty‐three MCSP and 69 UC dyads were analysed. The 6‐month cost of providing MCSP was €4,703; participants with dementia attended MC a mean of 45 times and carers 15 times. Including intervention costs, adjusted 6‐month HSC costs were €5,941higher in MCSP than in UC. From the HSC perspective: in terms of QALY, the probability of cost‐effectiveness was zero over willingness‐to‐pay (WTP) ranging from €0 to €350,000. On QOL‐AD, the probability of cost‐effectiveness of MCSP was 50% at WTP of €5,000 for a one‐point increase. A one‐point gain in the DQoL positive affect subscale had a probability of cost‐effectiveness of 99% at WTP over €8,000. On SSCQ, no significant difference was found between MCSP and UC. Evidence for cost‐effectiveness of MCSP was mixed but suggests that it may be cost‐effective in relation to gains in dementia‐specific quality of life measures. MCs offer effective tailored post‐diagnostic support services to both people with dementia and carers in a context where few evidence‐based alternatives to formal home‐based social services may be available. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]