ORIGINAL RESEARCH article
Front. Public Health
Sec. Aging and Public Health
This article is part of the Research TopicThe Costs of Caring for Older AdultsView all 15 articles
Preferences and Heterogeneity in Care Service Needs among Disabled Older Adult in an Urban Setting
Provisionally accepted- 1Fourth Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China
- 2The First Affiliated Hospital With Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
【Abstract 】Background: Against the backdrop of an accelerating aging population, notable disparities exist in the demand for care services among the older adult. Objective: This study aims to elucidate the heterogeneous preferences and willingness-to-pay for care services among self-caring older adult and those with varying levels of functional disability, in order to provide evidence-based insights for optimizing resource allocation. Methods: A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was designed, incorporating five core attributes: service content, delivery mode, provider type, cost, and payment mechanism. Using stratified random sampling, 600 self-caring and functionally impaired older adult individuals (Barthel Index ≤60 for the functionally impaired) from an urban city were enrolled. After excluding incomplete responses, 579 valid questionnaires were analyzed, comprising 218 self-caring, 231 moderately disabled, and 130 severely disabled older adult. Data analysis was performed using a conditional logit model. Results: The conditional logit model analysis revealed that the level of disability significantly influenced service preferences. Moderately disabled individuals exhibited significant preferences for service upgrade packages (β=0.164) and partial reimbursement (β=0.329), with a willingness-to-pay (WTP) of 149.37 CNY for the upgrade package. In contrast, severely disabled individuals demonstrated significant preferences for institutional care (β=0.153) and partial reimbursement (β = 0.308), exhibiting a WTP for institutional care as high as 899.56 CNY, which is eight times that of the self-caring group (111.59 CNY). All groups expressed aversion to care provided by nursing aides (β=-0.331 to -0.617), requiring compensation ranging from 322.47 CNY (self-caring) to 1949.40 CNY (severely disabled) to accept such services. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that the level of disability is a key determinant of care preferences among the older adult, characterized by an evolution in demand from "life support" to "professional medical care." We recommend establishing a tiered care system: providing a "home-based + upgraded services" model as the core for moderately disabled individuals, and creating a service network dominated by "institutional + professional medical care" for the severely disabled, complemented by a sliding-scale payment mechanism that prioritizes coverage for professional services under long-term care insurance. This approach aims to achieve precise allocation of care resources.
Keywords: Care Service Needs, Care service preferences, disabled older adult, Discrete choice experiment, Willingness-to-pay (WTP)
Received: 17 Oct 2025; Accepted: 12 Dec 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Zhao and zhao. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence:
Xuewei Zhao
jun zhao
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
