As a result of the rapid ageing of societies, meeting the demands for long-term care has become increasingly difficult. In the Netherlands, informal care is recognised as a key element to compensate for cut-backs in formal care provision. Formal, informal and privately paid long-term care services, however, are not used equally across socio-economic status (SES) groups and whether these inequalities have been reduced or exacerbated over time has not been researched. This study investigates to what extent educational and income inequalities in the use of formal, informal and privately paid care have changed over time. Data from the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam (LASA) was used from three points in time: 1995 (N = 787), 2005 (N = 550) and 2015 (N = 473). Participants were between 75 and 85 years of age and living independently. The results indicate that lower SES groups are consistently more likely to use formal and informal care, and less likely to use privately paid care compared to higher SES groups. An increase in inequality was only found in the use of informal care; while informal care use is stable among lower SES groups, it decreases steeply among higher SES groups. These findings highlight the importance of education for explaining variation and changes over time in care use. Governmental efforts to mobilise informal care-givers might be outweighed by trends towards less long-term care.

由于社会迅速老龄化，满足长期护理需求变得越来越困难。在荷兰，非正式护理被认为是补偿正式护理供应减少的关键因素。然而，正式、非正式和私人支付的长期护理服务在社会经济地位 (SES) 群体中并没有得到平等使用，而且这些不平等是否随着时间的推移而减少或加剧还没有研究。本研究调查了在使用正规、非正规和私人有偿护理方面的教育和收入不平等随时间变化的程度。阿姆斯特丹纵向老龄化研究 (LASA) 的数据来自三个时间点：1995 年（N = 787）、2005 年（N = 550）和 2015 年（N = 473）。参与者年龄在 75 至 85 岁之间，独立生活。结果表明，与较高 SES 群体相比，较低 SES 群体始终更有可能使用正式和非正式护理，并且不太可能使用私人付费护理。只有在使用非正式护理时才会发现不平等加剧；虽然非正式护理的使用在低 SES 群体中保持稳定，但在高 SES 群体中急剧下降。这些发现强调了教育对于解释护理使用随时间变化的重要性。政府动员非正式护理人员的努力可能会被长期护理减少的趋势所抵消。虽然非正式护理的使用在低 SES 群体中保持稳定，但在高 SES 群体中急剧下降。这些发现强调了教育对于解释护理使用随时间变化的重要性。政府动员非正式护理人员的努力可能会被长期护理减少的趋势所抵消。虽然非正式护理的使用在低 SES 群体中保持稳定，但在高 SES 群体中急剧下降。这些发现强调了教育对于解释护理使用随时间变化的重要性。政府动员非正式护理人员的努力可能会被长期护理减少的趋势所抵消。