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.

由于社会的快速老龄化，满足长期护理的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服务减少的一个关键因素。然而，正式、非正式和私人支付的长期护理服务并未在社会经济地位 (SES) 群体中平等使用，并且这些不平等现象是随着时间的推移而减少还是加剧尚未得到研究。本研究调查了在使用正规、非正规和私人付费护理方面的教育和收入不平等在多大程度上随时间发生了变化。使用了来自三个时间点的阿姆斯特丹纵向老化研究 (LASA) 的数据：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 SES 较高的群体相比，SES 较低的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。不平等现象的加剧只出现在使用非正式照料方面；虽然非正式护理的使用在较低社会经济地位群体中稳定，但在较高社会经济地位群体中急剧下降。这些发现强调了教育对于解释护理使用随时间的变化和变化的重要性。政府动员非正式护理人员的努力可能会被减少长期护理的趋势所抵消。虽然非正式护理的使用在较低社会经济地位群体中稳定，但在较高社会经济地位群体中急剧下降。这些发现强调了教育对于解释护理使用随时间的变化和变化的重要性。政府动员非正式护理人员的努力可能会被减少长期护理的趋势所抵消。虽然非正式护理的使用在较低社会经济地位群体中稳定，但在较高社会经济地位群体中急剧下降。这些发现强调了教育对于解释护理使用随时间的变化和变化的重要性。政府动员非正式护理人员的努力可能会被减少长期护理的趋势所抵消。