Oral health is an important component of general health, yet there is limited financial protection for the costs of oral health care in many countries. This study compares public dental care coverage in a selection of jurisdictions: Australia (New South Wales), Canada (Alberta), England, France, Germany, Italy, Sweden, and the United States. Drawing on the WHO Universal Coverage Cube, we compare breadth (who is covered), depth (share of total costs covered), and scope (services covered), with a focus on adults aged 65 and older. We worked with local experts to populate templates to provide detailed and comparable descriptions of dental care coverage in their jurisdictions. Overall most jurisdictions offer public dental coverage for basic services (exams, x-rays, simple fillings) within four general types of coverage models: 1) deep public coverage for a subset of the older adult population based on strict eligibility criteria: Canada (Alberta), Australia (New South Wales) and Italy; 2) universal but shallow coverage of the older adult population: England, France, Sweden; 3) universal, and predominantly deep coverage for older adults: Germany; and 4) shallow coverage available only to some subgroups of older adults in the United States. Due to the limited availability of comparable data within and across jurisdictions, further research would benefit from standardized data collection initiatives for oral health measures.

Health systems are striving to design and deliver care that is 'person centred'-aligned with the needs and preferences of those receiving it; however, it is unclear what older people and their caregivers value in their care. This paper captures attributes of care that are important to older people and their caregivers. This qualitative descriptive study entailed 1-1 interviews with older adults with multimorbidity receiving community based primary health care in Canada and New Zealand and caregivers. Data were analyzed to identify core attributes of care, important to participants. Feeling heard, appreciated and comfortable; having someone to count on; easily accessing health and social care; knowing how to manage health and what to expect; feeling safe; and being independent were valued. Each attribute had several characteristics including: being treated like a friend; having contact information of a responsive provider; being accompanied to medical and social activities; being given clear treatment options including what to expect; having homes adapted to support limitations and having the opportunity to participate in meaningful hobbies. Attributes of good care extend beyond disease management. While our findings include activities that characterize these attributes, further research on implementation barriers and facilitators is required.

There is growing reliance on unpaid caregivers to provide support to people with care needs. Integrated care approaches that aim to coordinate primary care with community care known as community based primary health care (CBPHC) has been a key policy initiative across health systems; however most attention has been paid to the needs of patients and not caregivers. The objective of this paper was to explore the unmet needs of caregivers of older adults with complex care needs receiving CBPHC. This qualitative descriptive study entailed one-to-one interviews with 80 caregivers from Canada and New Zealand where roles, experiences and needs were explored. Interview text related to unmet need was reviewed inductively and core themes identified. Three themes were identified across CBPHC sites: unrecognized role; lack of personal resources; and no breaks even when services are in place. To support caregivers, models of care such as CBPHC need to look beyond the patient to meaningfully engage caregivers, address their needs and recognize the insight they hold. This knowledge needs to be valued as a key source of evidence to inform developments in health and social care.

Objective: To engage with patients, caregivers and care providers to co‐design components of an intervention that aims to improve delayed hospital discharge experiences.Design: This is a qualitative study, which entailed working groups and co‐design sessions utilizing World Café and deliberative dialogue techniques to continually refine the intervention.Setting and Participants: Our team engaged with 61 participants (patients, caregivers and care providers) in urban and rural communities across Ontario, Canada. A 7‐member Patient and Caregiver Advisory Council participated in all stages of the research.Results: Key challenges experienced during a delayed discharge by patients, caregivers and care providers were poor communication and a lack of care services. Participants recommended a communication guide to support on‐going conversation between care providers, patients and caregivers. The guide included key topics to cover and questions to ask during initial and on‐going conversations to manage expectations and better understand the priorities and goals of patients and caregivers. Service recommendations included getting out of bed and dressed each day, addressing the psycho‐social needs of patients through tailored activities and having a storyboard at the bedside to facilitate on‐going engagement.Discussion and Conclusions: Our findings outline ways to meaningfully engage patients and caregivers during a delayed hospital discharge. Combining this with a minimal basket of services can potentially facilitate a better care experience and outcomes for patients, their care providers and families.

Integrating community-based health and social care has grabbed international attention as a way of addressing the needs of aging populations while contributing to health systems' sustainability. However, integrating initiatives in different jurisdictions work (or do not work) within very various institutional and structural dynamics. The question is, what transferable lessons can we learn to guide policy makers and policy innovators at the local level? In this paper, we consider "aging at home" as a policy option in Ontario, and beyond. In the first section, we focus on the problem, in effect, what not to do. Here, we briefly review findings from national and international research literature and from our own research in Ontario that identify the costs and consequences of non-systems of care for older persons. In the second part, we turn to solutions, in effect, what to do. Drawing on our recent scoping review of the international literature, we identify three guiding principles, as well as a number of recommendations, for integrating care for older persons, knowing that important details of how to put such initiatives "on the ground" will be provided by other contributors to this journal edition.