The Long-Lasting Effect of Multidisciplinary Interventions for Emotional and Social Loneliness in Older Community-Dwelling Individuals: A Systematic Review.

IF 2.4 Q1 NURSING Nursing Reports Pub Date : 2024-12-06 DOI:10.3390/nursrep14040281
Georgiana Zaharia, Vanessa Ibáñez-Del Valle, Omar Cauli, Silvia Corchón
{"title":"The Long-Lasting Effect of Multidisciplinary Interventions for Emotional and Social Loneliness in Older Community-Dwelling Individuals: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Georgiana Zaharia, Vanessa Ibáñez-Del Valle, Omar Cauli, Silvia Corchón","doi":"10.3390/nursrep14040281","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Loneliness can occur at any age, but it is more prevalent among older adults due to the associated risk factors. Various interventions exist to improve this situation, but little is known about their long-term effects. Our aims were to determine if these interventions have long-lasting effects and for how long they can be sustained. Additionally, we aimed to analyze if the interventions carried out by volunteers affected the outcomes regarding loneliness and psychological impact.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review was performed by searching the literature in the MEDLINE PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and Web of Science databases for interventions focused on the lonely population. The inclusion criteria for this review were the assessment of loneliness using a validated tool, and loneliness being the primary or secondary outcome. The CASPe checklist was used to assess the risk of bias in the selected studies, and the PRISMA-ScR recommendations were followed to present and synthesize the results.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty articles were included. The interventions identified were classified into five categories: psychosocial, technological, health promotion, physical exercise, and multicomponent interventions. Loneliness improved in 24 studies during the post-intervention analysis. Social connectivity and depressive symptoms also improved in most interventions. Long-term follow-ups were conducted with positive results in a total of 16 interventions. Depressive symptoms and social connectivity were also improved. Eight of the interventions were carried out by volunteers and showed good results regarding loneliness.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results obtained in this work suggested that multidisciplinary interventions can reduce loneliness, but more controlled clinical studies are needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":40753,"journal":{"name":"Nursing Reports","volume":"14 4","pages":"3847-3863"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11676195/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nursing Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/nursrep14040281","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Loneliness can occur at any age, but it is more prevalent among older adults due to the associated risk factors. Various interventions exist to improve this situation, but little is known about their long-term effects. Our aims were to determine if these interventions have long-lasting effects and for how long they can be sustained. Additionally, we aimed to analyze if the interventions carried out by volunteers affected the outcomes regarding loneliness and psychological impact.

Methods: A systematic review was performed by searching the literature in the MEDLINE PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and Web of Science databases for interventions focused on the lonely population. The inclusion criteria for this review were the assessment of loneliness using a validated tool, and loneliness being the primary or secondary outcome. The CASPe checklist was used to assess the risk of bias in the selected studies, and the PRISMA-ScR recommendations were followed to present and synthesize the results.

Results: Thirty articles were included. The interventions identified were classified into five categories: psychosocial, technological, health promotion, physical exercise, and multicomponent interventions. Loneliness improved in 24 studies during the post-intervention analysis. Social connectivity and depressive symptoms also improved in most interventions. Long-term follow-ups were conducted with positive results in a total of 16 interventions. Depressive symptoms and social connectivity were also improved. Eight of the interventions were carried out by volunteers and showed good results regarding loneliness.

Conclusions: The results obtained in this work suggested that multidisciplinary interventions can reduce loneliness, but more controlled clinical studies are needed.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
多学科干预对老年社区居民情感和社会孤独的长期影响:一项系统综述。
背景:孤独可以发生在任何年龄,但由于相关的风险因素,它在老年人中更为普遍。有多种干预措施可以改善这种状况,但对其长期效果知之甚少。我们的目的是确定这些干预措施是否具有持久的效果,以及它们可以持续多久。此外,我们旨在分析志愿者进行的干预是否会影响孤独感和心理影响的结果。方法:通过检索MEDLINE PubMed、SCOPUS、Web of Science、PsycINFO和Web of Science数据库的文献进行系统综述,以获得针对孤独人群的干预措施。本综述的纳入标准是使用经过验证的工具评估孤独感,并且孤独感是主要或次要结局。使用CASPe检查表来评估所选研究的偏倚风险,并遵循PRISMA-ScR建议来呈现和综合结果。结果:共纳入30篇文章。已确定的干预措施分为五类:心理社会、技术、健康促进、体育锻炼和多成分干预。在干预后的分析中,有24项研究的孤独感有所改善。在大多数干预措施中,社会联系和抑郁症状也有所改善。在16项干预措施中进行了长期随访,取得了积极的结果。抑郁症状和社会联系也有所改善。其中八项干预是由志愿者进行的,在孤独感方面显示出良好的效果。结论:本研究结果提示多学科干预可以减少孤独感,但还需要更多的临床对照研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Nursing Reports
Nursing Reports NURSING-
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
4.20%
发文量
78
期刊介绍: Nursing Reports is an open access, peer-reviewed, online-only journal that aims to influence the art and science of nursing by making rigorously conducted research accessible and understood to the full spectrum of practicing nurses, academics, educators and interested members of the public. The journal represents an exhilarating opportunity to make a unique and significant contribution to nursing and the wider community by addressing topics, theories and issues that concern the whole field of Nursing Science, including research, practice, policy and education. The primary intent of the journal is to present scientifically sound and influential empirical and theoretical studies, critical reviews and open debates to the global community of nurses. Short reports, opinions and insight into the plight of nurses the world-over will provide a voice for those of all cultures, governments and perspectives. The emphasis of Nursing Reports will be on ensuring that the highest quality of evidence and contribution is made available to the greatest number of nurses. Nursing Reports aims to make original, evidence-based, peer-reviewed research available to the global community of nurses and to interested members of the public. In addition, reviews of the literature, open debates on professional issues and short reports from around the world are invited to contribute to our vibrant and dynamic journal. All published work will adhere to the most stringent ethical standards and journalistic principles of fairness, worth and credibility. Our journal publishes Editorials, Original Articles, Review articles, Critical Debates, Short Reports from Around the Globe and Letters to the Editor.
期刊最新文献
Knowledge Assessment of Hospital Nursing Staff in Saudi Arabia Regarding Clostridioides difficile Infection: A Descriptive Cross-Sectional Study. The Benefits of Caring Massage® for Patients and Nurses: A Delphi Study. Bridging the Gap: A Phenomenological Study of Transfer Students' Journey into Professional Nursing. A Scoping Review Protocol: Parenting Experiences and Family Dynamics in Pediatric Burn Care Settings from Hospitalization to the Return Home. Vocation of Human Care and Soft Skills in Nursing and Physiotherapy Students: A Cross-Sectional Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1