Consequences of contact restrictions for long-term care residents during the first months of COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review.

IF 3.7 2区 社会学 Q1 GERONTOLOGY European Journal of Ageing Pub Date : 2023-10-17 DOI:10.1007/s10433-023-00787-6
Petra Benzinger, Hans-Werner Wahl, Jürgen M Bauer, Anne Keilhauer, Ilona Dutzi, Simone Maier, Natalie Hölzer, Wilco P Achterberg, Natascha-Elisabeth Denninger
{"title":"Consequences of contact restrictions for long-term care residents during the first months of COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review.","authors":"Petra Benzinger, Hans-Werner Wahl, Jürgen M Bauer, Anne Keilhauer, Ilona Dutzi, Simone Maier, Natalie Hölzer, Wilco P Achterberg, Natascha-Elisabeth Denninger","doi":"10.1007/s10433-023-00787-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>During the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, stringent measures were implemented in most countries to limit social contact between residents of long-term care facilities (LTCF) and visitors. The objective of this scoping review was to identify and map evidence of direct and indirect consequences of contact restrictions, guided by three conceptual perspectives: (1) stress and learned helplessness (i.e., failure to use coping behaviors even when they are available and actionalble); (2) social contact loss; and (3) 'total institution' (i.e., a facility operates following a fixed plan due to spelled-out rules and norms, controlled by institutional representatives). We used the framework for conducting a scoping review by Arksey and O'Malley; included were peer-reviewed manuscripts reporting on the outcomes of contact restrictions from the beginning of the pandemic until the end of 2020. After removing duplicates, 6,656 records were screened and 62 manuscripts included. Results pertaining to the stress and learned helplessness perspective primarily focused on depressive symptoms, showing substantial increases compared to the pre-pandemic period. Studies examining cognitive and functional decline, as well as non-COVID-19 related mortality, were limited in number and presented mixed findings. The majority of study outcomes related to the social contact loss perspective focused on loneliness, but the study designs did not adequately allow for comparisons with the pre-pandemic status. The evidence concerning outcomes related to the 'total Institution' perspective was inconclusive. Although detrimental effects of social isolation in the long-term care context found support particularly in the negative affect domain, other outcome areas did not allow for definitive conclusions due to considerable variations in findings and, in some cases, insufficient statistical power.</p>","PeriodicalId":47766,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Ageing","volume":"20 1","pages":"39"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10581973/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Ageing","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10433-023-00787-6","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

During the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, stringent measures were implemented in most countries to limit social contact between residents of long-term care facilities (LTCF) and visitors. The objective of this scoping review was to identify and map evidence of direct and indirect consequences of contact restrictions, guided by three conceptual perspectives: (1) stress and learned helplessness (i.e., failure to use coping behaviors even when they are available and actionalble); (2) social contact loss; and (3) 'total institution' (i.e., a facility operates following a fixed plan due to spelled-out rules and norms, controlled by institutional representatives). We used the framework for conducting a scoping review by Arksey and O'Malley; included were peer-reviewed manuscripts reporting on the outcomes of contact restrictions from the beginning of the pandemic until the end of 2020. After removing duplicates, 6,656 records were screened and 62 manuscripts included. Results pertaining to the stress and learned helplessness perspective primarily focused on depressive symptoms, showing substantial increases compared to the pre-pandemic period. Studies examining cognitive and functional decline, as well as non-COVID-19 related mortality, were limited in number and presented mixed findings. The majority of study outcomes related to the social contact loss perspective focused on loneliness, but the study designs did not adequately allow for comparisons with the pre-pandemic status. The evidence concerning outcomes related to the 'total Institution' perspective was inconclusive. Although detrimental effects of social isolation in the long-term care context found support particularly in the negative affect domain, other outcome areas did not allow for definitive conclusions due to considerable variations in findings and, in some cases, insufficient statistical power.

Abstract Image

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
新冠肺炎大流行前几个月长期护理居民接触限制的后果:范围审查。
在新冠肺炎大流行的早期阶段,大多数国家都采取了严格措施,限制长期护理机构(LTCF)居民与访客之间的社交接触。本次范围界定审查的目的是在三个概念视角的指导下,识别和绘制接触限制直接和间接后果的证据:(1)压力和习得性无助(即,即使应对行为可用且可采取行动,也未能使用);(2) 社会联系缺失;以及(3)“整体机构”(即,由于明确的规则和规范,设施按照固定计划运营,由机构代表控制)。我们使用了Arksey和O'Malley进行范围界定审查的框架;其中包括报告从疫情开始到2020年底接触限制结果的同行评审手稿。在去除重复后,共筛选了6656份记录,包括62份手稿。与压力和习得性无助有关的结果主要集中在抑郁症状上,与疫情前相比大幅增加。研究认知和功能下降以及非COVID-19相关死亡率的研究数量有限,结果喜忧参半。与社会接触丧失视角相关的大多数研究结果都集中在孤独上,但研究设计没有充分考虑与疫情前的状态进行比较。与“整体制度”观点相关的结果证据是不确定的。尽管社会隔离在长期护理环境中的有害影响得到了支持,特别是在负面影响领域,但由于研究结果的差异很大,在某些情况下,统计能力不足,其他结果领域无法得出明确结论。
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
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
7.90%
发文量
72
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Ageing: Social, Behavioural and Health Perspectives is an interdisciplinary journal devoted to the understanding of ageing in European societies and the world over. EJA publishes original articles on the social, behavioral and population health aspects of ageing and encourages an integrated approach between these aspects. Emphasis is put on publishing empirical research (including meta-analyses), but conceptual papers (including narrative reviews) and methodological contributions will also be considered. EJA welcomes expert opinions on critical issues in ageing. By stimulating communication between researchers and those using research findings, it aims to contribute to the formulation of better policies and the development of better practice in serving older adults. To further specify, with the term ''social'' is meant the full scope of social science of ageing related research from the micro to the macro level of analysis. With the term ''behavioural'' the full scope of psychological ageing research including life span approaches based on a range of age groups from young to old is envisaged. The term ''population health-related'' denotes social-epidemiological and public health oriented research including research on functional health in the widest possible sense.
期刊最新文献
Cohort and gender differences in the association between childlessness and social exclusion in old age. Prevention of frailty in relation with social out-of-home activities in older adults: results from the Survey of Health, Ageing, and Retirement in Europe. Aging in place or aging out of place? Family caregivers' perspectives on care for older Pakistani migrants in Norway. Job satisfaction declines before retirement in Germany. Cost-effectiveness analysis of the digital fall preventive intervention Safe Step among community-dwelling older people aged 70 and older.
×
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