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
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":"","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.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
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.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信