Danielle P. Escueta, Soe Han Tha, Katrina A. Hough, Preston Burnes, Carla M. Perissinotto, Ashwin A. Kotwal
{"title":"The Role of Daily Calls to Telephone Companionship Lines for Older Adults Experiencing Chronic Loneliness","authors":"Danielle P. Escueta, Soe Han Tha, Katrina A. Hough, Preston Burnes, Carla M. Perissinotto, Ashwin A. Kotwal","doi":"10.1111/nyas.70058","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study uses mixed methods to understand the experiences of daily versus nondaily callers to a telephone-based companionship line, the Institute on Aging Friendship Line, for loneliness. Baseline interviews of Friendship Line participants (<i>n</i> = 63) were conducted between October 1st, 2020, and April 30th, 2021, with follow-up interviews at 3 and 6 months. We tested the association of call volume (daily vs. nondaily) with chronic loneliness, defined as scoring 6+ points on the 3-item UCLA Scale (Range: 3–9 points) at two or more time points. In addition, we analyzed qualitative interviews of a purposive sample (<i>n</i> = 23) thematically. Daily callers were more likely to be chronically lonely than nondaily callers (61% vs. 18%, χ<sup>2</sup> (1) = 11.5, <i>p</i><0.001). Although daily callers reported high levels of chronic loneliness, they reported high satisfaction with and meaningful relationships through the Friendship Line (daily: 83% vs. nondaily: 61%, χ<sup>2</sup> (1) = 2.9, <i>p</i> = 0.09). Daily callers described the importance of a long-term, evolving relationship with Friendship Line, whereas nondaily callers described the Friendship Line as an outlet for acute social needs, similar to an urgent care clinic. Taken together, results suggest the Friendship Line is an important source of support for older adults managing both chronic loneliness and occasional loneliness.","PeriodicalId":8250,"journal":{"name":"Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.70058","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This study uses mixed methods to understand the experiences of daily versus nondaily callers to a telephone-based companionship line, the Institute on Aging Friendship Line, for loneliness. Baseline interviews of Friendship Line participants (n = 63) were conducted between October 1st, 2020, and April 30th, 2021, with follow-up interviews at 3 and 6 months. We tested the association of call volume (daily vs. nondaily) with chronic loneliness, defined as scoring 6+ points on the 3-item UCLA Scale (Range: 3–9 points) at two or more time points. In addition, we analyzed qualitative interviews of a purposive sample (n = 23) thematically. Daily callers were more likely to be chronically lonely than nondaily callers (61% vs. 18%, χ2 (1) = 11.5, p<0.001). Although daily callers reported high levels of chronic loneliness, they reported high satisfaction with and meaningful relationships through the Friendship Line (daily: 83% vs. nondaily: 61%, χ2 (1) = 2.9, p = 0.09). Daily callers described the importance of a long-term, evolving relationship with Friendship Line, whereas nondaily callers described the Friendship Line as an outlet for acute social needs, similar to an urgent care clinic. Taken together, results suggest the Friendship Line is an important source of support for older adults managing both chronic loneliness and occasional loneliness.
期刊介绍:
Published on behalf of the New York Academy of Sciences, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences provides multidisciplinary perspectives on research of current scientific interest with far-reaching implications for the wider scientific community and society at large. Each special issue assembles the best thinking of key contributors to a field of investigation at a time when emerging developments offer the promise of new insight. Individually themed, Annals special issues stimulate new ways to think about science by providing a neutral forum for discourse—within and across many institutions and fields.