4.6 Article

A Practical Approach to Assessing and Mitigating Loneliness and Isolation in Older Adults

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN GERIATRICS SOCIETY
卷 67, 期 4, 页码 657-662

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jgs.15746

关键词

loneliness; isolation; older adults; serious illness

资金

  1. National Institute of Minority Health and Health Disparities of the National Institutes of Health [U54MD10724]
  2. National Institute of Aging [5P50AG047366, P30AG059307, RO1AG062239]
  3. Department of Veterans Affairs [VA HSRD QUE 15-288]
  4. Stanford University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Loneliness and social isolation are strongly associated with several adverse health outcomes in older persons including death and functional impairments. The strength of these associations has been compared with smoking. Accordingly, loneliness and isolation have significant public health implications. Despite the adverse impacts of loneliness and social isolation on quality of life, and their strong association with health outcomes, the evaluation of loneliness and isolation have not been integrated into medical care. The risks for loneliness may be of particular concern to persons with serious illness as patients and caregivers cope with the experience of loss, loss of independence, and increasing care needs. To date, there has been no uniform way of evaluating and documenting loneliness and social isolation as a part of a review of a patient's social determinants of health. This article provides a framework for healthcare systems, providers, and community members working with older adults to (1) understand loneliness, isolation, and its counterpart social connection; (2) describe the different ways loneliness affects health; and (3) create a framework for asking about and documenting these experiences. Finally, because the lack of studies assessing whether targeting loneliness can improve health outcomes is a major gap, we provide guidance on the future of interventions. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:657-662, 2019.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据