Interventions Associated With Reduced Loneliness and Social Isolation in Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Importance: Loneliness and social isolation are public health concerns faced by older adults due to physical, cognitive, and psychosocial changes that develop with aging. Loneliness and social isolation are associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Objective: To evaluate interventions, targeting older adults, associated with a reduction in loneliness and social isolation. Data Sources: OVID, CINAHL, CENTRAL, Embase, PsychINFO, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched from inception to March 2020. Study Selection: Peer-reviewed randomized clinical trials measuring loneliness and social isolation or support in adults aged 65 years or older. Only English language articles were included. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two independent reviewers screened studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Random-effects models were performed to pool the overall effect size by intervention. Statistical heterogeneity was evaluated with the I2 statistic and by estimating prediction intervals. Data were analyzed from November 2021 to September 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: Quantitative measures of loneliness, social isolation, or social support based on an effect size of standardized mean differences. Results: Seventy studies were included in the systematic review (8259 participants); 44 studies were included in the loneliness meta-analysis (33 in the community with 3535 participants; 11 in long-term care with 1057 participants), with participants' ages ranging from 55 to 100 years. Study sizes ranged from 8 to 741 participants. Interventions included animal therapy, psychotherapy or cognitive behavioral therapy, multicomponent, counseling, exercise, music therapy, occupational therapy, reminiscence therapy, social interventions, and technological interventions. Most interventions had a small effect size. Animal therapy in long-term care, when accounting for studies with no active controls, had the largest effect size on loneliness reduction (-1.86; 95% CI, -3.14 to -0.59; I2 = 86%) followed by technological interventions (videoconferencing) in long-term care (-1.40; 95% CI, -2.37 to -0.44; I2 = 70%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, animal therapy and technology in long-term care had large effect sizes, but also high heterogeneity, so the effect size's magnitude should be interpreted with caution. The small number of studies per intervention limits conclusions on sources of heterogeneity. Overall quality of evidence was very low. Future studies should consider measures of social isolation in long-term care and identify the contextual components that are associated with a reduction in loneliness.

Implementing Technology Literacy Programs in Retirement Homes and Residential Care Facilities: Conceptual Framework.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic caused widespread societal disruption, with governmental stay-at-home orders resulting in people connecting more via technology rather than in person. This shift had major impacts on older adult residents staying in retirement homes and residential care facilities, where they may lack the technology literacy needed to stay connected. The enTECH Computer Club from the University of Waterloo in Ontario, Canada created a knowledge translation toolkit to support organizations interested in starting technology literacy programs (TLPs) by providing guidance and practical tips. OBJECTIVE: This paper aimed to present a framework for implementing TLPs in retirement homes and residential care facilities through expanding on the knowledge translation toolkit and the framework for person-centered care. METHODS: Major concepts relating to the creation of a TLP in retirement homes and residential care facilities were extracted from the enTECH knowledge translation toolkit. The domains from the framework for person-centered care were modified to fit a TLP context. The concepts identified from the toolkit were sorted into the three framework categories: "structure," "process," and "outcome." Information from the knowledge translation toolkit were extracted into the three categories and synthesized to form foundational principles and potential actions. RESULTS: All 13 domains from the framework for person-centered care were redefined to shift the focus on TLP implementation, with 7 domains under "structure," 4 domains under "process," and 2 domains under "outcome." Domains in the "structure" category focus on developing an organizational infrastructure to deliver a successful TLP; 10 foundational principles and 25 potential actions were identified for this category. Domains in the "process" category focus on outlining procedures taken by stakeholders involved to ensure a smooth transition from conceptualization into action; 12 foundational principles and 9 potential actions were identified for this category. Domains in the "outcome" category focus on evaluating the TLP to consider making any improvements to better serve the needs of older adults and staff; 6 foundational principles and 6 potential actions were identified for this category. CONCLUSIONS: Several domains and their foundational principles and potential actions from the TLP framework were found to be consistent with existing literatures that encourage taking active steps to increase technology literacy in older adults. Although there may be some limitations to the components of the framework with the current state of the pandemic, starting TLPs in the community can yield positive outcomes that will be beneficial to both older adult participants and the organization in the long term.

Designing a Serious Game (Above Water) for Stigma Reduction Surrounding Mental Health: Semistructured Interview Study With Expert Participants.

BACKGROUND: Although in many contexts unsuccessful games targeting learning, social interaction, or behavioral change have few downsides, when covering a sensitive domain such as mental health (MH), care must be taken to avoid harm and stigmatization of people who live with MH conditions. As a result, evaluation of the game to identify benefits and risks is crucial in understanding the game's success; however, assessment of these apps is often compared with the nongame control condition, resulting in findings specifically regarding entertainment value and user preferences. Research exploring the design process, integrating field experts, and guidelines for designing a successful serious game for sensitive topics is limited. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to understand which elements of game design can guide a designer when designing a game for sensitive topics. METHODS: To carefully probe the design space of serious games for MH, we present Above Water (AbW), a game targeting the reduction of stigma surrounding MH, now in its second iteration. The game, AbW, serves as a consistent research probe to solicit expert feedback. Experts were recruited from a range of topic domains related to MH and wellness, game design, and user experience. RESULTS: By using this deployment as a research probe, this study demonstrates how to synthesize gained insights from multiple expert perspectives and create actionable guidelines for successful design of serious games targeting sensitive topics. CONCLUSIONS: Our work contributes to a better understanding of how to design specialized games to address sensitive topics. We present a set of guidelines for designing games for sensitive subjects, and for each guideline, we present an example of how to apply the finding to the sample game (AbW). Furthermore, we demonstrate the generalizability to other sensitive topics by providing an additional example of a game that could be designed with the presented guidelines.

Identifying barriers, facilitators and behaviour change techniques to the adoption of the full scope of pharmacy practice among pharmacy professionals: Using the Theoretical Domains Framework.

BACKGROUND: As pharmacy evolves, pharmacy professionals continue to struggle to practice to their full scope. A theoretically-informed intervention to change practice can support pharmacy professionals in providing full scope services. The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) can inform the design of a behaviour change intervention to improve the uptake of full scope services among pharmacy professionals. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to: (1) identify barriers and facilitators influencing the adoption of full scope services among pharmacy professionals, and (2) identify optimal behaviour change techniques (BCTs) to address the identified barriers and facilitators. METHODS: A three-step, mixed method study was conducted. First, a 24-item TDF-based survey was sent via email to users of a national computer-based educational platform (n = 2696). Second, TDF-based interviews were conducted with a convenient sample of survey respondents and analyzed using the framework method. Finally, validated linkages were used to link BCTs with corresponding barriers and facilitators, then interview data were analyzed using a deductive approach to guide the selection of the BCTs. RESULTS: A total of 225 participants completed the survey and 24 telephone interviews were conducted (17 pharmacists, 7 pharmacy technicians). A number of key barriers were identified on an individual level (e.g., lack of clear professional identity and limited decision-making skills in ambiguous cases) and on an organizational level (e.g., lack of social support from managers and concerns about making more errors with the current workflow). Mapping the barriers and facilitators to BCTs yielded 18 BCTs to support the adoption of full scope services, including modeling, rehearsal/practice, and social support. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlighted several barriers that need to be addressed to facilitate pharmacy professionals working to their full scope, including professional collaboration, professional identity, and adequate training. A comprehensive intervention combining skills training with modeling, social support, and decision-making tools could encourage practice change.

Evaluation of an Intergenerational and Technological Intervention for Loneliness: Protocol for a Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Social integration and mental health are vital aspects of healthy aging. However, close to half of Canadians older than 80 years report feeling socially isolated. Research has shown that social isolation leads to increased mortality and morbidity, and various interventions have been studied to alleviate loneliness among older adults. This proposal presents an evaluation of an intervention that provides one-on-one coaching, is intergenerational, provides both educational and socialization experiences, and increases technology literacy of older adults to overcome loneliness. OBJECTIVE: This paper describes the protocol of a randomized, mixed-methods study that will take place in Ontario, Canada. The purpose of this study is to evaluate if an intergenerational technology literacy program can reduce social isolation and depression in older adults via quantitative and qualitative outcome measures. METHODS: This study is a randomized, mixed-methods, feasibility trial with 2 conditions. Older adults in the intervention condition will receive 1 hour of weekly technological assistance to send an email to a family member, for 8 weeks, with the assistance of a volunteer. Participants in the control condition will not receive any intervention. The primary outcomes are loneliness, measured using the University of California, Los Angeles Loneliness Scale, and depression, measured using the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression scale, both of which are measured weekly. Secondary outcomes are quality of life, as assessed using the Older People's Quality of Life-Brief version, and technological literacy, evaluated using the Computer Proficiency Questionnaire-12, both of which will be administered before and after the intervention. Semistructured interviews will be completed before and after the intervention to assess participants' social connectedness, familiarity with technology, and their experience with the intervention. The study will be completed in a long-term care facility in Southwestern Ontario, Canada. Significance was set at P<.05. RESULTS: This study was funded in April 2019 and ethical approval was obtained in August 2019. Recruitment for the study started in November 2019. The intervention began in February 2020 but was halted due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The trial will be restarted when safe. As of March 2020, 8 participants were recruited. CONCLUSIONS: Information and communication technology interventions have shown varying results in reducing loneliness and improving mental health among older adults. Few studies have examined the role of one-on-one coaching for older adults in addition to technology education in such interventions. Data from this study may have the potential to provide evidence for other groups to disseminate similar interventions in their respective communities. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/23767.

Prescribers' perspectives on including reason for use information on prescriptions and medication labels: a qualitative thematic analysis.

BACKGROUND: The indication for prescribing a particular medication, or its reason for use (RFU) is a crucial piece of information for all those involved in the circle of care. Research has shown that sharing RFU information with physicians, pharmacists and patients improves patient safety and patient adherence, however RFU is rarely added on prescriptions by prescribers or on medication labels for patients to reference. METHODS: Qualitative interviews were conducted with 20 prescribers in Southern Ontario, Canada, to learn prescribers' current attitudes on the addition of RFU on prescriptions and medication labels. A trained interviewer used a semi-structured interview guide for each interview. The interviews explored how the sharing of RFU information would impact prescribers' workflows and practices. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and thematically coded. RESULTS: The analysis yielded four main themes: Current Practice, Future Practice, Changing Culture, and Collaboration. Most of the prescribers interviewed do not currently add RFU to prescriptions. Prescribers were open to sharing RFU with colleagues via a regional database but wanted the ability to provide context for the prescribed medication within the system. Many prescribers were wary of the impact of adding RFU on their workflow but felt it could save time by avoiding clarifying questions from pharmacists. Increased interprofessional collaboration, increased patient understanding of prescribed medications, avoiding guesswork when determining indications and decreased misinterpretation regarding RFU were cited by most prescribers as benefits to including RFU information. CONCLUSIONS: Prescribers were generally open to sharing RFU and clearly identified the benefits to pharmacists and patients if added. Critically, they also identified benefits to their own practices. These results can be used to guide the implementation of future initiatives to promote the sharing of RFU in healthcare teams.

Pharmacists' perspectives on the value of reason for use information.

BACKGROUND: The indication for a particular medication, or its reason for use (RFU), is important information for prescribers, pharmacists and patients but is not often communicated in writing from prescribers to pharmacists. Adding RFU to a prescription and a medication label would ensure that pharmacists are confident that they are providing high-quality, accurate patient care. This study aims to describe the perspectives of pharmacists on how receiving RFU from prescribers would affect their practice and how pharmacists putting this information on prescriptions would affect patients. METHODS: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 20 pharmacists in Southwestern Ontario. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the interview transcripts, leading to 4 major themes. RESULTS: Pharmacists expressed that RFU should be formatted to ensure that it is of clinical utility via the use of written text and noted that either medical or lay (also known as plain) language would be appropriate for use. Pharmacists indicated that patient privacy should be considered when writing RFU on labels and that patient preference with respect to the addition of RFU should dictate its inclusion on a medication label. Pharmacist access to RFU was universally acknowledged to improve patient safety by providing pharmacists with more information to determine whether the given medication was indicated. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides further information about the impact that having access to RFU would have on pharmacy practice and can be used to advocate for the inclusion of RFU information with prescriptions to improve patient outcomes. Can Pharm J (Ott) 2020;153:xx-xx.

How do I keep myself safe? Patient perspectives on including reason for use information on prescriptions and medication labels: a qualitative thematic analysis.

BACKGROUND: Medications are crucial for maintaining patient wellness and improving health in modern medicine, but their use comes with risks. Helping patients to understand why they are taking medications is important for patient-centered care and facilitates patient adherence to prescribed medications. One strategy involves enhancing communication between patients, physicians, and pharmacists through the sharing of reason for use (RFU) information or the indication for medications. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 patients in Ontario, Canada, to gain perspectives on how patients currently store their medication information and benefits and disadvantages of adding RFU to prescriptions and medication labels. An interview guide was used by the two interviewers, and the interviews were recorded, transcribed, and thematically coded. RESULTS: The analysis yielded three main themes: patient decision making with RFU, RFU in modern, patient-centered care, and logistical aspects of communicating RFU. The patients that were interviewed expressed the value of having RFU when deciding if a medication was effective or to stop taking the medication. Patients felt comfortable with RFU being added to prescriptions and acknowledged the value in adding RFU to medication labels, helping patients and others identify and distinguish medications. Patients generally expressed interest in having RFU written in lay language and identified strengths and weaknesses of having access to RFU via a website or app. CONCLUSIONS: Patients rated the importance of knowing RFU very highly, identified the value in sharing RFU with pharmacists on prescriptions, and in having RFU on medication labels. These results can be used to inform policy on the addition of RFU on prescriptions and medication labels and support improved communication between patients, pharmacists, and physicians about RFU.