Associations of face-to-face and non-face-to-face social isolation with all-cause and cause-specific mortality: 13-year follow-up of the Guangzhou Biobank Cohort study.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Although social isolation has been associated with a higher mortality risk, little is known about the potential different impacts of face-to-face and non-face-to-face isolation on mortality. We examined the prospective associations of four types of social isolation, including face-to-face isolation with co-inhabitants and non-co-inhabitants, non-face-to-face isolation, and club/organization isolation, with all-cause and cause-specific mortality separately. METHODS: This prospective cohort study included 30,430 adults in Guangzhou Biobank Cohort Study (GBCS), who were recruited during 2003-2008 and followed up till Dec 2019. RESULTS: During an average of 13.2 years of follow-up, 4933 deaths occurred during 396,466 person-years. Participants who lived alone had higher risks of all-cause (adjusted hazard ratio (AHR) 1.24; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04-1.49) and cardiovascular disease (CVD) (1.61; 1.20-2.03) mortality than those who had ≥ 3 co-habitant contact after adjustment for thirteen potential confounders. Compared with those who had ≥ 1 time/month non-co-inhabitant contact, those without such contact had higher risks of all-cause (1.60; 1.20-2.00) and CVD (1.91; 1.20-2.62) mortality. The corresponding AHR (95% CI) in participants without telephone/mail contact were 1.27 (1.14-1.42) for all-cause, 1.30 (1.08-1.56) for CVD, and 1.37 (1.12-1.67) for other-cause mortality. However, no association of club/organization contact with the above mortality and no association of all four types of isolation with cancer mortality were found. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort study, face-to-face and non-face-to-face isolation were both positively associated with all-cause, CVD-, and other-cause (but not cancer) mortality. Our finding suggests a need to promote non-face-to-face contact among middle-aged and older adults.