Andy Dickens

Interventions targeting social isolation in older people: a systematic review

BackgroundTargeting social isolation in older people is a growing public health concern. The proportion of older people in society has increased in recent decades, and it is estimated that approximately 25% of the population will be aged 60 or above within the next 20 to 40 years. Social isolation is prevalent amongst older people and evidence indicates the detrimental effect that it can have on health and wellbeing. The aim of this review was to assess the effectiveness of interventions designed to alleviate social isolation and loneliness in older people.MethodsRelevant electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, ASSIA, IBSS, PsycINFO, PubMed, DARE, Social Care Online, the Cochrane Library and CINAHL) were systematically searched using an extensive search strategy, for randomised controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies published in English before May 2009. Additional articles were identified through citation tracking. Studies were included if they related to older people, if the intervention aimed to alleviate social isolation and loneliness, if intervention participants were compared against inactive controls and, if treatment effects were reported. Two independent reviewers extracted data using a standardised form. Narrative synthesis and vote-counting methods were used to summarise and interpret study data.ResultsThirty two studies were included in the review. There was evidence of substantial heterogeneity in the interventions delivered and the overall quality of included studies indicated a medium to high risk of bias. Across the three domains of social, mental and physical health, 79% of group-based interventions and 55% of one-to-one interventions reported at least one improved participant outcome. Over 80% of participatory interventions produced beneficial effects across the same domains, compared with 44% of those categorised as non-participatory. Of interventions categorised as having a theoretical basis, 87% reported beneficial effects across the three domains compared with 59% of interventions with no evident theoretical foundation. Regarding intervention type, 86% of those providing activities and 80% of those providing support resulted in improved participant outcomes, compared with 60% of home visiting and 25% of internet training interventions. Fifty eight percent of interventions that explicitly targeted socially isolated or lonely older people reported positive outcomes, compared with 80% of studies with no explicit targeting.ConclusionsMore, well-conducted studies of the effectiveness of social interventions for alleviating social isolation are needed to improve the evidence base. However, it appeared that common characteristics of effective interventions were those developed within the context of a theoretical basis, and those offering social activity and/or support within a group format. Interventions in which older people are active participants also appeared more likely to be effective. Future interventions incorporating all of these characteristics may therefore be more successful in targeting social isolation in older people.

The impact of social isolation on the health status and health-related quality of life of older people

PurposeTo investigate for socially isolated older people, and older people at risk of social isolation: (1) health status and health-related quality of life (HRQL); (2) the relationship between social isolation and health status/HRQL; (3) the relationship between two alternative measures of health status/HRQL.MethodsOlder people at risk of social isolation (n = 393) completed the EQ-5D and the SF-12. Multiple regression analyses were performed to examine the relationship between levels of social isolation and health status/HRQL, controlling for demographic/clinical characteristics. The agreement between EQ-5D and SF-6D (SF-12) scores was explored using descriptive psychometric techniques.ResultsHealth status and health state values were much lower than UK general population age-matched norms. After controlling for depression, physical co-morbidities, age, gender, living alone status, employment and accommodation, social isolation was significantly associated, to a degree that was clinically relevant, with EQ-5D DSI, SF-6D (SF-12) and SF-12 MCS scores. The potential for ceiling effects on the EQ-5D with this population was identified.ConclusionThis work highlights the burden that social isolation may have on the health and well-being of older people. The potential HRQL gains from addressing social isolation may be considerable, with those at risk of social isolation also a key target group.

Is volunteering a public health intervention? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the health and survival of volunteers

BackgroundVolunteering has been advocated by the United Nations, and American and European governments as a way to engage people in their local communities and improve social capital, with the potential for public health benefits such as improving wellbeing and decreasing health inequalities. Furthermore, the US Corporation for National and Community Service Strategic Plan for 2011–2015 focused on increasing the impact of national service on community needs, supporting volunteers’ wellbeing, and prioritising recruitment and engagement of underrepresented populations. The aims of this review were to examine the effect of formal volunteering on volunteers’ physical and mental health and survival, and to explore the influence of volunteering type and intensity on health outcomes.MethodsExperimental and cohort studies comparing the physical and mental health outcomes and mortality of a volunteering group to a non-volunteering group were identified from twelve electronic databases (Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase, PsychINFO, CINAHL, ERIC, HMIC, SSCI, ASSIA, Social Care Online, Social Policy and Practice) and citation tracking in January 2013. No language, country or date restrictions were applied. Data synthesis was based on vote counting and random effects meta-analysis of mortality risk ratios.ResultsForty papers were selected: five randomised controlled trials (RCTs, seven papers); four non-RCTs; and 17 cohort studies (29 papers). Cohort studies showed volunteering had favourable effects on depression, life satisfaction, wellbeing but not on physical health. These findings were not confirmed by experimental studies. Meta-analysis of five cohort studies found volunteers to be at lower risk of mortality (risk ratio: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.66, 0.90). There was insufficient evidence to demonstrate a consistent influence of volunteering type or intensity on outcomes.ConclusionObservational evidence suggested that volunteering may benefit mental health and survival although the causal mechanisms remain unclear. Consequently, there was limited robustly designed research to guide the development of volunteering as a public health promotion intervention. Future studies should explicitly map intervention design to clear health outcomes as well as use pragmatic RCT methodology to test effects.

Vitamin D, Cognitive Dysfunction and Dementia in Older Adults

The physiologically active form of vitamin D, 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3, is a fat-soluble steroid hormone with a well established role in skeletal health. A growing body of evidence suggests low vitamin D levels also play a role in the pathogenesis of a wide range of non-skeletal, age-associated diseases including cancer, heart disease, type 2 diabetes mellitus and stroke. Low levels of serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D], a stable marker of vitamin D status, are also associated with increased odds of prevalent cognitive dysfunction, Alzheimer’s disease and all-cause dementia in a number of studies, raising the possibility that vitamin D plays a role in the aetiology of cognitive dysfunction and dementia. To date, the majority of human studies reporting associations between vitamin D and cognition or dementia have been cross-sectional or case-control designs that do not permit us to exclude the possibility that such associations are a result of disease progression rather than being causal. Animal and in vitro experiments have identified a number of neuroprotective mechanisms that might link vitamin D status to cognitive dysfunction and dementia, including vasoprotection and amyloid phagocytosis and clearance, but the clinical relevance of these mechanisms in humans is not currently clear. Two recent, large, prospective studies go some way to establish the temporal relationship with cognitive decline. The relative risk of cognitive decline was 60% higher (relative risk = 1.6, 95% CI 1.2, 2.0) in elderly Italian adults with severely deficient 25(OH)D levels (<25 nmol/L) when compared with those with sufficient levels (≥75 nmol/L). Similarly, the odds of cognitive decline were 41% higher (odds ratio= 1.4, 95% CI 0.9, 2.2) when elderly US men in the lowest quartile (≤49.7 nmol/L) were compared with those in the highest quartile (≥74.4 nmol/L). To our knowledge, no prospective studies have examined the association between 25(OH)D levels and incident dementia or neuroimaging abnormalities. The possible therapeutic benefits of vitamin D have attracted considerable interest as over 1 billion people worldwide are thought to have insufficient 25(OH)D levels and these levels can be increased using inexpensive and well tolerated dietary supplements. However, no large randomized controlled trials have yet examined the effect of vitamin D supplements on cognitive decline or incident dementia. Further studies are urgently needed to establish which mechanisms have clinical relevance in human populations and whether vitamin D supplements are effective at minimizing cognitive decline or preventing dementia.

Assessing the professional performance of UK doctors: an evaluation of the utility of the General Medical Council patient and colleague questionnaires

Objective: To investigate the utility of the GMC patient and colleague questionnaires in assessing the professional performance of a large sample of UK doctors. Design: Cross-sectional questionnaire surveys. Setting: Range of UK clinical practice settings. Participants: 541 doctors gave preliminary agreement to take part in the study. Responses were received from 13 754 patients attending one of 380 participant doctors, and from 4269 colleagues of 309 participant doctors. Main outcome measures: Questionnaire performance and standardised scores for each doctor derived from patient and colleague responses. Results: Participant doctors were similar to non-participants in respect of age and gender. The patient and colleague questionnaires were acceptable to participants as evidenced by low levels of missing data. One patient questionnaire item seemed to cause confusion for respondents and requires rewording. Both patient and colleague responses were highly skewed towards favourable impressions of doctor performance, with high internal consistency. To achieve acceptable levels of reliability, a minimum of 8 colleague questionnaires and 22 patient questionnaires are required. G coefficients for both questionnaires were comparable with internationally recognised survey instruments of broadly similar intent. Patient and colleague assessments provided complementary perspectives of doctors’ performance. Older doctors had lower patient-derived and colleague-derived scores than younger doctors. Doctors from a mental health trust and doctors providing care in a variety of non-NHS settings had lower patient scores compared with doctors providing care in acute or primary care trust settings. Conclusions: The GMC patient and colleague questionnaires offer a reliable basis for the assessment of professionalism among UK doctors. If used in the revalidation of doctors’ registration, they would be capable of discriminating a range of professional performance among doctors, and potentially identifying a minority whose practice should to subjected to further scrutiny.

Inter-arm blood pressure difference in type 2 diabetes: a barrier to effective management?

BACKGROUND Previous studies have identified a substantial prevalence of a blood pressure difference between arms in various populations, but not patients with type 2 diabetes. Recognition of such a difference would be important as a potential cause of underestimation of blood pressure. AIM To measure prevalence of an inter-arm blood pressure difference in patients with type 2 diabetes, and to estimate how frequently blood pressure measurements could be erroneously underestimated if an inter-arm difference is unrecognised. DESIGN OF STUDY Cross-sectional study. SETTING Five surgeries covered by three general practices, Devon, England. METHOD Patients with type 2 diabetes underwent bilateral simultaneous blood pressure measurements using a validated protocol. Mean blood pressures were calculated for each arm to derive mean systolic and diastolic differences, and to estimate point prevalence of predefined magnitudes of difference. RESULTS A total of 101 participants were recruited. Mean age was 66 years (standard deviation [SD] = 13.9 years); 59% were male, and mean blood pressure was 138/79 mmHg (SD = 15/10 mmHg). Ten participants (10%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 4 to 16) had a systolic inter-arm difference > or =10 mmHg; 29 (29%; 95% CI = 20 to 38) had a diastolic difference >/=5 mmHg; and three (3%; 95% CI = 0 to 6) a diastolic difference > or =10 mmHg. No confounding variable was observed to account for the magnitude of an inter-arm difference. CONCLUSION A systolic inter-arm difference > or =10 mmHg was observed in 10% of patients with diabetes. Failure to recognise this would misclassify half of these as normotensive rather than hypertensive using the lower-reading arm. New patients with type 2 diabetes should be screened for an inter-arm blood pressure difference.

An evaluation of the effectiveness of a community mentoring service for socially isolated older people: a controlled trial

BackgroundSocial isolation affects a significant proportion of older people and is associated with poor health outcomes. The current evidence base regarding the effectiveness of interventions targeting social isolation is poor, and the potential utility of mentoring for this purpose has not previously been rigorously evaluated. The purpose of this study was to examine the effectiveness of a community-based mentoring service for improving mental health, social engagement and physical health for socially isolated older people.MethodsThis prospective controlled trial compared a sample of mentoring service clients (intervention group) with a matched control group recruited through general practice. One hundred and ninety five participants from each group were matched on mental wellbeing and social activity scores. Assessments were conducted at baseline and at six month follow-up. The primary outcome was the Short Form Health Survey v2 (SF-12) mental health component score (MCS). Secondary outcomes included the SF-12 physical health component score (PCS), EuroQol EQ-5D, Geriatric Depression Score (GDS-10), social activity, social support and morbidities.ResultsWe found no evidence that mentoring was beneficial across a wide range of participant outcomes measuring health status, social activity and depression. No statistically significant between-group differences were observed at follow-up in the primary outcome (p = 0.48) and in most secondary outcomes. Identifying suitable matched pairs of intervention and control group participants proved challenging.ConclusionsThe results of this trial provide no substantial evidence supporting the use of community mentoring as an effective means of alleviating social isolation in older people. Further evidence is needed on the effectiveness of community-based interventions targeting social isolation. When using non-randomised designs, there are considerable challenges in the recruitment of suitable matches from a community sample.Trial registrationSCIE Research Register for Social Care 105923

Exploring users’ experiences of accessing out-of-hours primary medical care services

Background: Since 2000, out-of-hours primary medical care services in the UK have undergone major changes in the organisation and delivery of services in response to recommendations by the Carson Review and more recently, through the new General Medical Services Contract (GMS2). People calling their general practice in the evening or at weekends are redirected to the out-of-hours service which may offer telephone advice, a home visit or a visit to a treatment centre. Little is known about users’ experiences under the new arrangements. Aim: To explore users’ experiences of out-of-hours primary medical care. Design of study: A qualitative study employing focus groups and telephone interviews. Setting: Three out-of-hours primary medical care service providers in England. Methods: Focus groups and telephone interviews were conducted with 27 recent users of out-of-hours services. Results: Key areas of concern included the urgency with which cases are handled, and delays when waiting for a call back or home visit. Users felt that providers were reluctant to do home visits. The service was regarded as under-resourced and frequently misused. Many expressed anxiety about calling, feeling unsure about how appropriate their call was and many were uncertain about how the service operated. Conclusions: Service users need clear information on how current out-of-hours services operate and how it should be used. Problems with triaging need to be addressed, users should be kept informed of any delays, and care needs to be taken to ensure that the new arrangements do not alienate older people or individuals with complex health needs.

A multi-method analysis of free-text comments from the UK General Medical Council Colleague Questionnaires

Context  Colleague surveys are important sources of information on a doctor’s professional performance in UK revalidation plans. Colleague surveys are analysed by deriving quantitative measures from rating scales. As free‐text comments are also recorded, we explored the utility of a mixed‐methods approach to their analysis.

Capturing users' experience of UK out-of-hours primary medical care: Piloting and psychometric properties of the out-of-hours patient questionnaire

Background and objective: Provision of out-of-hours care in the UK National Health Service (NHS) has changed in recent years with new models of provision and the introduction of national quality requirements. Existing survey instruments tend to focus on users’ satisfaction with service provision; most were developed without undertaking supporting qualitative fieldwork. In this study, a survey instrument was developed taking account of these changes in service provision and undertaking supporting qualitative fieldwork. This paper reports on the development and psychometric properties of the new survey instrument, the Out-of-hours Patient Questionnaire (OPQ), which aims to capture information on the entirety of users’ experiences of out-of-hours care, from the decision to make contact through to completion of their care management. Methods: An iterative approach was undertaken to develop the new instrument which was then tested in users of out-of-hours services in three geographically distributed UK settings. For the purposes of this study, “service users” were defined as “individuals about whom contact was made with an out-of-hours primary care medical service”, whether that contact was made by the user themselves, or via a third party. Analysis was undertaken of the acceptability, reliability and validity of the survey instrument. Results: The OPQ tested is a 56-item questionnaire, which was distributed to 1250 service users. Respondents were similar in respect of gender, but were older and more affluent (using a proxy measure) than non-respondents. Item completion rates were acceptable. Respondents sometimes completed sections of the questionnaire which did not equate to their principal mode of management as recorded in the record of the contact. Preliminary evidence suggests the OPQ is a valid and reliable instrument which contains within it two discrete scales—a consultation satisfaction scale (nine items) and an “entry-access” scale (four items). Further work is required to determine the generalisability of findings obtained following use of the OPQ, especially to non-white user populations. Conclusion: The OPQ is an acceptable instrument for capturing information on users’ experiences of out-of-hours care. Preliminary evidence suggests it is both valid and reliable in use. Further work will report on its utility in informing out-of-hours service planning and configuration and standard-setting in relation to UK national quality requirements.