The effectiveness of interventions to prevent loneliness and social isolation in the community-dwelling and old population: an overview of systematic reviews and meta-analysis

Abstract

Background Loneliness and social isolation have comparable health effects to widely acknowledged and established risk factors. Although old people are particularly affected, the effectiveness of interventions to prevent and/or mitigate social isolation and loneliness in the community-dwelling older adults is unclear. The aim of this review of reviews was to pool the findings of systematic reviews (SRs) addressing the question of effectiveness. Methods Ovid MEDLINE®, Health Evidence, Epistemonikos and Global Health (EBSCO) were searched from January 2017 to November 2021. Two reviewers independently assessed each SR in two consecutive steps based on previously defined eligibility criteria and appraised the methodological quality using a measurement tool to assess SRs 2, AMSTAR 2. One author extracted data from both SRs and eligible studies; another checked this. We conducted meta-analyses to pool the study results. We report the results of the random-effects and common-effect models. Results We identified five SRs containing a total of 30 eligible studies, 16 with a low or moderate risk of bias. Our random-effects meta-analysis indicates an overall SMD effect of 0.63 [95% confidence interval (CI): −0.10 to 1.36] for loneliness and was unable to detect an overall effect of the interventions on social support [SMD: 0.00; 95% CI: −0.11 to 0.12]. Discussion The results show interventions can potentially reduce loneliness in the non-institutionalized, community-dwelling and older population living at home. As confidence in the evidence is low, rigorous evaluation is recommended. Registration International Prospective Register of SRs (PROSPERO): Registration number: CRD42021255625

Exploring the prevalence of loneliness and social isolation in an analysis of Safeguarding Adults Reviews in South Yorkshire

“…It is also important to recognise the challenges for developing appropriate services; what might engage one person may not engage another. Developing appropriate services to respond to social isolation and loneliness can be complex and time-consuming with limited and inconclusive results regarding the success of these services (Grilich et al , 2023; Dickens et al , 2011). Much of the provision is inadequate and unsuccessful because most interventions focus on promoting social participation or expansion of the social network.…”

Relationship between Loneliness and Mild Behavioral Impairment: Validation of the Japanese Version of the MBI Checklist and a Cross-Sectional Study

“…A systematic review showed the effectiveness of intervention for loneliness and social isolation in community-dwelling older people, although the evidence level was low [ 57 ]. It has been estimated that removing loneliness could prevent 11–18% cases of depression in people aged 50 years and above [ 27 ].…”

The Psychological Network of Loneliness Symptoms Among Chinese Residents During the COVID-19 Outbreak

“…Systematic reviews have shown that interventions like mindfulness, social cognitive training, animal therapy, and social support can prevent or reduce loneliness. [50][51][52][53][54] During the pandemic, some studies have yielded preliminary evidence supporting the effectiveness of remote interventions, video calls, and assistive technology in reducing social isolation and loneliness. [55][56][57][58] Based on the results of this network analysis, the development of psychosocial interventions to alleviate loneliness must take into account the central and bridge symptoms identified.…”