Impact of Social Network Size and Contact Frequency on Resilience in Community-Dwelling Healthy Older Adults Living Alone in the Republic of Korea
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Participants
- Aged older than 80
- Scores less than −1.5 standard deviation in the Mini-Mental State Examination for Dementia Screening (MMSE-DS) [28]
- Extremes in any dimension of mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression in the Euro Quality of Life Questionnaire 5-Dimensional Classification, three-level version (EQ-5D-3L) [29]
- Scores higher than 9 in the Korean version of Short form Geriatric Depression Scale (SGDS-K) [30]
2.2. Variables and Measurement
2.2.1. Independent Variables
Social Network
- “How many relatives do you see or hear from at least once a month?”
- “How many relatives do you feel close to; i.e., how many of them do you feel at ease with when talking about private matters or calling for help?”
- “Do you have any close friends; i.e., do you have any friends with whom you feel at ease or talk to about private matters or can call for help? If so, how many?”
- “How many of these friends do you see or hear from at least once a month?”
- “Tell me about the relative with whom you have the most contact. How often do you see or hear from that person?”
- “Tell me about the friend with whom you have the most contact. How often do you see or hear from that person?”
2.2.2. Dependent Variable
Resilience
2.2.3. Controlling Variables
Socio-Demographic Characteristics
Health-Related Variables
Emotion-Related Variables
2.3. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Kim, W. A study on the knowledge of and attitudes toward the elderly of college students in Korea and the United States. J. Korean Gerontol. Soc. 2011, 31, 505–526. [Google Scholar]
- Kim, Y.E. A study on elderly caregiver’s burden. Korean J. Clin. Soc. Work. 2004, 1, 21–36. [Google Scholar]
- Cho, S. A study on the characteristics of the caring services for the elderly focused on the urban-rural differences. Korean J. Soc. Welf. Stud. 2016, 47, 141–166. [Google Scholar]
- Desai, R.; John, A.; Stott, J.; Charlesworth, G. Living alone and risk of dementia: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Ageing Res. Rev. 2020, 62, 101122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Support for senior citizens who live alone. Welf. Aged Act 2017, 27, 2.
- Comprehensive Support Center for the Elderly Living Alone. Welf. Aged Act 2017, 27, 3.
- Chung, S.; Sun, H.; Kim, G. The analysis and improvement directions of management and welfare programs for the senior welfare centers. J. Korean Soc. Welf. Adm. 2011, 13, 177–196. [Google Scholar]
- Noh, J.-C.; Ko, Z.-K. Current Status and Problems of Support Polices and Legal Improvement Devices for the Aged Living Alone. J. Korea Contents Assoc. 2013, 13, 257–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ministry of Health and Welfare. Press Release: Customized Care Service for Community-Dwelling Older Adult will be Provided from Today; Ministry of Health and Welfare: Sejong, Korea, 2019.
- Lee, S.H. Policy suggestions for improving care services for older Koreans. Health Welf. Policy Forum. 2014, 214, 54–65. [Google Scholar]
- Maslow, A.H. A theory of human motivation. Psychol. Rev. 1943, 50, 370–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- World Health Organization. Constitution of the World Health Organization Basic Documents, Forty-Fifth Edition, Supplement. 2006. Available online: https://www.who.int/governance/eb/who_constitution_en.pdf (accessed on 20 September 2020).
- Carlo, A.D.; Barnett, B.S.; Unützer, J. Harnessing Collaborative Care to Meet Mental Health Demands in the Era of COVID-19. JAMA Psychiatry 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song, M.; Kong, E.-H. Older adults’ definitions of health: A metasynthesis. Int. J. Nurs. Stud. 2015, 52, 1097–1106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McKibbin, C.; Lee, A.; Steinman, B.A.; Carrico, C.; Bourassa, K.; Slosser, A. Health Status and Social Networks as Predictors of Resilience in Older Adults Residing in Rural and Remote Environments. J. Aging Res. 2016, 2016, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Shen, K.; Zeng, Y. The association between resilience and survival among Chinese elderly. In Resilience in Aging; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2011; pp. 217–229. [Google Scholar]
- Waugh, C.E.; Fredrickson, B.L.; Taylor, S.F. Adapting to life’s slings and arrows: Individual differences in resilience when re-covering from an anticipated threat. J. Res. Pers. 2008, 42, 1031–1046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- McMurray, I.; Connolly, H.; Preston-Shoot, M.; Wigley, V. Constructing resilience: Social workers’ understandings and practice. Health Soc. Care Community 2008, 16, 299–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wells, M. Resilience in Older Adults Living in Rural, Suburban, and Urban Areas. Online J. Rural Nurs. Health Care 2010, 10, 45–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chang, P.-J.; Yarnal, C. The effect of social support on resilience growth among women in the Red Hat Society. J. Posit. Psychol. 2017, 13, 92–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fuller-Iglesias, H.; Sellars, B.; Antonucci, T.C. Resilience in Old Age: Social Relations as a Protective Factor. Res. Hum. Dev. 2008, 5, 181–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nam, S.I.; See, J.; Jung, Y.E.; Chae, J. Meaning in Life Depression and Suicidal Ideation in Old Age: A Comparative Study of Living Alone and Not Living Alone Older Adults. Korean J. Gerontol. Soc. Welf. 2019, 74, 163–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, Y.; Hicks, A.; While, A.E. Loneliness and social support of older people in China: A systematic literature review. Health Soc. Care Community 2013, 22, 113–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sharifian, N.; Manly, J.J.; Brickman, A.M.; Zahodne, L.B. Social network characteristics and cognitive functioning in ethnically diverse older adults: The role of network size and composition. Neuropsychology 2019, 33, 956–963. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Golden, J.; Conroy, R.M.; Lawlor, B.A. Social support network structure in older people: Underlying dimensions and association with psychological and physical health. Psychol. Health Med. 2009, 14, 280–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bui, B.K.H. The relationship between social network characteristics and depressive symptoms among older adults in the United States: Differentiating between network structure and network function. Psychogeriatrics 2020, 20, 458–468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Santini, Z.I.; Koyanagi, A.; Tyrovolas, S.; Mason, C.; Haro, J.M. The association between social relationships and depression: A systematic review. J. Affect. Disord. 2015, 175, 53–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kim, T.H.; Jhoo, J.H.; Park, J.H.; Kim, J.L.; Ryu, S.H.; Moon, S.W.; Choo, I.H.; Lee, D.W.; Yoon, J.C.; Do, Y.J.; et al. Korean Version of Mini Mental Status Examination for Dementia Screening and Its’ Short Form. Psychiatry Investig. 2010, 7, 102–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- EuroQol Research Foundation [Internet]. EQ-5D-3L User Guide: Basic Information on How to Use the EQ-5D-3L Instrument. Available online: https://euroqol.org/publications/user-guides/ (accessed on 13 February 2020).
- Bae, J.N.; Cho, M.J. Development of the Korean version of the Geriatric Depression Scale and its short form among elderly psychiatric patients. J. Psychosom. Res. 2004, 57, 297–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, K.W.; Kim, S.Y.; Chung, W.; Hwang, G.S.; Hwang, Y.W.; Hwang, I.H. The Validity and Reliability of Korean Version of Lubben Social Network Scale. Korean J. Fam. Med. 2009, 30, 352–358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hahn, E.A.; on behalf of the PROMIS Cooperative Group; De Vellis, R.F.; Bode, R.K.; Garcia, S.F.; Castel, L.D.; Eisen, S.V.; Bosworth, H.B.; Heinemann, A.; Rothrock, N.; et al. Measuring social health in the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS): Item bank development and testing. Qual. Life Res. 2010, 19, 1035–1044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Barnes, L.L.; De Leon, C.F.M.; Wilson, R.S.; Bienias, J.L.; Evans, D.A. Social resources and cognitive decline in a population of older African Americans and whites. Neurology 2004, 63, 2322–2326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Holtzman, R.E.; Rebok, G.W.; Saczynski, J.S.; Kouzis, A.C.; Doyle, K.W.; Eaton, W.W. Social Network Characteristics and Cognition in Middle-Aged and Older Adults. J. Gerontol. Ser. B 2004, 59, P278–P284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lubben, J.E. Assessing social networks among elderly populations. Fam. Community Health 1988, 11, 42–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martin, A.S.; Distelberg, B.; Palmer, B.W.; Jeste, D.V. Development of a new multidimensional individual and interpersonal resilience measure for older adults. Aging Ment. Health 2014, 19, 32–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Campbell-Sills, L.; Stein, M.B. Psychometric analysis and refinement of the connor–davidson resilience scale (CD-RISC): Validation of a 10-item measure of resilience. J. Trauma. Stress 2007, 20, 1019–1028. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kim, O.S. Korean Version of the Revised UCLA Loneliness Scale: Reliability and Validity Test. J. Nurses Acad. Soc. 1997, 27, 871–879. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coyle, C.E.; Dugan, E. Social Isolation, Loneliness and Health Among Older Adults. J. Aging Health 2012, 24, 1346–1363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shankar, A.; McMUNN, A.; Banks, J.; Steptoe, A. Loneliness, social isolation, and behavioral and biological health indicators in older adults. Health Psychol. 2011, 30, 377–385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Luna, E.; Ruiz, M.; Malyutina, S.; Titarenko, A.; Kozela, M.; Pająk, A.; Kubinova, R.; Bobak, M. The prospective association between frequency of contact with friends and relatives and quality of life in older adults from Central and Eastern Europe. Soc. Psychiatry Psychiatr. Epidemiol. 2020, 55, 1001–1010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Carstensen, L.L.; Fung, H.H.; Charles, S.T. Socioemotional selectivity theory and the regulation of emotion in the second half of life. Motiv. Emot. 2003, 27, 103–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Seebohm, P.; Chaudhary, S.; Boyce, M.; Elkan, R.; Avis, M.; Munn-Giddings, C. The contribution of self-help/mutual aid groups to mental well-being. Health Soc. Care Community 2013, 21, 391–401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van Kessel, G. The ability of older people to overcome adversity: A review of the resilience concept. Geriatr Nurs. 2013, 34, 122–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Jeste, D.V.; Savla, G.N.; Thompson, W.K.; Vahia, I.V.; Glorioso, D.K.; Martin, A.V.; Palmer, B.W.; Rock, D.; Golshan, S.; Kraemer, H.C.; et al. Association between older age and more successful aging: Critical role of resilience and depression. Am. J. Psychiatry. 2013, 170, 188–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Shapira, S.; Yeshua-Katz, D.; Cohn-Schwartz, E.; Aharonson-Daniel, L.; Sarid, O.; Clarfield, A.M. A pilot randomized controlled trial of a group intervention via Zoom to relieve loneliness and depressive symptoms among older persons during the COVID-19 outbreak. Internet Interv. 2021, 24, 100368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
General Characteristics | n (%) | Mean (SD) |
---|---|---|
Age (year) | 71.85 (4.02) | |
Years of living alone | 17.49 (11.68) | |
Years of education | 6.85 (4.30) | |
Number of chronic diseases | 1.82 (1.30) | |
Gender (Female) | 157 (59.0) | |
Living children | ||
None | 12 (4.5) | |
More than one | 254 (95.5) | |
Living siblings | ||
None | 40 (14.1) | |
More than one | 226 (85.9) | |
Religion | ||
Not Religious | 96 (36.1) | |
Religious | 170 (63.9) | |
Perceived SES | ||
Very unsatisfied | 66 (24.8) | |
Unsatisfied | 103 (38.7) | |
Moderate | 81 (30.5) | |
Satisfied | 12 (4.5) | |
Very satisfied | 4 (1.5) | |
Perceived health problems in usual activities | ||
None | 242 (91.0) | |
Some | 24 (9.0) | |
Subjective health | ||
Very unhealthy | 10 (3.8) | |
Unhealthy | 69 (25.9) | |
Moderate | 89 (33.5) | |
Healthy | 80 (30.1) | |
Very healthy | 18 (6.7) | |
MMSE-DS | 27.21 (2.36) | |
RULS | 38.83 (10.74) | |
SGDS-K | 3.43 (2.69) | |
Social Network | ||
Size | 7.84 (3.84) | |
Frequency | 5.48 (2.69) | |
MIIRM † | 63.63 (10.07) |
Characteristics | Total n (%) | Female n (%) | Male n (%) | χ2/t |
---|---|---|---|---|
Network size | ||||
Less than 1 person | 34 (12.8) | 15 (9.6) | 19 (17.4) | |
1—Less than 2 persons | 93 (35.0) | 61 (38.9) | 32 (29.4) | X2 = 4.84 df = 3 p = 0.184 |
2—Less than 3 persons | 90 (33.8) | 52 (33.1) | 38 (34.9) | |
3—More than 3 persons | 49 (18.4) | 29 (18.5) | 20 (18.3) | |
Contact frequency | ||||
Less than a few times a month | 56 (21.1) | 26 (33.1) | 30 (22.9) | X2 = 6.85 df = 3 p = 0.077 |
A few times a month–Less than weekly | 67 (25.2) | 38 (24.2) | 29 (26.6) | |
Weekly–Less than a few times a week | 75 (28.2) | 46 (29.3) | 29 (26.6) | |
A few times a week or more often | 68 (25.6) | 47 (29.9) | 21 (19.3) | |
LSNS scores (Mean ± SD) | ||||
Total score (10 questions) | 18.13 ± 7.98 | 19.27 ± 7.60 | 16.48 ± 8.26 | t = 2.85 ** |
Network size (4 questions) | 7.84 ± 3.84 | 7.91 ± 3.50 | 7.73 ± 4.29 | t = 0.36 p = 0.72 |
Contact frequency (2 questions) | 5.48 ± 2.69 | 5.92 ± 2.51 | 4.84 ± 2.82 | t = 3.82 ** |
Groups | n | Resilience | F | p | Post-Hoc | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mean | SD | ||||||
Network size | Less than 1 person a | 34 | 60.22 | 10.02 | 4.56 | 0.004 | a < d *, b < d * |
1—Less than 2 persons b | 93 | 62.04 | 8.65 | ||||
2—Less than 3 persons c | 90 | 64.64 | 10.27 | ||||
3—More than 3 persons d | 49 | 67.16 | 11.12 | ||||
Contact Frequency | Less than a few times a month e | 56 | 58.46 | 8.75 | 11.56 | 0.000 | e < g **, e < h **, f < h ** |
A few times a month–Less than weekly f | 67 | 62.17 | 9.37 | ||||
Weekly–Less than a few times a week g | 75 | 64.65 | 9.03 | ||||
A few times a week or more often h | 68 | 68.21 | 10.70 |
Edu | SES | Cog | SH | Lon | Dep | Size | Freq | Res | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Edu | 1 | 0.164 **,‡ | 0.531 **,† | 0.200 **,‡ | −0.146 *,† | −0.049 † | 0.240 **,† | 0.124 *,† | 0.154 *,† |
SES | 1 | 0.070 ‡ | 0.313 **,‡ | −0.222 **,‡ | −0.265 **,‡ | 0.187 **,‡ | 0.135 *,‡ | 0.370 **,‡ | |
Cog | 1 | 0.188 **,‡ | −0.165 **,† | −0.138 **,† | 0.202 **,† | 0.020 † | 0.164 **,† | ||
SH | 1 | −0.224 **,‡ | −0.376 **,‡ | 0.200 **,‡ | 0.085 ‡ | 0.402 **,‡ | |||
Lon | 1 | 0.417 **,† | −0.515 **,† | −0.464 **,† | −0.483 **,† | ||||
Dep | 1 | −0.295 **,† | −0.202 **,† | −0.499 **,† | |||||
Size | 1 | 0.493 **,† | 0.241 **,† | ||||||
Freq | 1 | 0.332 **,† | |||||||
Res | 1 |
Variables | Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 |
---|---|---|---|---|
Years of education | 0.117 * | 0.033 | 0.048 | 0.052 |
Existence of living children | 0.077 | 0.063 | −0.016 | −0.025 |
Religion | 0.245 ** | 0.251 ** | 0.254 ** | 0.243 ** |
Perceived SES | 0.338 ** | 0.259 ** | 0.185 ** | 0.185 ** |
Perceived health problems in usual activities | −0.061 | −0.082 | −0.060 | |
Cognitive function | 0.081 | 0.009 | 0.029 | |
Subjective health | 0.271 ** | 0.156 ** | 0.173 ** | |
Loneliness | −0.312 ** | −0.319 ** | ||
Depression | −0.233 ** | −0.240 ** | ||
Size of social network | −0.149 * | |||
Frequency of social contact | 0.136 * | |||
Adjusted R2 | 0.212 | 0.290 | 0.465 | 0.480 |
R2 change | 0.212 | 0.078 | 0.175 | 0.015 |
F | 18.827 ** | 10.592 ** | 43.035 ** | 4.670 * |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Park, S.; Kim, T.-H.; Eom, T.-R. Impact of Social Network Size and Contact Frequency on Resilience in Community-Dwelling Healthy Older Adults Living Alone in the Republic of Korea. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 6061. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18116061
Park S, Kim T-H, Eom T-R. Impact of Social Network Size and Contact Frequency on Resilience in Community-Dwelling Healthy Older Adults Living Alone in the Republic of Korea. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021; 18(11):6061. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18116061
Chicago/Turabian StylePark, Sangmi, Tae-Hui Kim, and Tae-Rim Eom. 2021. "Impact of Social Network Size and Contact Frequency on Resilience in Community-Dwelling Healthy Older Adults Living Alone in the Republic of Korea" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18, no. 11: 6061. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18116061