Search

Chronic pain is common in older people. However, little is known about how pain is experienced in residents of retirement villages ('villages'), and how pain intensity and associations are experienced in relation to characteristics of residents and village living. We thus aimed to examine pain levels, prevalence and associated factors in village residents. The current paper is a cross‐sectional analysis of baseline data from the 'Older People in Retirement Villages' study in Auckland, New Zealand. Between July 2016 and August 2018, 578 village residents were interviewed face‐to‐face by gerontology nurse specialists, using interRAI Community Health Assessment (CHA) and customised survey. We used a validated pain scale and multivariable logistic regression analyses adjusted for pre‐specified confounders. Residents' median age was 82 years; 420 (73%) were female; 270 (47%) exhibited/reported daily pain, and in 11% this was severe. After controlling for confounders, daily pain was positively associated with self‐reported arthritis (OR = 3.88, 95% CI = 2.57–5.87), poor/fair self‐reported health (OR = 3.19, 95% CI = 1.29–7.93), having no health clinic on‐site (OR = 1.76, 95% CI = 1.10–2.83), and minimal fatigue (diminished energy but completes normal day‐to‐day activities) (OR = 1.77, 95% CI = 1.11–2.81). Similar associations were observed for levels of pain. We conclude that levels of pain and prevalence of daily pain are high in village residents. Self‐reported arthritis, self‐reported poor/fair health, no health clinic on‐site and minimal fatigue are all independently associated with a higher risk of daily pain and with levels of pain. This study suggests potential opportunities for villages to better provide on‐site support to decrease prevalence and severity of pain for their residents, and thus potentially increase wellbeing and quality‐of‐life, though as we cannot prove causality, more research is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper considers the support networks of older people in populations with a preponderance of multigenerational households and examines the most vulnerable network types in terms of loneliness and isolation. Current common typologies of support networks may not be sensitive to differences within and between different cultures. This paper uses cross-sectional data drawn from 590 elders (Gujaratis, Punjabis and Sylhetis) living in the United Kingdom and South Asia. Six variables were used in K-means cluster analysis to establish a new network typology. Two logistic regression models using loneliness and isolation as dependent variables assessed the contribution of the new network type to wellbeing. Four support networks were identified: ‘Multigenerational Households: Older Integrated Networks’, ‘Multigenerational Households: Younger Family Networks’, ‘Family and Friends Integrated Networks’ and ‘Non-kin Restricted Networks’. Older South Asians with ‘Non-kin Restricted Networks’ were more likely to be lonely and isolated compared to others. Using network typologies developed with individualistically oriented cultures, distributions are skewed towards more robust network types and could underestimate the support needs of older people from familistic cultures, who may be isolated and lonely and with limited informal sources of help. The new typology identifies different network types within multigenerational households, identifies a greater proportion of older people with vulnerable networks and could positively contribute to service planning. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

A school's commitment to promoting health extends beyond students' efforts to encompass parental involvement and must recognize the critical role of parents in enhancing overall student well-being. This study, conducted in 27 schools across Lebanon, assessed parents' awareness of their children's physical and mental health. A school health campaign involved direct medical interventions on 7184 students, followed by phone interviews with 3880 parents to compare their responses with the medical findings. Discordances ranged from extreme mismatches (≥50%) to mild mismatches (<15%), with notable disparities in incomplete vaccination (67.8%), BMI (59%), and mental health indicators (expressions of sadness (69.1%), loneliness (61.0%), and anxiety (53.4%)). Factors such as school type, child's age, governorate, family income, parents' occupation, education level, and marital status significantly influenced discordance rates. Notably, mental health aspects exhibited higher disparities, emphasizing the need for improved communication between parents, physicians, and children. Bridging these gaps could empower parents with better knowledge, fostering environments conducive to lifelong healthy behaviors in children. The study underscores the urgency for enhanced communication strategies to bridge discrepancies and ensure a more comprehensive understanding of children's physical and mental well-being. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper considers the support networks of older people in populations with a preponderance of multigenerational households and examines the most vulnerable network types in terms of loneliness and isolation. Current common typologies of support networks may not be sensitive to differences within and between different cultures. This paper uses cross-sectional data drawn from 590 elders (Gujaratis, Punjabis and Sylhetis) living in the United Kingdom and South Asia. Six variables were used in K-means cluster analysis to establish a new network typology. Two logistic regression models using loneliness and isolation as dependent variables assessed the contribution of the new network type to wellbeing. Four support networks were identified: ‘Multigenerational Households: Older Integrated Networks’, ‘Multigenerational Households: Younger Family Networks’, ‘Family and Friends Integrated Networks’ and ‘Non-kin Restricted Networks’. Older South Asians with ‘Non-kin Restricted Networks’ were more likely to be lonely and isolated compared to others. Using network typologies developed with individualistically oriented cultures, distributions are skewed towards more robust network types and could underestimate the support needs of older people from familistic cultures, who may be isolated and lonely and with limited informal sources of help. The new typology identifies different network types within multigenerational households, identifies a greater proportion of older people with vulnerable networks and could positively contribute to service planning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Loneliness (inclusive social loneliness and emotional loneliness) of older adults is a prominent public health issue internationally. Factors consistently associated with loneliness are age, gender, education, living arrangements, social network, and functional status. Intergenerational co‐living with spouse and adult children is important for the exchange of social, emotional, practical, and financial support provided to older adults. Co‐living with migrant domestic workers (MDWs) to care for older adults became an emergent phenomenon internationally, particularly in Asian countries. According to the convoy model of social relations, the effect of co‐living with MDWs on older adults' loneliness is unknown. This study examined (1) the prevalence of loneliness among community‐dwelling older adults; and (2) the association between co‐living with MDWs and older adult loneliness. Using the Chinese version of the 6‐item De Jong Gierveld Loneliness Scale on loneliness, 380 older adults were interviewed at busy points in Hong Kong, including subway stations. 35.3% of older adults experienced moderate‐to‐severe loneliness. Linear regression was performed to examine the association between co‐living with MDWs and loneliness. The results showed that co‐living with MDWs was significantly associated with lower levels of overall loneliness (β = −0.636; p =.022) and emotional loneliness (β = −0.298, p =.039), but not for social loneliness (β = −0.337, p =.084). While MDWs could be an attachment figure for older adults, they might not be effective in promoting the social integration of older adults. There is a need to investigate the barriers of social integration faced by older adults co‐living with MDWs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

tse m., leung r. & ho s. (2012) Pain and psychological well-being of older persons living in nursing homes: an exploratory study in planning patient-centred intervention. Journal of Advanced Nursing 68(2), 312-321. Abstract Aim. This article is a report on a study to examine the pain situation, the use of oral analgesics and non-pharmacological strategies and the psychological well-being of older patients living in nursing homes; the relationships between pain and psychological well-being were also explored. Background. Pain is common among older adults world-wide, and tends to be under-treated. Indeed, the high prevalence of pain may further hinder the fulfilment of psychological needs in a Maslow hierarchy of needs model. Method. It was a quantitative cross-sectional study; older adults from six nursing homes were invited to join the study in 2007-2009, with a response rate of 100%. Pain was measured using the Geriatric Pain Assessment, happiness using the Subjective Happiness Scale, life satisfaction using the Life Satisfaction Index - A Form, loneliness using the Revised UCLA Loneliness Scale and depression was measured using the Geriatric Depression Scale. Results. A convenience sample of 302 older patients (213 females and 89 males aged from 60 to 101, mean age of 84·99) joined the study. The majority of them had experienced pain in the previous 3 months, with a pain intensity of 4·51 on a 10-point scale. Pain sites were mainly the knee, back, shoulder and musculoskeletal areas. Only 50% of them took oral analgesics, and 70% used non-pharmacological measures for pain relief. The pain group reported significantly more loneliness and depression when compared with their no-pain counterparts. Conclusions. As the number of older patients increases, so does the need for alternative accommodation; thus, pain management education is urgently needed for staff and nursing home residents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]