Next Article in Journal
Does Depression and Anxiety Mediate the Relation between Limited Health Literacy and Diet Non-Adherence?
Next Article in Special Issue
Silence or Voice? Agency Freedom among Elderly Women Living in Extended Families in Urban India
Previous Article in Journal
Life Cycle Sustainability Performance Assessment Method for Comparison of Civil Engineering Works Design Concepts: Case Study of a Bridge
Previous Article in Special Issue
Benefits for Older People Engaged in Environmental Volunteering and Socializing Activities in City Parks: Preliminary Results of a Program in Italy
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJERPH
Volume 17
Issue 21
10.3390/ijerph17217912
ijerph-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Loneliness and Social Engagement in Older Adults Based in Lombardy during the COVID-19 Lockdown: The Long-Term Effects of a Course on Social Networking Sites Use

by
Elena Rolandi
1,
Roberta Vaccaro
1,
Simona Abbondanza
1,
Georgia Casanova
2,*,
Laura Pettinato
1,
Mauro Colombo
1 and
Antonio Guaita
1
1
Golgi Cenci Foundation, Corso San Martino 10, 20081 Abbiategrasso, Italy
2
IRCSS-INRCA National Institute of Health & Science on Ageing, Centre for Socio-Economic Research on Ageing, 60124 Ancona, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17(21), 7912; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17217912
Submission received: 15 September 2020 / Revised: 21 October 2020 / Accepted: 26 October 2020 / Published: 28 October 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Socio-Economic Research on Ageing)
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Older adults are less familiar with communication technology, which became essential to maintain social contacts during the COVID-19 lockdown. The present study aimed at exploring how older adults, previously trained for Social Networking Sites (SNSs) use, experienced the lockdown period. In the first two weeks of May 2020, telephone surveys were conducted with individuals aged 81–85 years and resident in Abbiategrasso (Milan), who previously participated in a study aimed at evaluating the impact of SNSs use on loneliness in old age (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04242628). We collected information on SNSs use, self-perceived loneliness, and social engagement with family and friends. Interviewed participants were stratified as trained (N = 60) and untrained (N = 70) for SNSs use, based on their attendance to group courses held the previous year as part of the main experimental study. The groups were comparable for sociodemographics and clinical features. Participants trained for SNSs use reported significantly higher usage of SNSs and reduced feeling of being left out. Compared to pre-lockdown levels, individuals trained for SNSs use showed a lighter reduction in social contacts. These findings support the utility of training older adults for SNSs use in order to improve their social inclusion, even in extreme conditions of self-isolation and perceived vulnerability.

1. Introduction

The COVID-19 outbreak caused unprecedented health, social, and economic challenges worldwide. The first COVID-19 Italian case was detected in Lombardy on 21 February 2020 and soon after, Italy became the first country for number of infections besides China [1]. Older people are at greater risk of infection and mortality from COVID-19—in Italy, respectively, 61 and 82 years of median age, while Lombardy residents represented 49.1% of the deceased [2]. Therefore, being more than eighty years old and being a resident of Lombardy is the most risky profile for both infection and mortality. The Italian government established a nationwide lockdown on March 9th, allowing only essential transfers for grocery, health, or work [3]. Although necessary to counteract the spread of the COVID-19 epidemic, the strict self-isolation measurements may disproportionally affect older adults’ psychological and social wellbeing [4,5]. Indeed, loneliness feelings and social isolation were already seen as a public health issue for older adults, with deleterious impact on physical, cognitive, and mental health [5,6,7]. Older adults are also less familiar with information and communication technology (ICT) and social networking sites (SNSs) use [8,9,10], which became essential to maintain social contacts during the quarantine.
The aim of this study is to explore whether being trained for SNSs use had a significant impact on SNSs use, loneliness feelings, and social isolation during the COVID-19 lockdown period, in community-dwelling old-old adults (81–85 years) living in Abbiategrasso, a city in the Milan metropolitan area (Lombardy region). We conducted a telephone survey on participants of “The Ageing in a Networked Society-Social Experiment Study (ANS-SE)”, a randomized controlled trial aimed at exploring the causal impact of SNSs use on loneliness and social isolation in old age [11]. The ANS-SE study enrolled older adults without previous experience in SNSs use to be randomly allocated to one of three conditions: a course on SNSs use (experimental group), waiting list (inactive control group), and lifestyle education course (active control group). For the purposes of the present investigation, survey respondents were stratified as trained for SNSs use if they attended the course on SNSs use before the COVID-19 outbreak, thus including both participants randomized to the experimental group and those randomized to the waiting list who subsequently accepted to attend the course after the experimental phase (June 2019). Therefore, adopting a quasi-experimental design, we were able to test both cross-sectional and longitudinal differences between older adults trained and untrained for SNSs use during the COVID-19 lockdown. Indeed, the outcome measures collected during the experimental phase (pre–post intervention) were used as a proxy of pre-lockdown levels of loneliness and social isolation of the survey participants. With regard to the ANS-SE study experimental phase, no statistically significant effects of SNSs course on loneliness and social isolation were found in the short term (unpublished work).
Loneliness is the negative feeling derived from the discrepancy between the desired and the actual personal social network, while social isolation usually refers to the objective characteristic of the social network (i.e., number of kin and non-kin relationships) [12]. Observational studies on oldest-old individuals suggest a positive association between ICT use and different aspects of subjective well-being, including loneliness [13,14]. However, a recent review from our group showed that very few studies tested this association using experimental or quasi-experimental design, which is necessary to draw conclusions on the causal relationship between variables [15]. Systematic reviews of interventional studies show that training on ICT use had beneficial short-term effects on social connectedness, social support, and social isolation in older adults [16,17]. The results on loneliness are mixed, with the majority of studies reporting beneficial effects, while some report none or negative effects [16,17]. Few interventional studies performed long-term follow-up, and the results available on the maintenance of the gain observed post training are not conclusive [16]. Moreover, studies in this research area showed several limitations, which prevent us from drawing firm conclusions on the causal effect of ICT and SNSs use on loneliness and social isolation, such as: small and/or convenience samples, lack of active control group and great heterogeneity in the outcome measures used [15,16,17,18,19]. In this context, the ANS-SE study design has several methodological strengths: sample size based on power analysis, outcome measures selected to assess both loneliness and social isolation with internationally validated scales, randomization of participants, and the presence of active and inactive control conditions [11]. Furthermore, a one-year follow-up was planned to provide evidence on the long-term effects of the course on SNSs use.
However, the COVID-19 pandemic dramatically changed the psychological and social context worldwide, as well as the possible modalities for data collection. At the same time, the topic of social isolation and loneliness among older adults has acquired even more relevance. Feeling lonely as a result of the pandemic was the most common personal stressor identified in an Australian survey [20]. Older adults have received stricter directives on social distancing, as they were one of the first groups encouraged to stay home worldwide [21]. Several commentaries proposed ICT use improvement in older populations as a potential strategy to counteract social isolation and loneliness during the pandemic [4,5,20,21,22,23,24]. Keeping connections is listed among the tips for preventing the detrimental effect of loneliness and social isolation [5]. The use of digital technologies can bridge social distance, even while physical distancing measures are in place [24]. Many older adults, however, might not be familiar with these new technologies [5,8,10]. However, training on SNSs use may prove useful to familiarize older adults with such technologies [22].
Here, we had the unique opportunity to investigate empirically the long-lasting effect of training on SNSs use in oldest-old adults on SNSs use, loneliness, and social isolation, in the context of the COVID-19 quarantine. To this end, a telephone survey was conducted soon after the first attenuation of the Italian lockdown, when visiting family members was allowed after nearly 2 months of self-isolation. Based on the available evidence and on the aforementioned expert opinion in the field, we hypothesized that being trained for SNSs use, within a context in which any in-person social contact outside home is forbidden, could potentially help older adults in maintaining pre-lockdown levels of social engagement, with a potential benefit on perceived loneliness during the quarantine period. To the best of our knowledge, our study provides the first empirical evidence on the effectiveness of training community-dwelling oldest-old adults on SNSs use to counteract social isolation during the quarantine.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Participants and Procedures

The study protocol of the ANS-SE study is described in detail elsewhere [11]. Briefly, participants were selected among older adults participating in the fourth evaluation wave of the InveCe.Ab study (Invecchiamento Cerebrale in Abbiategrasso), a population-based cohort set in Abbiategrasso, a town near Milan [25]. The ANS-SE study eligibility criteria were: (i) consent to be contacted to take part in further studies; (ii) a score lower than 9 on the 15-item Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS); (iii) absence of functional limitations to hands and visual or hearing impairment, which might prevent smartphone use; (iv) any diagnosis of dementia or mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and a Mini-Mental State Examination score higher than 24; (v) no experience in using SNSs. The setting and location of the ANS-SE study was the Golgi Cenci Foundation in Abbiategrasso.
The sample size calculation is reported elsewhere [11]. Briefly, power analysis was conducted using an estimated effect size of 0.25 with 80% power using a 5%-level F test of the equality of means, assuming a balanced design. According to statistical computing, a sample size of no less than 52 subjects per group was required. Thereafter, a 10% attrition rate was considered, and the expected sample size resulted in no less than 57 subjects per group.
The recruitment phase was conducted on January 2019: 180 InveCe.Ab participants presenting the ANS-SE study eligibility criteria were randomly allocated to one of three conditions: a course on SNSs use (experimental group), waiting list as an inactive control group, and lifestyle education course as an active control condition. They were contacted for the study proposal and 144 participants underwent baseline evaluation—they represent the sample for this investigation.
Group interventions took place between 18 February and 7 March 2019. The SNSs course consists of 5 interactive group sessions held twice a week. The themes covered were: smartphone use, Facebook and WhatsApp use, privacy rules, and fraud risk prevention using Facebook. Participants were provided with user-friendly smartphones designed for older adults. For the remaining 3 weeks of the experimental phase, two trainers were available twice a week for face-to-face tutoring. Moreover, they regularly sent messages and media in a dedicated WhatsApp group and Facebook pages.
Participants underwent pre–post evaluations in order to verify the short-term effect of the intervention on loneliness and social isolation (primary outcomes), as well as on executive functions (secondary outcomes). Furthermore, to explore the long-term effects of the intervention, a one-year in-person follow-up was planned. However, due to the strict lockdown measurements deployed in the Lombardy region from 9 March 2020 to counteract the spread of the COVID-19 epidemic, we performed telephone surveys to explore how participants in the ANS-SE study were experiencing the lockdown period.
Participants were contacted between 4 May and 19 May 2020, one year after post-intervention evaluations for the ANS-SE study (May 2019) and soon after the first attenuation of the lockdown measurements. Indeed, the so-called phase 2 of the Italian lockdown started on 4 May when visiting family members was allowed after nearly 2 months of self-isolation. During the phone call, we collected information on SNSs use, self-perceived loneliness measured by the 3-item UCLA (University of California, Los Angeles) loneliness scale, and social engagement measured by the 6-item Lubben Social Network Scale (LSNS-6). We explicitly asked participants to answer by referring to the phase 1 lockdown that had just ended.
We were thus able to test both cross-sectional and longitudinal differences between older adults trained and untrained for SNSs use during the COVID-19 lockdown. Cross-sectional differences were investigated by comparing the two groups on measures of SNSs use, loneliness, and social engagement collected during the telephone survey. Longitudinal differences were investigated by comparing one-year changes in levels of loneliness and social engagement, considering the average of corresponding measures collected before and after the ANS-SE experiment as a proxy of pre-lockdown status.
Among the 144 eligible ANS-SE study participants, 1 died, 4 refused, and 9 were unreachable, resulting in a sample of 130 survey participants. For the purposes of the present investigation, participants were stratified as trained (N = 60) and untrained (N = 70) for SNSs use. Survey respondents were stratified as trained for SNSs use if they attended the course before the COVID-19 outbreak, thus including both participants randomized to the experimental group and those randomized to the waiting list who attended the course in June 2019, at the end of the experimental phase (N = 15).
The ANS-SE study received approval from the Ethics Committee of the University of Milano Bicocca (prot. 431/2019). The study was performed in accordance with the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki. All participants signed the written informed consent at the beginning of the ANS-SE study.

2.2. Measures

SNSs use. Participants were asked about their use of Facebook and WhatsApp during the phase 1 lockdown (yes/no response). Furthermore, usage frequency was reported with a 4-point scale: 1 = less than once a week; 2 = once a week; 3 = several times per week; 4 = daily.
Loneliness. Self-perceived loneliness was evaluated through the administration of the 3-item UCLA loneliness scale, an abbreviated tool specifically developed for telephone surveys addressed to older adults [26]. The scale consists of the following items: “How often do you feel that you lack companionship?”; “How often do you feel left out?”; “How often do you feel isolated from others?” Participants rate each item on a 3-point scale: 1 = hardly ever; 2 = sometimes; 3 = often. The total score consists of the sum of the items, ranging from 3 to 9. This score was used as the loneliness measure in our analysis. We further reported the response to each item dichotomized (i.e., absence = hardly ever; presence = sometimes or often), to show cross-sectionally the distribution of specific loneliness feelings according to group.
In the ANS-SE study, we administered in person the Revised UCLA loneliness scale before and after the end of the experimental phase, which consists of 20 items on a 4-point Likert scale (1 = never; 2 = rarely; 3 = sometimes; 4 = often) [27]. However, the instrument is not suitable for telephone surveys, while the 3-item UCLA loneliness scale was specifically designed for this purpose and showed high correspondence with the same 3 items when asked in the full in-person scale [26]. Thus, to obtain the baseline level for the longitudinal analysis, the relevant 3 items asked in the full scale were re-conducted to a 3-point Likert scale by recoding both the “never” and “rarely” response to the “hardly ever” response of the 3-item version. The items were then summed up to obtain the total score. Finally, the pre–post scores were averaged to obtain a unique pre-lockdown level of loneliness, both for total score and for individual items.
Social engagement. Social engagement with family and friends was explored with the 6-item Lubben Social Network Scale (LSNS-6, [28]). The LSNS-6 is composed of a set of 3 questions to evaluate their relationship with relatives, followed by the same set of questions referring to friends. Specifically, the questions were “How many relatives/friends do you see or hear from at least once a month?”; “How many relatives/friends do you feel close to such that you would call on them for help?”; “How many relatives/friends do you feel at ease with that you can talk about private matters?” The items were thus suitable to report both remote and in-person contacts and to capture both structural and functional aspects of the social network [29]. Items were rated on a 6-point Likert scale: 0 = none; 1 = one; 2 = two; 3 = three or four; 4 = five through eight; 5 = nine or more. The total score was the sum of the 6 items, ranging from 0 to 30 (LSNS-6 Total), with higher scores indicating higher engagement (i.e., lower social isolation). Moreover, subscales were obtained by adding the items on relatives (LSNS-6 Family, range 0–15) and friends (LSNS-6 Friends, range 0–15). The same scale was administered during the ANS-SE study experimental phase. Pre-lockdown levels of social engagement were obtained by averaging the pre–post score of the LSNS-6 scale and subscales.

2.3. Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis was performed on Statistical Package for Social Science (IBM Corp. Released 2011. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 20.0. Armonk, NY, USA: IBM Corp.). To ascertain whether the groups were comparable for relevant sociodemographic and clinical features, an Independent Sample T-test for continuous variables (age, education, GDS, MMSE, comorbidity) and a Chi-square test for categorical variables (sex, percentage of living alone) were performed.
First, we tested cross-sectionally whether being trained for SNSs use before the COVID-19 outbreak (independent variable) was associated with the outcomes of interest collected during the telephone survey (dependent variables). More specifically, we investigated between groups (trained vs. untrained) differences in SNSs use (yes/no), loneliness (UCLA total score and individual items dichotomized), and social engagement (LSNS-6 scale and subscales), using a Chi-square test for dichotomous variables and Mann–Whitney test for continuous variables (skewed distribution). Furthermore, Spearman’s rank-order correlations were performed to explore any direct or inverse relationship between SNSs usage frequency and measures of loneliness and social engagement.
We then performed longitudinal analyses to investigate the effect of SNSs use training on one-year changes in loneliness and social isolation. As previously detailed, proxies of pre-lockdown levels of loneliness and social engagement were obtained retrospectively by averaging the corresponding measures collected before (February 2019) and after (May 2019) the experimental phase of the ANS-SE study. A delta score was computed for each measure (post-lockdown–pre-lockdown). Thus, one-way analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used to test the effects of being trained on SNSs use on social engagement changes (LSNS-6 scale and subscales) after the COVID-19 lockdown, including the pre-lockdown measure as a covariate. Generalized Linear Models with identity link functions were performed for changes in UCLA scale and individual items, including the pre-lockdown measure as a covariate, since they displayed a skewed distribution.

3. Results

Descriptive characteristics of the study sample are reported in Table 1. Older adults trained and untrained for SNSs use were comparable for key sociodemographics and clinical features, as well as for the percentage of individuals living alone during the lockdown period (Table 1).
Table 2 shows the main findings of the present study. The first step of this study is to explore cross-sectional differences between trained and untrained participants on SNSs use, loneliness, and social engagement during the COVID-19 lockdown. The findings underline how participants trained for SNSs use reported significantly higher usage (yes/no response) of Facebook (χ2(1) = 17.1, p < 0.001) and WhatsApp (χ2(1) = 11.92, p = 0.001). However, we must observe that a portion of participants in the untrained group reported being SNSs users during the lockdown period: 31% WhatsApp users; 7% Facebook users (Table 2). As regards loneliness and social engagement, non-significant differences were found for the UCLA loneliness scale total score and the LSNS-6 scores. However, considering the prevalence of yes responses to the individual items of the UCLA loneliness scale, a lower portion of trained participants reported a feeling of being left out (χ2(1) = 5.11, p = 0.024) and a trend of reduced feeling of isolation was detected (χ2(1) = 3.60, p = 0.058).
When longitudinal analyses were performed to test the impact of SNSs training on one-year change in the measures of interest, a slight reduction in social engagement was found in the trained group, on both LSNS-6 Total (F(1) = 7.85, p = 0.006) and LSNS-6 Family (F(1) = 8.16, p = 0.005). No significant differences between groups were found for the UCLA scale and single items using a generalized linear model.
Finally, Table 3 showed an exploratory analysis on the eventual inverse or direct relationship between SNSs usage frequency and loneliness feelings (UCLA individual items) or social engagement (LNSNS-6 scale and subscale). No significant associations were discerned. Only a trend toward significance was found for an inverse relationship between WhatsApp usage frequency and feeling of a lack of companionship (ρs(56) = −0.257, p = 0.051; Table 3).

4. Discussion

The aim of the present study was to investigate whether older adults trained for SNSs use showed more frequent use of SNSs and increased resilience (i.e., reduced loneliness and social isolation) during the period of forced self-isolation due to the COVID-19 outbreak. The main findings of the study are:
(1)
SNSs use was higher in the trained group;
(2)
The feeling of being left out was less frequent in the trained group during the lockdown;
(3)
Participants trained for SNSs use showed a lighter reduction in social engagement compared to the pre-lockdown level.

4.1. Relevance of Results

These results support a better understanding of SNSs use by older people. In particular, the findings confirm the efficacy of training to use SNSs for older adults and their positive effect on increasing their perceived social inclusion and maintaining meaningful social contacts and relationships, even in adverse and threatening conditions. Both aspects are relevant for several reasons. Firstly, widespread SNSs use by elders reduces the grey digital divide, which is the difference in ICT access and use between the aged population and younger generations. Indeed, although the portion of ICT users within the aged population has constantly increased in recent years, the grey digital divide is still an issue in many countries [9,30,31]. The relevance of this issue grows for countries like Italy, where the percentage of ICT and SNSs users among older adults is one of the lowest in Europe [8,10].
Our findings clearly show the advantage of formal training in this accelerated process of digitalization. Even a short course delivered in groups has the potential to promote long-term SNSs use in older adults lacking previous experience with social media and, in most cases, with the smartphone itself. This assumption finds confirmation in the significantly higher proportion of SNSs users within the trained group one year after SNSs course completion. This is not a trivial finding, since no further tutoring was provided after the end of the experimental phase.
Moreover, the present study provides evidence of the effectiveness and appropriateness of training for SNSs use in older adults aged 80 years and over (oldest-old). All these assumptions work to contrast the ageism stigma on communication technologies use [32]. The cross-sectional comparison shows no significant differences between trained and untrained participants on scales measuring loneliness and social isolation as a whole. However, between-group differences emerged when the individual items of the UCLA loneliness scale were considered. These results highlight the benefit of SNSs use on specific loneliness feelings. Moreover, these detected benefits remain quite stable in the middle term. In particular, after one year, having been trained had a beneficial impact on one-year change in social engagement, especially with family. This finding underlines the strong linkage between loneliness feelings and social participation [33,34].
As for the SNS used, the older adults in this study showed a marked preference for WhatsApp over Facebook usage. This could be due to the specific features of the SNSs considered. Indeed, while WhatsApp is mainly used to maintain social contact with one’s current social network, Facebook requires the construction of a public or semipublic profile and an extended social network with which to share content, and it might thus raise privacy concerns. Systematic reviews aimed to explore the experience of older SNSs users showed as a main benefit the possibility to maintain social contact with family and friends and to enter an intergenerational communication with younger family members, while several barriers were reported, such as privacy concerns, technical difficulties, and low accessibility/usability [17,35,36].

4.2. Contributions for the Literature

This study supports the literature debate on older adults’ loneliness and social isolation and on the strategies to contrast these negative effects on their wellbeing. Several commentaries on older adult needs during the COVID-19 pandemic highlighted social inclusion and loneliness reduction among public health priorities and proposed improved ICT use as a potential strategy [4,5,20,21,22,23,24].
Firstly, the study confirms the multidimensional characteristics of loneliness and social isolation definitions, underlining their interrelated constructs. Indeed, in order to gain a deep understanding of these phenomena, multidimensional measures must be applied, covering both structural and functional aspects of the social network, as well as subjective feelings on social relationships [29]. The lack of significance of SNSs use on changes in loneliness feelings is in line with the literature, which showed contrasting results [16,37]. Loneliness is conceptualized as a quite stable trait, with high one-year test–retest reliability [26], and a recent meta-analysis on longitudinal studies shows great stability of loneliness from adolescence to old age [38]. This could potentially explain the inconsistency of findings on loneliness outcomes in interventional studies so far. However, it is possible that more sensitive and broad measures of loneliness, not suitable for phone interviews, would help us fully grasp subtle oscillations in a rather stable tract.
Moreover, while we were conducting the present investigation, other research articles were published on the effects of self-isolation due to COVID-19 on older adults’ well-being and loneliness, further confirming the relevance of the topic. Online surveys conducted in Spain and Israel showed that a negative self-perception of aging was associated with loneliness and psychological distress [39,40]. Interestingly, the study conducted in Spain, including 1310 participants aged between 18 and 88 years, showed an inverse association between chronological age and both loneliness and distress, suggesting better coping abilities in aged individuals [39]. A longitudinal observational study showed that US older adults experienced increased depressive symptoms and loneliness than prior to the COVID-19 pandemic [41]. Conversely, in a large Swedish cohort evaluated annually for 5 years, no changes in loneliness were detected [42].
This study lends its contribution to the specific literature focusing on these issues, enlarging the international perspective. Our results, together with the incoming literature, shed light on the resilience and personal resources of the older population facing the adversities of the COVID-19 outbreak. This is an important message, since aging is often described only in terms of vulnerabilities and losses.
Lastly, our study contributes to promoting further experimental studies on ICT or SNSs use, showing the effects on loneliness and social isolation over a long-term observation time. Few previous studies on the topic performed long-term follow-up, which is generally scheduled no more than 6 months after the end of the training phase [16].

4.3. Strengths and Limitations of Study

Our study had several strengths and novelties. The longitudinal measurements allow the detection of changes before and after the pandemic. The quasi-experimental design allows for a robust interpretation of the results, suggesting a cause–effect mechanism between the course on SNSs use and increased maintenance of social networks during the pandemic. Moreover, very few studies evaluated the long-term effects of this kind of intervention. By including participants aged 80 years and over, we reported data on a scarcely studied population (oldest-old, old-old) which, however, represent a relevant and growing portion of the general one. Actually, recent observational studies suggested a positive association between ICT use and well-being even among the oldest-old [13,14]. Our study experimentally showed the possibility of promoting long-term SNSs use in oldest-old individuals without previous experience with it. Another relevant novelty is the use of smartphone devices, which was uncommon among interventional studies in the field [16,17].
Some limitations should also be discussed. As mentioned earlier, some outcomes would be better characterized by in-person evaluation (i.e., loneliness). The results presented are not widely generalizable, as we selected participants without cognitive impairment or clinically relevant depressive symptoms. It is, therefore, possible that we selected the most resilient individuals, in terms of both cognitive and psychological health. Moreover, even if SNSs use was significantly increased, a non-negligible portion of trained participants did not use it at all. Future studies, including a larger sample to perform stratified analysis, should investigate which personal, motivational, or technical aspects hamper ICT and SNSs use among older adults.

5. Conclusions

The present study showed that a short training course on SNSs use has the potential to promote long-term effects in older adults aged 80 years and over. Participants trained for SNSs use showed benefits in specific loneliness feelings and a lighter reduction in social engagement with family and friends during the period of forced self-isolation to counteract the COVID-19 spread, one year after training completion. These findings support the usefulness of training older adults for SNSs in order to improve their social inclusion, even in extreme conditions of self-isolation and perceived vulnerability. However, more studies are still needed to clarify the psychological and social effects of the COVID-19 pandemic in individuals already struggling with mental health or in disadvantaged socioeconomic conditions. Furthermore, since the epidemic involved almost the entire world, it would be of great interest to investigate similarities and differences across countries, in relation with government decisions, media communication styles, and cultural aspects.

Author Contributions

E.R., R.V., S.A., G.C. and A.G. conceived and designed the present investigation. E.R., R.V., S.A., L.P. and A.G. contributed to data collection and data management. E.R. provided data analysis and interpretation of the results. E.R., G.C., M.C. and R.V. drafted the manuscript. All authors reviewed the paper, provided significant feedback, and approved the final manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Italian Fondazione Cariplo (Bando 2017, ricerca scientifica: Ricerca sociale sull’invecchiamento: persone, luoghi e relazioni. Grant number: 2017-0946. Title of the project: Aging in a networked society. Older people, social networks and well-being). This study was partially supported by a Ricerca Corrente funding from the Italian Ministry of Health to IRCCS INRCA.

Acknowledgments

Emanuela Maria Sala and Daniele Zaccaria conceived and designed the ANS-SE study. Doro Italia donated the smartphones used for the Social Networking Sites training course. The “Liceo Bachelet” high school students contributed as tutors for smartphone use courses.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. Boccia, S.; Ricciardi, W.; Ioannidis, J.P.A. What Other Countries Can Learn from Italy during the COVID-19 Pandemic. JAMA Intern. Med. 2020, 180, 927–928. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  2. Characteristics of COVID-19 Patients Dying in Italy Report Based on Available Data on 22 July 2020. Available online: https://www.epicentro.iss.it/en/coronavirus/sars-cov-2-analysis-of-deaths (accessed on 6 August 2020).
  3. Sylvers, E.; Legorano, G. As Virus Spreads, Italy Locks Down Country. Wall Str. J. 2020. Available online: https://www.wsj.com/articles/italy-plans-large-scale-lockdown-in-countrys-north-to-fight-coronavirus-11583613874 (accessed on 26 August 2020).
  4. Armitage, R.; Nellums, L.B. COVID-19 and the consequences of isolating the elderly. Lancet Public Health 2020, 5, e256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Hwang, T.J.; Rabheru, K.; Peisah, C.; Reichman, W.; Ikeda, M. Loneliness and Social Isolation during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Int. Psychogeriatr. 2020, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Santini, Z.I.; Jose, P.E.; York Cornwell, E.; Koyanagi, A.; Nielsen, L.; Hinrichsen, C.; Meilstrup, C.; Madsen, K.R.; Koushede, V. Social disconnectedness, perceived isolation, and symptoms of depression and anxiety among older Americans (NSHAP): A longitudinal mediation analysis. Lancet Public Health 2020, 5, e62–e70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Lara, E.; Martín-María, N.; De la Torre-Luque, A.; Koyanagi, A.; Vancampfort, D.; Izquierdo, A.; Miret, M. Does loneliness contribute to mild cognitive impairment and dementia? A systematic review and meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Ageing Res. Rev. 2019, 52, 7–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Sala, E.; Gaia, A.; Cerati, G. The Gray Digital Divide in Social Networking Site Use in Europe: Results from a Quantitative Study. Soc. Sci. Comput. Rev. 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Yu, R.P.; Ellison, N.B.; McCammon, R.J.; Langa, K.M. Mapping the two levels of digital divide: Internet access and social network site adoption among older adults in the USA. Inf. Commun. Soc. 2016, 19, 1445–1464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Sala, E.; Gaia, A. Older People’s Use of «Information and Communication Technology» in Europe. The Italian Case. Auton. Locali Serv. Soc. 2019, 42, 163–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Zaccaria, D.; Guaita, A.; Vaccaro, R.; Casanova, G.; Abbondanza, S.; Pettinato, L.; Cerati, G.; Rolandi, E.; Sala, E. Assessing the impact of Social Networking Site use on older people’s loneliness and social isolation. A randomized controlled trial: The Aging in a Networked Society-Social Experiment Study (ANS-SE). Contemp. Clin. Trials Commun. 2020, 19, 100615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. De Jong Gierveld, J.; Van Tilburg, T.; Dykstra, P. Loneliness and Social Isolation. In The Cambridge Handbook of Personal Relationships; Cambridge Handbooks in Psychology; Vangelisti, A., Perlman, D., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2006; pp. 485–500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Sims, T.; Reed, A.E.; Carr, D.C. Information and communication technology use is related to higher well-being among the oldest-old. J. Gerontol. Ser. B 2017, 72, 761–770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  14. Schlomann, A.; Seifert, A.; Zank, S.; Woopen, C.; Rietz, C. Use of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Devices Among the Oldest-Old: Loneliness, Anomie, and Autonomy. Innov. Aging 2020, 4, igz050. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. JMIR Preprints #23588: The effect of Information and Communication Technologies and Social Networking Sites (SNSs) Use on Older People’s Well-Being Related to Loneliness: Results from a Review of Experimental Studies. Available online: https://preprints.jmir.org/preprint/23588 (accessed on 21 October 2020).
  16. Chen, Y.R.R.; Schulz, P.J. The Effect of Information Communication Technology Interventions on Reducing Social Isolation in the Elderly: A Systematic Review. J. Med. Internet Res. 2016, 18, e18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Ibarra, F.; Baez, M.; Cernuzzi, L.; Casati, F. A Systematic Review on Technology-Supported Interventions to Improve Old-Age Social Wellbeing: Loneliness, Social Isolation, and Connectedness. J. Healthc. Eng. 2020, 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Poscia, A.; Stojanovic, J.; La Milia, D.I.; Duplaga, M.; Grysztar, M.; Moscato, U.; Onder, G.; Collamati, A.; Ricciardi, W.; Magnavita, N. Interventions targeting loneliness and social isolation among the older people: An update systematic review. Exp. Gerontol. 2018, 102, 133–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Stojanovic, J.; Collamati, A.; Mariusz, D.; Onder, G.; La Milia, D.I.; Ricciardi, W.; Moscato, U.; Magnavita, N.; Poscia, A. Decreasing loneliness and social isolation among the older people: Systematic search and narrative review. Epidemiol. Biostat. Public Health 2017, 14, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Smith, B.J.; Lim, M.H. How the COVID-19 pandemic is focusing attention on loneliness and social isolation. Public Health Res. Pract. 2020, 30, 2–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Morrow-Howell, N.; Galucia, N.; Swinford, E. Recovering from the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Focus on Older Adults. J. Aging Soc. Policy 2020, 32, 526–535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  22. Steinman, M.A.; Perry, L.; Perissinotto, C.M. Meeting the Care Needs of Older Adults Isolated at Home during the COVID-19 Pandemic. JAMA Intern. Med. 2020, 180, 819–820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Vahia, I.V.; Blazer, D.G.; Smith, G.S.; Karp, J.F.; Steffens, D.C.; Forester, B.P.; Tampi, R.; Agronin, M.; Jeste, D.V.; Reynolds, C.F. COVID-19, Mental Health and Aging: A Need for New Knowledge to Bridge Science and Service. Am. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry 2020, 28, 695–697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Galea, S.; Merchant, R.M.; Lurie, N. The Mental Health Consequences of COVID-19 and Physical Distancing: The Need for Prevention and Early Intervention. JAMA Intern. Med. 2020, 180, 817–818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  25. Guaita, A.; Colombo, M.; Vaccaro, R.; Fossi, S.; Vitali, S.F.; Forloni, G.; Polito, L.; Davin, A.; Ferretti, V.V.; Villani, S. Brain aging and dementia during the transition from late adulthood to old age: Design and methodology of the “Invece.Ab” population-based study. BMC Geriatr. 2013, 13, 98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  26. Hughes, M.E.; Waite, L.J.; Hawkley, L.C.; Cacioppo, J.T. A short scale for measuring loneliness in large surveys: Results from two population-based studies. Res. Aging 2004, 26, 655–672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Russell, D.W. UCLA Loneliness Scale (Version 3): Reliability, validity, and factor structure. J. Pers. Assess. 1996, 66, 20–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Lubben, J.; Blozik, E.; Gillmann, G.; Iliffe, S.; Von Kruse, W.R.; Beck, J.C.; Stuck, A.E. Performance of an abbreviated version of the lubben social network scale among three European community-dwelling older adult populations. Gerontologist 2006, 46, 503–513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Valtorta, N.K.; Kanaan, M.; Gilbody, S.; Hanratty, B. Loneliness, social isolation and social relationships: What are we measuring? A novel framework for classifying and comparing tools. BMJ Open 2016, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Morris, A.; Goodman, J.; Brading, H. Internet use and non-use: Views of older users. Univers. Access Inf. Soc. 2007, 6, 43–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Friemel, T.N. The digital divide has grown old: Determinants of a digital divide among seniors. New Media Soc. 2016, 18, 313–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. McDonough, C.C. The Effect of Ageism on the Digital Divide among Older Adults. Gerontol. Geriatr. Med. 2016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  33. Newall, N.E.; Chipperfield, J.G.; Clifton, R.A.; Perry, R.P.; Swift, A.U.; Ruthig, J.C. Causal beliefs, social participation, and loneliness among older adults: A longitudinal study. J. Soc. Pers. Relat. 2009, 26, 273–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Niedzwiedz, C.L.; Richardson, E.A.; Tunstall, H.; Shortt, N.K.; Mitchell, R.J.; Pearce, J.R. The relationship between wealth and loneliness among older people across Europe: Is social participation protective? Prev. Med. 2016, 91, 24–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  35. Nef, T.; Ganea, R.L.; Müri, R.M.; Mosimann, U.P. Social networking sites and older users—A systematic review. Int. Psychogeriatr. 2013, 25, 1041–1053. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  36. Newman, L.; Stoner, C.; Spector, A. Social networking sites and the experience of older adult users: A systematic review. Ageing Soc. 2019, 1–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Aarts, S.; Peek, S.T.M.; Wouters, E.J.M. The relation between social network site usage and loneliness and mental health in community-dwelling older adults. Int. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry 2015, 30, 942–949. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Mund, M.; Freuding, M.M.; Möbius, K.; Horn, N.; Neyer, F.J. The Stability and Change of Loneliness across the Life Span: A Meta-Analysis of Longitudinal Studies. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 2020, 24, 24–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  39. Losada-Baltar, A.; Jiménez-Gonzalo, L.; Gallego-Alberto, L.; Pedroso-Chaparro, M.D.S.; Fernandes-Pires, J.; Márquez-González, M. “We’re staying at home”. Association of self-perceptions of aging, personal and family resources and loneliness with psychological distress during the lock-down period of COVID-19. J. Gerontol. B 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  40. Shrira, A.; Hoffman, Y.; Bodner, E.; Palgi, Y. COVID-19-Related Loneliness and Psychiatric Symptoms Among Older Adults: The Buffering Role of Subjective Age. Am. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry 2020, 28, 1200–1204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Krendl, A.C.; Perry, B.L. The Impact of Sheltering in Place during the COVID-19 Pandemic on Older Adults’ Social and Mental Well-Being. J. Gerontol. Ser. B 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Kivi, M.; Hansson, I.; Bjälkebring, P. Up and About: Older Adults’ Well-being during the COVID-19 Pandemic in a Swedish Longitudinal Study. J. Gerontol. Ser. B 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table
Table 1. Descriptive characteristics of the study population (N = 130) and comparisons between older adults trained and untrained for Social Networking Sites (SNSs) use.
Table 1. Descriptive characteristics of the study population (N = 130) and comparisons between older adults trained and untrained for Social Networking Sites (SNSs) use.
Characteristics Study Sample
N = 130		Trained for SNSs Use
N = 60		Untrained for SNSs Use
N = 70		p *
Sociodemographics
Age 81.8 ± 1.482.0 ± 1.681.6 ± 1.20.102
Sex, female 68 (52%)32 (53%)36 (51%)0.828
Education 8.7 ± 3.48.7 ± 3.38.6 ± 3.50.883
Living alone 48 (37%)23 (38%)25 (36%)0.758
Clinical scalesRange
Comorbidity (CIRS)14–701.7 ± 0.31.7 ± 0.31.7 ± 0.30.438
Depressive symptoms (GDS)0–151.9 ± 1.92.0 ± 1.91.8 ± 2.00.579
Global cognition (MMSE)0–3028.4 ± 1.528.3 ± 1.428.4 ± 1.50.503
Values denote mean ± SD for continuous variables, counts (%) for dichotomous variables. * p values indicate significance in the Independent Sample t-test for continuous variables and Chi-square test for dichotomous variables. Abbreviations: CIRS—Cumulative Illness Rating Scale; GDS—Geriatric Depression Scale (15 item); MMSE—Mini Mental State Examination; SNSs—Social Networking Sites.
Table
Table 2. Differences between older adults trained and untrained for Social Networking Sites (SNSs) use on SNSs use, loneliness, and social engagement during the COVID-19 lockdown and impact of SNSs training course on one-year changes in loneliness and social engagement.
Table 2. Differences between older adults trained and untrained for Social Networking Sites (SNSs) use on SNSs use, loneliness, and social engagement during the COVID-19 lockdown and impact of SNSs training course on one-year changes in loneliness and social engagement.
OutcomesTrained for SNSs Use
N = 60		Untrained for SNSs Use
N = 70		p
Cross-sectional analysis *
SNSs use
Facebook users22 (37%)5 (7%)<0.001
WhatsApp users37 (62%)22 (31%)0.001
Loneliness
UCLA 3-item total4.2 ± 1.54.6 ± 1.60.124
Feeling a lack of companionship 31 (53%)42 (60%)0.395
Feeling left out6 (10%)18 (26%)0.024
Feeling isolated from others10 (17%)22 (31%)0.058
Social engagement
LSNS-6 Total14.8 ± 5.613.3 ± 4.90.102
LSNS-6 Family8.8 ± 2.97.9 ± 2.40.063
LSNS-6 Friends 6.0 ± 4.15.4 ± 3.20.389
Longitudinal analysis &
Loneliness
UCLA 3-item total score0.0 (0.2)0.3 (0.2)0.135
Feeling a lack of companionship 0.3 (0.1)0.3 (0.1)0.664
Feeling left out−0.3 (0.1)−0.1 (0.1)0.133
Feeling isolated from others0.2 (0.1)0.0 (0.1)0.082
Social engagement
LSNS-6 Total−1.7 (0.6)−3.8 (0.5)0.006
LSNS-6 Family−0.8 (0.3)−1.9 (0.3)0.005
LSNS-6 Friends−1.0 (0.4)−1.9 (0.4)0.100
* Cross-sectional analysis: Values denote mean ± SD for continuous variables, counts (%) for dichotomous variables. p values indicate significance in Mann–Whitney test for continuous variables, Chi-squared test for dichotomous variables. & Longitudinal analysis: Values denote adjusted mean (SE). p values indicate significance in the one-way ANCOVA (social engagement) or generalized linear model (loneliness) with baseline score as covariate. In bold statistically significant p value (p < 0.05). Abbreviations: LSNS-6—Lubben Social Network Scale 6-items; SNSs—Social Networking Sites.
Table
Table 3. Correlations between Social Networking Sites (SNSs) usage frequency and measures of loneliness and social engagement.
Table 3. Correlations between Social Networking Sites (SNSs) usage frequency and measures of loneliness and social engagement.
SNSs Usage Frequency LonelinessSocial Engagement
UCLA Lack of CompanionshipUCLA
Left Out		UCLA IsolatedLSNS-6
Total		LSNS-6 FamilyLSNS-6 Friend
WhatsApp
usage frequency
N = 58		ρs−0.257−0.051−0.0180.0210.0240.009
p0.0510.7060.8950.8750.8580.948
Facebook
usage frequency
N = 26		ρs0.286−0.1250.1020.2750.2290.227
p0.1570.5440.6190.1740.2600.264
ρs—Spearman’s correlation coefficient. p values denote significance at Spearman’s rank-order correlation.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Rolandi, E.; Vaccaro, R.; Abbondanza, S.; Casanova, G.; Pettinato, L.; Colombo, M.; Guaita, A. Loneliness and Social Engagement in Older Adults Based in Lombardy during the COVID-19 Lockdown: The Long-Term Effects of a Course on Social Networking Sites Use. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 7912. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17217912

AMA Style

Rolandi E, Vaccaro R, Abbondanza S, Casanova G, Pettinato L, Colombo M, Guaita A. Loneliness and Social Engagement in Older Adults Based in Lombardy during the COVID-19 Lockdown: The Long-Term Effects of a Course on Social Networking Sites Use. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020; 17(21):7912. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17217912

Chicago/Turabian Style

Rolandi, Elena, Roberta Vaccaro, Simona Abbondanza, Georgia Casanova, Laura Pettinato, Mauro Colombo, and Antonio Guaita. 2020. "Loneliness and Social Engagement in Older Adults Based in Lombardy during the COVID-19 Lockdown: The Long-Term Effects of a Course on Social Networking Sites Use" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17, no. 21: 7912. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17217912

APA Style

Rolandi, E., Vaccaro, R., Abbondanza, S., Casanova, G., Pettinato, L., Colombo, M., & Guaita, A. (2020). Loneliness and Social Engagement in Older Adults Based in Lombardy during the COVID-19 Lockdown: The Long-Term Effects of a Course on Social Networking Sites Use. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(21), 7912. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17217912

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop