ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Global policy emphasizes the need to promote healthy aging through supporting inclusivity, safety, and functional independence. Research indicates that efforts to enhance resilience can contribute to meeting these objectives. We employed a meta-analytical approach to examine evidence on resilience in community-living older adults. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We searched electronic databases until January 13, 2020 for observational studies investigating factors associated with resilience in this population. Articles had to provide quantitative data based on standardized assessment and include samples where mean participants' age and lower 95% confidence interval were more than 55 years. We included 49 studies reported in 43 articles and completed 38 independent meta-analyses, 27 for personal and 11 for contextual factors associated with resilience. RESULTS: A range of personal and contextual factors were significantly associated with resilience, with effects sizes predominantly small to moderate (0.1 < r < 0.49). Factors reflecting psychological and physical well-being and access to/quality of social support were associated with higher resilience. Factors indicative of poorer psychological well-being and social challenges were associated with lower resilience. Longitudinal evidence was limited. The level of between-study heterogeneity was substantial to considerable. Where relevant analysis was possible, the identified publication bias was also considerable. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: The quality of the available evidence, as well as issues related to measurement of resilience, indicates the need for further work relative to its conceptualization and assessment. The presented findings have important clinical implications, particularly within the context of the coronavirus disease 2019 impact on resilience in older adults.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Resilience, Psychological , Aged , Humans , COVID-19/psychologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Previous efforts to develop a resilience measure for older adults have largely failed to consider the environmental influences on their resilience, and have primarily concentrated on the resilience of community-dwelling older adults. Our objective was to validate a new multidimensional measure of resilience, the Making it CLEAR (MiC) questionnaire, for use with older adults at the point of discharge from hospital. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This study tested the structure, validity, and reliability of the MiC questionnaire. The questionnaire consists of 34 items, which assess the "individual determinants of resilience" (IDoR) and the "environmental determinants of resilience" (EDoR) across 2 subscales. 416 adults aged 66-102 years participated. Exploratory factor analysis, item analysis, and linear regression were undertaken. RESULTS: The IDoR subscale contained six factors which were labeled "Self-efficacy," "Values," "Interpersonal skills," "Life orientation," "Self-care ability," and "Process skills." The EDoR subscale contained five factors related to "Person-environment fit," "Friends," "Material assets," "Habits," and "Family." Both subscales demonstrated acceptable convergent validity and internal consistency, while individual items showed acceptable levels of discrimination and difficulty. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: The study provides evidence supporting the validity and quality of the MiC questionnaire. The results suggest that the MiC questionnaire could be used to identify the resilience needs of older adults at the point of hospital discharge. However, future research should identify which items of the MiC questionnaire are associated with hospital readmission, in order to develop an easily applicable screening tool for clinical practice.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: General self-efficacy (GSE) encourages health-promoting behaviors in older adults. It is unsurprising then that older adults receiving health care services are reported to have a greater risk of low GSE than older adults who are not. Despite this, there is currently limited evidence investigating whether the effect differs based on the environment in which care is received. This review aims to determine whether the GSE of older adults is affected by the receipt of health care services and whether GSE varies based on the setting in which care is received. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In accordance with PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO registration number CRD42018092191), a systematic search was undertaken across 7 databases. Standardized mean differences (SMD) and mean General Self-Efficacy Scale scores, with 95% confidence intervals (CI), were pooled for meta-analysis. RESULTS: A total of 40 studies were identified, they consisted of 33 population cohorts that were included in the meta-analysis. Older adults receiving health care services were found to be at greater risk of having lower GSE than those who do not (SMD = -0.62; 95% CI: -0.96 to -0.27, p < .0001). Following identification of sources of heterogeneity, older adults receiving acute inpatient care were more likely to have lower GSE than those receiving care in other health care settings. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Older adults receiving inpatient care have a greater risk of lower GSE, and consequently, poorer health-promoting behaviors. Further research is recommended that focuses on the GSE of older adults and health outcomes following discharge from inpatient care.
