The current study explored the question what is the relationship between objective social isolation and perceived isolation, loneliness, on the social functioning and health outcomes in elderly? Social isolation and loneliness both have a negative impact in similar and different ways on the overall social functioning and health outcomes in the elderly. An independent samples t-test was performed to test whether social isolation and loneliness negatively affect elderly’s social functioning. Social isolation was measured by multiple variables such as whether one was employed, volunteered, traveled to
Mexico or to another Latin country while loneliness was measured by whether one could not shake off the blues. Social functioning was measured by multiple variables including one’s self perception of own health, health perception comparison with others, difficulties in mobility, whether one stayed in bed past two weeks, ever hospitalized or ever admitted into a nursing home.
Demographics
The study includes 1,789 Latinos, 60 years and older, for up to five years, from the Sacramento, California, region (Haan, Aiello, Gonzalez, Hinton, Jagust, Miller, Moore, Blythe, Mungas, & Seavey (1996-2008). Most participants are from Sacramento County while others are from Woodland, Dixon, Roseville, Yuba City, and surrounding small towns in the valley. Among the 1789 participants, 745, or 41.6% are male while 1044 or 58.4 % are female as shown in table 1. The age at the baseline visit of participants had a mean of 70.64 years with a standard deviation of 7.128. The participant’s marital status
is 2.9% single/never married, 58% is married, 24.9% is widowed, 10.5% is divorced, 2.9% is separated and .8% is living with someone as a spouse. Table 1 also lists the income of participants, where 44.8% is less than 1000, 20.5% is 1000 to 1499, 11.4% is 1500 to 1999, 9.3% is 2000 to 2499 and 14.1% is 2500 or more. Among the participants, 87.2% had attended school while 12.8% had not.
Table 1:
Living with Someone as a Spouse 0.8
Income
The independent variables in the study included whether one is employed, ever volunteered, ever traveled to Mexico or another Latin country and whether one could not shake off the blues. As shown in table 6, among the participants 17% are employed while 83% are not, 17.2% have volunteered while 82.7% have not. Of the participants 49.8% have traveled to Mexico or another Latin country while 50.1% have not. For the
fourth independent variable measuring loneliness, 36.2% of participants could not shake off the blues while 63.8% could.
Table 2
Independent Variables
IV 1- Employed
Y 17%
N 83%
IV 2 – Ever Volunteered 17.2% 82.7%
IV 3- Ever traveled to Mexico 49.8% 50.1%
IV 4- Could Not Shake off Blues 36.2% 63.8%
The dependent variables in the study included one’s self perception of health, health perception by comparison with others, difficulties in mobility, stayed in bed past two weeks, ever hospitalized and ever admitted to nursing home. Self-Perception of Health (DV 1), ranges from 1 to 5, where a larger number means one has a more positive self-perception of their health. As shown in table 7, the mean score for DV 1 is 3.33 with a standard deviation of 1.036. Health perception compared to others (DV 2) ranges from -1 to +1, where a positive value means that an individual considers themselves better in health than others. The mean score for DV 2 is 1.46 with a standard deviation of .638.
Difficulties in mobility ranges from 0 to 6, where a lower value means one has less
difficulty in mobility. The mean score for DV 3 difficulties in mobility is .7 with a standard deviation of 3.221.
The fourth dependent variable stayed in bed past two weeks (DV 4) ranges from 0 and 1 where a lower value means a less rate of staying in bed. The mean of DV 4 is .17 with a standard deviation of 1.044. Ever hospitalized (DV 5) has a range of 0 and 1 where a lower value means less hospitalization. DV 5 has a mean of .74 with a standard deviation of .441. The sixth dependent variable ever admitted to nursing home (DV 6) also has a range of 0 and 1 where a lower value means less admission to nursing home.
The mean score of DV 6 is .04 and a standard deviation of .199.
Table 3
Statistically Significant Relationship between Social Isolation and Social Functioning
My hypothesis of the study was that there would be a negative relationship between one’s level of social isolation and their overall social functioning and health outcomes. I hypothesized that higher health outcomes would be observed from those answering yes to the variable of employment status, and therefore less socially isolated. My analysis results support my hypothesis with statistical significance of a p value less than .001, where those who answered yes to employment had a higher mean of self-perception of health of 2.99, compared to a mean of 2.6 of those who answered no to employment.
Those who answered yes to employment also had a higher health perception compared to others with a mean of .65 significant at less than .001, compared to those who answered no, of .52. Those who answered yes to employment had a lower difficulty in mobility with a lower mean of .10 significant at less than .001 compared to those who answered no, of .37. For those who answered yes to employment and less socially isolated had a lower rate of staying in bed over the past two weeks with a mean of .20 significant at less than .01, compared to those who are more socially isolated, a mean of .5. A yes response also related to higher social functioning where there was a less likelihood of ever being admitted to nursing home with a mean of .01 significant at less than .01 compared to those who answered no, a mean of .35. However, the variable ever being hospitalized did not have a statistically significant relationship with one’s employment status.
I predicted that higher health outcomes would be observed from those answering yes to whether they have ever volunteered, and therefore less socially isolated. My analysis results support my hypothesis with statistical significance of a p value less than .001, where those who answered yes to volunteered had a higher self-perception of health with a mean of 3.14 compared to those who answered no, of 2.58. Those who answered yes to ever had volunteered and less socially isolated also had a higher health perception compared to others with a mean of .7 significant at less than .001 compared to those who answered no, of .51. Those who answered yes to ever had volunteered and less socially isolated also had lower difficulties in mobility with a mean of .12 significant at less than .001 compared to those who answered no, of .36. My analysis results did not show statistical significance for the correlation of the variable of employment to one’s answers
to staying in bed the past two weeks, ever being hospitalized and ever admitted to nursing home.
I hypothesized that higher health outcomes would be observed from those answering yes to whether they have ever traveled to Mexico, and therefore less socially isolated. My analysis results support my hypothesis with statistical significance of a p value less than .001, where those who answered yes to ever traveled to Mexico had a higher health perception of health compared to others with a mean of .58 significant at less than .05 compared to those who answered no, of .51. Those who were less socially isolated also had a lower difficulty in mobility with a mean of .27 compared significant at less than .01 compared to .45 of those who were more socially isolated. Those who answered yes to ever traveling to Mexico also had a lower rate of stayed in bed for past two weeks with a mean of 3% significant at less than .05 compared to those who answered no, 6%. Ever being hospitalized also had a lower mean of 71% significant at less than .01 for those who answered yes to have ever traveled compared to those who have not at 76%. Analysis results did not show statistical significance for the variable travel predicting one’s self perception of own health and ever being admitted to nursing home.
Statistically Significant Relationship between Loneliness and Social Functioning I hypothesized that lower health outcomes would be observed from those answering yes to whether they could not shake off the blues and therefore lonelier. My analysis results support my hypothesis with statistical significance of a p value less than .001, where those who answered yes to could not shake off the blues had a lower
self-perception of overall health with a mean of 2.36 compared to those who answered no, of 2.85. Those who answered yes to could not shake off the blues and lonelier had a less health perception compared to others with a mean of .39 significant at less than .001 compared to those who answered no, of .63.
Those who answered yes had a higher difficulty in mobility, with a mean of .54 significant at less than .001 compared to .2 of those who answered no. Those who answered yes to could not shake off the blues also had a higher response to stayed in bed in past two weeks, with a mean of 8% significant at less than .001 compared to those who answered no, 3%. Analysis results did not show statistical significance for the variable could not shake off the blues predicting one’s answer to being ever hospitalized or admitted to nursing home.
Table 4
DV 6- Ever
Overall, my hypothesis that there would be a negative relationship between one’s level of social isolation and loneliness and their overall social functioning and health outcomes was supported through my analysis. By measuring the differences in means of independent and dependent variables, I was able to test the significant impact social isolation and loneliness have on one’s social functioning. As shown in table 8, an independent samples t-test indicated a statistically significant negative association between elderly’s social isolation and loneliness and their health outcomes. One’s level of social isolation measured by one’s employment had a significant connection to one’s social functioning, specifically in the areas of one’s self perception of health, health perception compared to others, difficulties in mobility, staying in bed and admission to nursing home. One’s employment however did not have a significant association with one’s hospitalization. One’s volunteer experience had a significant connection to one’s social functioning, specifically in the areas of one’s self perception of health, health perception by comparison with others and difficulties in mobility. One’s travel experience had a statistically significant association with one’s health perception by comparison with others, difficulties in mobility, stayed in bed and hospitalization. One’s loneliness measured by one’s response to could not shake off the blues had a statistically
significant association with self perception of own health, health perception compared to others, difficulties in mobility and stayed in bed.
Chapter 5
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS