CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 15Aging, Health, and DisabilityGeriatric Care and Nursing HomesAging, Elder Care, and Social Issues

Emotional and Social Effects of a Controlled Intervention Study in a Day-Care Unit for Elderly Patients

Open access
Lökk, Johan·1990·Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care
DOI 10.3109/02813439008994951
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The present study deals with social, behavioural, and emotional aspects of the life of elderly handicapped people in a day-care unit. It was hypothesized that passivity and lack of possibility to influence treatment may inhibit progress in therapy. 65 patients were randomly allocated to experimental and control groups. The programme was devised in collaboration with the patients in order to ameliorate the passivity factor in treatment (by means of improved personal control and social activation). The programme was evaluated in a controlled study over 24 weeks with checkups before as well as after 6 and 12 weeks of therapy, and finally 12 weeks after the end of the programme. There were no changes in psychosomatic complaint scores or in any health/socioeconomic factor. However, there was a significant improvement in perceived health and life satisfaction. The results indicate that significant improvement in subjective well-being, lasting for at least three months after the end of day-care treatment, may be a consequence of the new intervention programme.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3109/02813439008994951

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In the discussion group study, participants reported increased social network size at six weeks and increased availability of contacts at 24 weeks, although more participants reported feeling often lonely compared with controls at six weeks.

    “Participants reported increased social network size at six weeks and increased availability of contacts at 24 weeks, although more participants reported feeling 'often lonely' compared with controls at six weeks.”

    From Interventions targeting social isolation in older people: a systematic review (2011) · cites this paper as [69]

  • In the discussion group study, participants reported decreased depression at 24 weeks and reduced feelings of hopelessness at all time points compared with the control group.

    “Participants reported decreased depression at 24 weeks, and reduced feelings of hopelessness at all time points in comparison with the control group.”

    From Interventions targeting social isolation in older people: a systematic review (2011) · cites this paper as [69]

  • In the discussion group study, beneficial intervention effects were observed in perceived health at 12 and 24 weeks.

    “Beneficial intervention effects were observed in perceived health at 12 and 24 weeks.”

    From Interventions targeting social isolation in older people: a systematic review (2011) · cites this paper as [69]

  • Thirteen out of 19 (68%) group interventions in this review had a positive effect on at least one of the four social health sub-domains.

    “Thirteen out of 19 (68%) group interventions in this review [13,53,55,60,63,66-69,73-76] had a positive effect on at least one of the four social health sub-domains.”

    From Interventions targeting social isolation in older people: a systematic review (2011) · cites this paper as [69]

  • Nine out of 11 (82%) interventions delivered by health and social care professionals reported at least one beneficial effect.

    “compared with nine out of 11 (82%) interventions delivered by health and social care professionals [13,52,56,60,65,69,70,76,81].”

    From Interventions targeting social isolation in older people: a systematic review (2011) · cites this paper as [69]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Mahoney FJ, Wood OH, Barthel DW. Chronically ill patients. South Med J 1958; 51:605-9.
  2. UnestAhl L-E. Sjalvkontroll genom mental traning. 1973; 16: 181-201. (Self-control by mental training). Veje. ijrebro, 1979, 150 pp (Swedish).
  3. Thornstam L. Att Bdras. Socialgerontologiska per- spektiv. (To get older. Socio-gerontological perspec- tives). Academic thesis, Uppsala, 1973. (Swedish).
  4. Mellstrom D, Ahlgren C, Steen B. Kostmassiga ko- hortskillnader och effekten av kostintervention hos aldre. (Differences of cohorts concerning food and the effect of foodintervention of elderly). Report from Vasa Hospital, University of Gothenburg, Sweden. Annual Conference of the Swedish Society of Med- icine. Stockholm, 1988 (Swedish).
  5. Arnetz BB, Theorell T. Research on activation for the elderly. J Gerontol Nurs 1983; 9: 616-9.
  6. Konch BM, G o v i EK, Francis V. Gaps in dostor- patient interaction and patient satisfaction. Pediatrics 1963; 92: 855-71.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Lökk, J.
Corresponding author
Lökk, Johan
ORCID
Lökk, Johan
Venue
Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
1990-01
Volume
8
Issue
3
Pages
165-172
ISSN
  • 0281-3432 (ISSN-L)
  • 1502-7724
DOI
10.3109/02813439008994951
OpenAlex
W1995100988
Cited by
15
References
25
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2016: 1
FWCI
1.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Aging, Health, and Disability
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Geriatric Care and Nursing Homes
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Aging, Elder Care, and Social Issues
Keywords
elderly patients, day care unit, passivity, personal control, social activation, intervention program, health perception, life satisfaction, subjective well-being, psychosomatic symptoms, social consequences, emotional impact, behavioral effects
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Chronic Disease, Day Care, Medical, Female, Persons with Disabilities, Humans, Internal-External Control, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Participation, Personal Satisfaction, Socialization

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review