Abstract
Background
There is very limited knowledge regarding the prevalence and determinants of loneliness in oldest old residents of nursing or old age homes.
Objective
To examine the prevalence and determinants of loneliness among the oldest old living in institutionalized settings in Germany.
Material and methods
Data were taken from the representative survey on quality of life and subjective well-being of the very old in North Rhine-Westphalia (NRW80+) including individuals ≥ 80 years living in North Rhine-Westphalia. The study focused on individuals living in institutionalized settings. Sociodemographic, lifestyle-related, and health-related determinants were included in multiple linear regression models.
Results
Approximately 56.6% of the individuals were not lonely, 25.7% and 17.8% of the individuals were moderately and severely lonely, respectively. Regression analyses showed that higher loneliness was associated with being married (β = 0.48, p < 0.05), high education (compared to low education, β = 0.46, p < 0.05), having a small social network size (β = −0.02, p < 0.05), having poor self-rated health (β = −0.25, p < 0.05), and more depressive symptoms (β = 0.25, p < 0.001).
Conclusion
A significant proportion of the institutionalized oldest old individuals reported moderate or severe loneliness, which underpins the relevance of this topic. Understanding the determinants of loneliness may help to address institutionalized adults aged 80 years and over at risk of loneliness.
Zusammenfassung
Hintergrund
Es gibt nur sehr wenige Erkenntnisse über die Prävalenz und die Determinanten von Einsamkeit bei älteren Bewohner:innen von Pflege- oder Altersheimen.
Ziel der Arbeit
Untersuchung der Prävalenz und der Determinanten von Einsamkeit bei älteren Menschen, die in stationären Einrichtungen in Deutschland leben.
Material und Methoden
Die Daten stammen aus der repräsentativen Studie „Lebensqualität und Wohlbefinden hochaltriger Menschen in NRW (NRW80+)“, die in Nordrhein-Westfalen lebende Personen ≥ 80 Jahre umfasst. Wir haben uns auf Personen konzentriert, die in institutionellen Einrichtungen leben. Soziodemographische, lebensstilbezogene und gesundheitsbezogene Determinanten wurden in multiple lineare Regressionsmodelle einbezogen.
Ergebnisse
Etwa 56,6 % der Personen waren nicht einsam, 25,7 % und 17,8 % der Personen waren mäßig bzw. stark einsam. Die Regressionen zeigten, dass höhere Einsamkeit mit Verheiratetsein (β = 0,48; p < 0,05), hoher Bildung (im Vergleich zu niedriger Bildung, β = 0,46; p < 0,05), einem kleinen sozialen Netzwerk (β = −0,02; p < 0,05), schlechter selbst eingeschätzter Gesundheit (β = −0,25; p < 0,05) und mehr depressiven Symptomen (β = 0,25, p < 0,001) assoziiert war.
Diskussion
Ein signifikanter Anteil der stationär untergebrachten Personen >80 Jahre berichtete über mäßige oder schwere Einsamkeit – was die Relevanz dieses Themas unterstreicht. Das Verständnis der Determinanten der Einsamkeit kann dazu beitragen, institutionalisierte Erwachsene im Alter von 80 Jahren und darüber, die von Einsamkeit bedroht sind, zu adressieren.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
In very late life various adverse life events, such spousal loss commonly occur. Often due to a lack of data availability, individuals living in nursing or old age homes are neglected in research. For example, the prevalence and determinants of loneliness in oldest old residents of nursing or old age homes is largely unknown. Such knowledge is of great relevance to better understand the significance of loneliness among the oldest old residing in institutionalized settings. This in turn is of great importance because loneliness predicts morbidity and premature death.
Introduction
The number of individuals aged 80 years and older (also called oldest old) is expected to rise considerably in the next 20 or 30 years, not only in Germany, but in many industrial nations [27]. In this age bracket, various critical life events can take place such as immobility, cognitive decline, spousal loss, or institutionalization [15]. Particularly oldest old individuals living in institutionalized settings might experience worse conditions but are often neglected in research (e.g., due to a lack of data availability); however, it can be assumed that the importance of nursing and old age homes will increase as the geographic distance to family members (who could potentially provide informal care) is increasing and particularly the daughters, who have often provided private care in the past, are placing increasing emphasis on their professional careers [18, 29, 35].
One main topic for such institutionalized oldest old individuals may be loneliness [39], referring to a discrepancy between actual and desired social relations [38]. Due to various reasons (such as disconnection from friends and acquaintances [5, 20]), particularly individuals residing in institutionalized settings can feel lonely [45, 52]. This would be in accordance with the theory of the need to belong which was proposed by Baumeister and Leary [3] in the mid-1990s. Overall, this topic is of great importance because loneliness can have adverse health consequences such as morbidity and mortality [17, 37, 50].
As described in a recent systematic review and meta-analysis [13], only some studies investigated the prevalence of loneliness among older individuals living in institutions. These studies often included individuals aged 60 years and over [1, 7, 10, 14, 25, 34, 40, 51], whereas only very few studies [30, 36] exclusively focused on the oldest old individuals who most likely considerably differ from individuals aged 60 years (e.g., in terms of mobility, cognitive impairment or availability of friends and relatives, which could be important for loneliness [52]). Moreover, quantitative evidence from Germany is completely missing. Thus, our aim was to examine the prevalence and determinants of loneliness among the oldest old living in institutionalized settings in Germany. Such knowledge is important to better understand the importance of loneliness among the oldest old residing in institutionalized settings. Furthermore, identifying the determinants may assist in addressing those institutionalized individuals at risk for high loneliness levels. This can help to promote health and successful ageing in this particularly vulnerable group.
Methods
Sample
Data from the survey on the quality of life and subjective well-being of very old people in North Rhine-Westphalia (NRW80+) were used. This survey was conducted in North Rhine-Westphalia, the most populous federal state of Germany, from August 2017 to February 2018. The NRW80+ is a representative sample of individuals in this federal state who are 80 years or older. Men and individuals aged 85 years and older were oversampled. Thus, sampling weights were applied in our study to account for such factors. Details about the weighting procedure are given in Chapter 8 of the methods report [4] and also by Hansen et al. [19]. In our study, we concentrated on individuals in institutionalized settings. Thus, in our analytical sample, n equalled 142 individuals.
Outcome: loneliness
In accordance with prior research (e.g., [10, 24, 36, 44]), a single item measure was used to quantify loneliness. It ranges from 1 (never/almost never) to 4 (always or almost always). Prior research has shown that the UCLA loneliness scale is highly associated with such a single item measure of loneliness [33].
Following Gardiner et al. [13], for descriptive purposes we trichotomized this item into:
-
not lonely if individuals responded to this single item with 1 (never lonely),
-
moderately lonely if individuals responded to this single item with 2 (sometimes lonely),
-
severely lonely if individuals responded to this single item with 3 or 4 (mostly lonely or almost always lonely).
Gardiner et al. [13] followed the classification scheme for loneliness developed by Valtorta et al. a few years ago [48]. This choice also eases the comparison to the results of the systematic review/meta-analysis conducted by Gardiner et al. [13].
However, for reasons of transparency, we additionally present all four loneliness levels in the results section. In multiple linear regression analysis, we used loneliness (measured continuously, i.e., from 1 to 4) as outcome measure.
Determinants
Grounded on prior research (overview: [8]) and theoretical considerations, determinants were selected. In regression analysis, we included age, sex, marital status (single, divorced, widowed, married but separated from spouse, married), education (International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED)-97 [46] classification: low, medium or high), social network size, activity score consisting of 16 activities such as sports, volunteering, walks (from 1 to 5, higher values reflecting a higher frequency), number of technologies in use (6 items such as smartphone or internet use; score ranges from 0 to 1, with higher values reflecting a higher number of technologies in use), self-rated health ranging from 1 (very bad) to 4 (very good), functional impairment (modified Lawton and Brody instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) scale; 7 items; score ranges from 0 to 2, with higher values reflecting lower functional impairment), depressive symptoms (depression in old age scale, DIA‑S, with favorable psychometric characteristics [21, 22]; 4 items; score ranges from 0 to 4, with higher values reflecting more depressive symptoms), and cognitive impairment (DemTect [26, 28]; total score ranges from 0 to 18, with higher values corresponding to lower cognitive impairment; scores between 9 and 12 indicate mild cognitive impairment, and scores lower than 9 indicate dementia; scores from 13–18 indicate no cognitive impairment).
Statistical analysis
First, the prevalence of loneliness was reported among all individuals aged ≥ 80 years living in institutionalized settings and also stratified by key sociodemographics (i.e., sex, age group, education and marital status). Subsequently, multiple linear regressions (with robust standard errors) were used to examine the determinants of loneliness. Full information maximum likelihood (FIML) was used to address missing values [2, 49].
Results
Sample characteristics
The average age was 90.2 years (SD 4.9 years, ranging from 80 to 101 years). In sum, 73.2% of the individuals were female. The prevalence of loneliness is shown in Table 1 (also stratified by age group, sex, educational level and marital status). About 56.6% of the individuals were not lonely, 25.7% of the individuals were moderately lonely and 17.8% of the individuals were severely lonely.
When using all 4 loneliness levels, i.e., additionally distinguishing between mostly lonely and (almost) always lonely, 12.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 7.3–21.2%) of the individuals belonged to the mostly lonely group and 5.0% (95% CI: 2.4–10.4%) of the individuals belonged to the (almost) always lonely group.
Regression analysis
The findings of multiple linear regressions are given in Table 2, the R2 value was 0.35. Mean average variation inflation factor (VIF) was 1.5 (highest VIF was 2.1) indicating that multicollinearity is not a threat.
Regressions showed that higher loneliness is associated with being married (β = 0.48, p < 0.05), high education (compared to low education, β = 0.46, p < 0.05), a small social network size (β = −0.02, p < 0.05), poor self-rated health (β = −0.25, p < 0.05), and more depressive symptoms (β = 0.25, p < 0.001). Moreover, there was a marginal significant association between a higher number of technology usage and lower loneliness (β = 1.67, p = 0.09). Sex, age, the frequency of activities, functional impairment and MCI/dementia were not associated with loneliness.
Discussion
Nearly 50% of individuals were moderately or severely lonely in our study. This prevalence is in marked contrast to individuals living in private homes where about 25% of individuals were moderately or severely lonely. For reasons of comparison, it may be also worth noting that among noninstitutionalized individuals in the NRW80+, 76.3% of the individuals were not lonely, 19.0% of the individuals were moderately lonely and 4.7% of the individuals were severely lonely.
Prior knowledge was mainly restricted to qualitative studies (overview: [39]) or mostly did not exclusively focus on the oldest old [13]. Moreover, quantitative studies were missing regarding the prevalence and determinants of loneliness in oldest old residents of nursing or old age homes in Germany. Our current study thus adds first quantitative evidence regarding loneliness experiences among the oldest old in Germany (North Rhine-Westphalia).
The rather high prevalence rates of loneliness among the oldest old extend our current knowledge mainly based on prior findings from the general adult population in Germany [16]. A prior systematic review and meta-analysis [13] investigating the prevalence of loneliness among older people living in residential and nursing care home settings also reported very high average prevalence rates (i.e., moderate loneliness 61%; severe loneliness 35%). Potential reasons for such prevalence rates include that living in institutionalized settings (as opposed to living in a private home) can disconnect the affected individuals from the family and close friends [5, 20]. Moreover, the identified prevalence rates can be explained by a wide range of physical and mental conditions associated with highest age [12]. Furthermore, the quality and kind of care and support received by the oldest old in the nursing homes might be lower compared with the quality of community care, which may also contribute to these frequencies.
The association between being married and higher loneliness scores is very counterintuitive and in contrast to a systematic review mainly based on data from community-dwelling samples [8]. We assume that our findings can be explained by the fact that institutionalized individuals may extremely miss their spouses. A prior qualitative study [23] in Norwegian nursing homes may support this assumption. The aim of this former study was to explore the perceptions of sadness among older people residing in nursing homes (in Rogaland County, Norway in 2012/2013). For example, one male individual stated: “We have been married for ages. Moving into nursing home was like getting a divorce. It was very sad, even though she visits me every day” (page 3) [23]. The spatial separation or reduced frequency of contact could increase the feeling of loneliness among institutionalized individuals [11, 47]. Additionally, unmarried individuals might find it easier to make new contacts due to less emotional family burden (e.g., form new relationships with members of staff or other residents [31]).
Individuals with high education showed higher loneliness scores compared to individuals with low education in our study. This link may be explained by the fact that the former group may have had quite frequent social activities prior to admission to nursing or old age home [32]. Thus, they may perceive a higher discrepancy between actual and desired social contacts (discrepancy model of loneliness). They also may miss particularly these social activities in institutionalized settings and may thus feel lonely [5].
An association between a smaller network size and higher loneliness scores was identified in our current study, which is well in line with prior research (e.g., [9]). Such an association confirms the theory of the need to belong introduced by Baumeister and Leary [3], which emphasizes the basic human need to belong to someone. For example, a prior study also showed that a high frequency of contact with sons, daughters and grandchildren is associated with lower social loneliness levels among residents in nursing homes [9]. A prior qualitative study showed that a sense of belonging to the family, friends and the staff from the nursing home may prevent loneliness among individuals living in Norwegian nursing homes [42].
Our study showed an association between poor self-rated health, more depressive symptoms and higher loneliness scores. This is in accordance with prior research among institutionalized individuals in very late life (e.g., [24]) and can be explained by, among other things, the associated impairments in their life. More precisely, health difficulties could make it more difficult to have close relationships with peers and staff in nursing homes [43]. For example, health impairments may reduce the noncare time and noncare time can contribute to close relationships with staff in nursing homes [43].
We would like to highlight some strengths and limitations of this current work. First, as one of the first studies [30, 36], we exclusively used data from oldest old institutionalized individuals (i.e., aged 80 years and over). Moreover, it should be noted that data from a representative sample were used. Additionally, established tools were used to quantify the variables of interest. Our study has a cross-sectional design, which limits the possibility to clarify the causal link. Thus, upcoming research in this area is required. Furthermore, upcoming research could focus on mediating and moderating factors (e.g., [53]), which is beyond the scope of our current work. Furthermore, our determinants were somewhat limited in our study. For example, personality factors (e.g., extraversion) could also be associated with loneliness [6] among institutionalized individuals. This should be examined in future studies.
In conclusion, a significant proportion of the oldest old institutionalized individuals reported moderate or severe loneliness, which underpins the relevance of this topic. Knowing the determinants of loneliness may help to address institutionalized individuals aged 80 years and over at risk.
A prior systematic review suggested that several interventions (e.g., reminiscence therapy or laughter therapy) can assist in reducing loneliness scores among older adults living in long-term care facilities [41]. With respect to future research, this should be further explored.
References
Ahmed D, El Shair IH, Taher E et al (2014) Prevalence and predictors of depression and anxiety among the elderly population living in geriatric homes in Cairo, Egypt. J Egypt Public Health Assoc 89:127–135
Allison PD (2012) Handling missing data by maximum likelihood. In: SAS global forum
Baumeister RF, Leary MR (1995) The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychol Bull 117:497–529
Brix J, Steinacker G, Stadler M (2018) NRW80+ Methodenbericht. Kantar Public, München
Buckley C, Mccarthy G (2009) An exploration of social connectedness as perceived by older adults in a long-term care setting in ireland. Geriatr Nurs 30:390–396
Buecker S, Maes M, Denissen JJ et al (2020) Loneliness and the Big Five personality traits: A meta-analysis. Eur J Pers 34:8–28
Casey A‑NS, Low L‑F, Jeon Y‑H et al (2016) Residents’ positive and negative relationship networks in a nursing home. J Gerontol Nurs 42:9–13
Dahlberg L, Mckee KJ, Frank A et al (2022) A systematic review of longitudinal risk factors for loneliness in older adults. Aging Ment Health 26:225–249
Drageset J (2004) The importance of activities of daily living and social contact for loneliness: a survey among residents in nursing homes. Scand J Caring Sci 18:65–71
Drageset J, Kirkevold M, Espehaug B (2011) Loneliness and social support among nursing home residents without cognitive impairment: A questionnaire survey. Int J Nurs Stud 48:611–619
Fakoya OA, Mccorry NK, Donnelly M (2020) Loneliness and social isolation interventions for older adults: a scoping review of reviews. BMC Public Health 20:1–14
Formiga F, Ferrer A, Sanz H et al (2013) Patterns of comorbidity and multimorbidity in the oldest old: the Octabaix study. Eur J Intern Med 24:40–44
Gardiner C, Laud P, Heaton T et al (2020) What is the prevalence of loneliness amongst older people living in residential and nursing care homes? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Age Ageing 49:748–757
Georgiades S (2008) Quality of nursing home care in Cyprus: are elder residents content with their treatment? J Gerontol Soc Work 50:3–24
Hajek A, Brettschneider C, Mallon T et al (2017) How does social support affect functional impairment in late life? Findings of a multicenter prospective cohort study in Germany. Age Ageing 46:813–820
Hajek A, König H‑H (2022) Prevalence and correlates of loneliness, perceived and objective social isolation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Evidence from a representative survey in Germany. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 57:1969–1978
Hajek A, Kretzler B, König H‑H (2020) Multimorbidity, loneliness, and social isolation. A systematic review. Int J Environ Res Public Health 17:8688
Hajek A, Lehnert T, Wegener A et al (2017) Who should take care of me? Preferences of old age individuals for characteristics of professional long-term caregivers: an observational cross-sectional study. BMC Res Notes 10:1–10
Hansen S, Kaspar R, Wagner M et al (2021) The NRW80+ study: conceptual background and study groups. Z Gerontol Geriat 54:76–84
Hauge S, Kirkevold M (2010) Older Norwegians’ understanding of loneliness. Int J Qual Stud Health Well-being 5:4654
Heidenblut S, Zank S (2010) Entwicklung eines neuen Depressionsscreenings für den Einsatz in der Geriatrie. Z Gerontol Geriat 43:170–176
Heidenblut S, Zank S (2014) Screening for depression with the depression in old age scale (DIA-S) and the geriatric depression scale (GDS15): diagnostic accuracy in a geriatric inpatient setting. Geropsych 27:41–49
Iden KR, Ruths S, Hjørleifsson S (2015) Residents’ perceptions of their own sadness‑a qualitative study in Norwegian nursing homes. BMC Geriatr 15:1–7
Jansson A, Muurinen S, Savikko N et al (2017) Loneliness in nursing homes and assisted living facilities: Prevalence, associated factors and prognosis. J Nurs Home Res 3:43–49
Jongenelis K, Pot AM, Eisses AM et al (2004) Prevalence and risk indicators of depression in elderly nursing home patients: the AGED study. J Affect Disord 83:135–142
Kalbe E, Brand M, Kessler J et al (2005) Der DemTect in der klinischen Anwendung: Sensitivität und Spezifität eines kognitiven Screeninginstruments. Z Gerontopsychol Psychiatrie 18:121–130
Kasai T (2021) Preparing for population ageing in the Western Pacific Region. Lancet Reg Health West Pac 6:100069
Kessler J, Fengler S, Kaesberg S et al (2014) DemTect 40–und DemTect 80+: Neue Auswertungsroutinen für diese Altersgruppen. Fortschr Neurol Psychiatr 82:640–645
Lambert SD, Bowe SJ, Livingston PM et al (2017) Impact of informal caregiving on older adults’ physical and mental health in low-income and middle-income countries: a cross-sectional, secondary analysis based on the WHO’s Study on global AGEing and adult health (SAGE). BMJ Open 7:e17236
Liu G, Dupre ME, Gu D et al (2012) Psychological well-being of the institutionalized and community-residing oldest old in China: The role of children. Soc Sci Med 75:1874–1882
Lovatt M (2021) Relationships and material culture in a residential home for older people. Ageing Soc 41:2953–2970
Mirowsky J, Ross CE (2017) Education, social status, and health. Routledge
Nersesian PV, Han H‑R, Yenokyan G et al (2018) Loneliness in middle age and biomarkers of systemic inflammation: Findings from midlife in the United States. Soc Sci Med 209:174–181
Nikmat AW, Hashim NA, Omar SA et al (2015) Depression and loneliness/social isolation among patients with cognitive impairment in nursing home. ASEAN J Psychiatry 16:1–10
Nortey ST, Aryeetey GC, Aikins M et al (2017) Economic burden of family caregiving for elderly population in southern Ghana: the case of a peri-urban district. Int J Equity Health 16:1–9
Nyqvist F, Cattan M, Andersson L et al (2013) Social capital and loneliness among the very old living at home and in institutional settings: A comparative study. J Aging Health 25:1013–1035
O’súilleabháin PS, Gallagher S, Steptoe A (2019) Loneliness, living alone, and all-cause mortality: The role of emotional and social loneliness in the elderly during 19 years of follow-up. Psychosom Med 81:521
Peplau LA, Perlman D (1982) Perspectives on Loneliness. In: Peplau LA, Perlman D (eds) Loneliness: A sourcebook of current theory. John Wiley & Sons, New York, pp 1–14
Plattner L, Brandstötter C, Paal P (2022) Loneliness in nursing homes—Experience and measures for amelioration: A literature review. Z Gerontol Geriat 55:5–10
Prieto-Flores M‑E, Forjaz MJ, Fernandez-Mayoralas G et al (2011) Factors associated with loneliness of noninstitutionalized and institutionalized older adults. J Aging Health 23:177–194
Quan NG, Lohman MC, Resciniti NV et al (2020) A systematic review of interventions for loneliness among older adults living in long-term care facilities. Aging Ment Health 24:1945–1955
Rinnan E, André B, Drageset J et al (2018) Joy of life in nursing homes: A qualitative study of what constitutes the essence of Joy of life in elderly individuals living in Norwegian nursing homes. Scand J Caring Sci 32:1468–1476
Roberts TJ (2018) Nursing home resident relationship types: What supports close relationships with peers & staff? J Clin Nurs 27:4361–4372
Savikko N, Routasalo P, Tilvis RS et al (2005) Predictors and subjective causes of loneliness in an aged population. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 41:223–233
Tomstad S, Sundsli K, Sævareid HI et al (2021) Loneliness among older home-dwelling persons: a challenge for home care nurses. J Multidiscip Healthc 14:435
Unesco (2006) International standard classification of education. ISCED 1997. UNESCO, Paris
Valtorta N, Hanratty B (2012) Loneliness, isolation and the health of older adults: do we need a new research agenda? J R Soc Med 105:518–522
Valtorta NK, Kanaan M, Gilbody S et al (2016) Loneliness, social isolation and social relationships: what are we measuring? A novel framework for classifying and comparing tools. BMJ Open 6:e10799
Von Hippel PT (2016) New confidence intervals and bias comparisons show that maximum likelihood can beat multiple imputation in small samples. Struct Equ Modeling 23:422–437
Ward M, May P, Normand C et al (2021) Mortality risk associated with combinations of loneliness and social isolation. Findings from The Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing (TILDA). Age Ageing 50:1329–1335
Zammit P, Fiorini A (2015) Depressive illness in institutionalised older people in Malta. Malta Med J 27:22–25
Zhao X, Si H (2021) Loneliness and frailty among nursing home older adults: the multiple mediating role of social support and resilience. Psychogeriatrics 21:902–909
Zhao X, Zhang D, Wu M et al (2018) Loneliness and depression symptoms among the elderly in nursing homes: A moderated mediation model of resilience and social support. Psychiatry Res 268:143–151
Funding
Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
A. Hajek, L. Zwar, R. M. Gyasi, B. Kretzler and H.-H. König declare that they have no competing interests.
For this article no studies with human participants or animals were performed by any of the authors. All studies mentioned were in accordance with the ethical standards indicated in each case.
Additional information
Scan QR code & read article online
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Hajek, A., Zwar, L., Gyasi, R.M. et al. Prevalence and determinants of loneliness among the oldest old living in institutionalized settings. Z Gerontol Geriat 57, 214–219 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00391-023-02196-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00391-023-02196-x