Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Characterizing Intervention Opportunities Among Home-Delivered Meals Program Participants: Results from the 2017 National Survey of Older Americans Act Participants and a New York City Survey

  • Clinics and Public Health
  • Original Research
  • Published:
The Journal of Frailty & Aging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The Home Delivered Meals Program (HDMP) serves a vulnerable population of adults aged 60 and older who may benefit from technological services to improve health and social connectedness.

Objective

The objectives of this study are (a) to better understand the needs of HDMP participants, and (b) to characterize the technology-readiness and the utility of delivering information via the computer.

Design

We analyzed data from the 2017 NSOAAP to assess the health and functional status and demographic characteristics of HDMP participants. We also conducted a telephone survey to assess technology use and educational interests among NYC HDMP participants.

Measurements

Functional measures of the national sample included comorbidities, recent hospitalizations, and ADL/IADL limitations. Participants from our local NYC sample completed a modified version of the validated Computer Proficiency Questionnaire. Technology readiness was assessed by levels of technology use, desired methods for receiving health information, and interest in learning more about virtual senior centers.

Results

About one-third (32.4%) of national survey HDMP participants (n=902) reported insufficient resources to buy food and 17.1% chose between food or medications. Within the NYC HDMP participant survey sample (n=33), over half reported having access to the internet (54.5%), 48.5% used a desktop or laptop, and 30.3% used a tablet, iPad, or smartphone.

Conclusion

The HDMP provides an opportunity to reach vulnerable older adults and offer additional resources that can enhance social support and improve nutrition and health outcomes. Research is warranted to compare technological readiness of HDMP participants across urban and rural areas in the United States.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data and material: The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

  1. Beauchamp JT L. Results from the Administration on Aging’s Third National Survey of Older Americans Act Program Participants. 2007.

  2. Delivering so much more than just a meal: Meal on Wheels America; 2018 Available from: https://www.mealsonwheelsamerica.org/docs/default-source/fact-sheets/2018/2018-national/what-we-deliver_2018-fact-sheets_forpublication.pdf?sfvrsn=1410bc3b_2.

  3. Gualtieri MC, Donley AM, Wright JD, Vega SS. Home delivered meals to older adults: a critical review of the literature. Home Healthcare Now. 2018;36(3):159–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Sahyoun NR, Vaudin A. Home-Delivered Meals and Nutrition Status Among Older Adults. Nutr Clin Pract. 2014;29(4):459–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Mabli J, Ghosh A, Schmitz B, et al. Evaluation of the Effect of the Older Americans Act Title III-C Nutrition Services Program on Participants’ Health Care Utilization. Administration for Community Living. 2018:1–57.

  6. Khosravi P, Ghapanchi AH. Investigating the effectiveness of technologies applied to assist seniors: A systematic literature review. Int J Med Inform. 2016;85(1):17–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Lindhardt T, Nielsen MH. Older patients’ use of technology for a post-discharge nutritional intervention - A mixed-methods feasibility study. Int J Med Inform. 2017;97:312–21.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Zickuhr K, Madden M. Older adults and internet use: Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project; 2012 Available from: https://www.pewinternet.org/2012106/06/older-adults-and-internet-use/.

  9. Anderson M, Perrin A. Technology use among seniors 2017 Available from: https://www.pewinternet.org/2017/05/17/technology-use-among-seniors/.

  10. Buys DR, Campbell AD, Godfryd A, et al. Meals Enhancing Nutrition After Discharge: Findings from a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2017;117(4):599–608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Ornstein KA, Leff B, Covinsky KE, et al. Epidemiology of the Homebound Population in the United States. JAMA Intern Med. 2015;175(7):1180–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Porter Starr KN, McDonald SR, Bales CW. Nutritional Vulnerability in Older Adults: A Continuum of Concerns. Current nutrition reports. 2015;4(2):176–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Yang Y, Brown CJ, Burgio KL, et al. Undernutrition at baseline and health services utilization and mortality over a 1-year period in older adults receiving Medicare home health services. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2011;12(4):287–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. National Survey of Older Americans Acts Participants (NSOAAP) twelfth national survey (2017) 2017 [May 30, 2019]. Available from: https://agid.acl.gov/DataFiles/Documents/NPS/2017SurveyDocumentation.pdf.

  15. Boot WR, Charness N, Czaja SJ, et al. Computer proficiency questionnaire: assessing low and high computer proficient seniors. Gerontologist. 2015;55(3):404–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Choi NG, Dinitto DM. The digital divide among low-income homebound older adults: Internet use patterns, eHealth literacy, and attitudes toward computer/Internet use. J Med Internet Res. 2013;15(5):e93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Czaja SJ, Charness N, Fisk AD, et al. Factors predicting the use of technology: findings from the Center for Research and Education on Aging and Technology Enhancement (CREATE). Psychol Aging. 2006;21(2):333–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Marziali E, Serafini JM, McCleary L. A systematic review of practice standards and research ethics in technology-based home health care intervention programs for older adults. J Aging Health. 2005;17(6):679–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. van Doorn-van Atten MN, de Groot LC, Romea AC, et al. Implementation of a multicomponent telemonitoring intervention to improve nutritional status of community-dwelling older adults: a process evaluation. Public Health Nutr. 2019;22(2):363–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Baker SL. A platform for aging in place: The increasing potential of high-speed internet connectivity American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) Public Policy Institute. 2013(84):1–6.

  21. Coughlin JF. Technology needs of aging boomers. Issues in Science and Technology 1999 [Available from: https://issues.org/coughlin/.

  22. Goldwater J, Harris Y. Using technology to enhance the aging experience: A market analysis of existing technologies. Ageing International. 2011;36(1):5–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Koch S. Healthy ageing supported by technology—a cross-disciplinary research challenge. Inform Health Soc Care. 2010;35(3–4):81–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Satariano WA, Scharlach AE, Lindeman D. Aging, place, and technology: toward improving access and wellness in older populations. J Aging Health. 2014;26(8):1373–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Wilcox ME, Adhikari NK. The effect of telemedicine in critically ill patients: systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Care. 2012;16(4):R127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. van den Berg N, Schumann M, Kraft K, Hoffmann W. Telemedicine and telecare for older patients—a systematic review. Maturitas. 2012;73(2):94–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Shan M, Gutman R, Dosa D, et al. A New Data Resource to Examine Meals on Wheels Clients’ Health Care Utilization and Costs. Med Care. 2019;57(3):e15–e21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Ziegler J, Redel N, Rosenberg L, Carlson B. Older Americans Act Nutrition Programs Evaluation: Meal Cost Analysis. Administration for Community Living. 2015:1–31.

  29. Thomas KS, Smego R, Akobundu U, Dosa D. Characteristics of Older Adults on Waiting Lists for Meals on Wheels: Identifying Areas for Intervention. J Appl Gerontol. 2017;36(10):1228–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Peels D, Mudde A, Bolman C, Golsteijn R, de Vries H, Lechner L. Correlates of the intention to implement a tailored physical activity intervention: perceptions of intermediaries. International journal of environmental research and public health. 2014;11(2):1885–903.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Peels DA, Bolman C, Golsteijn RH, de Vries H, Mudde AN, van Stralen MM, et al. Long-term efficacy of a printed or a Web-based tailored physical activity intervention among older adults. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2013;10:104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Peels DA, Hoogenveen RR, Feenstra TL, et al. Long-term health outcomes and cost-effectiveness of a computer-tailored physical activity intervention among people aged over fifty: modelling the results of a randomized controlled trial. BMC public health. 2014;14:1099.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Lukasik S, Tobis S, Wieczorowska-Tobis K, Suwalska A. Could Robots Help Older People with Age-Related Nutritional Problems? Opinions of Potential Users. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018;15(11).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors appreciate the contributions of New York City’s Department for the Aging in general, and Jose L. Sanchez from Encore Community Services in particular, for their assistance with this project.

Funding

Funding: This study was funded by the New York Center for Diabetes Translational Research (P30DK111022-01).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medicine, New York University School of Medicine, New York, New York, USA

    M. El Shatanofy, J. Chodosh, M. A. Sevick & Jeannette M. Beasley

  2. Department of Population Health, New York University School of Medicine, New York, New York, USA

    J. Chodosh & M. A. Sevick

  3. VA New York Harbor Healthcare System, New York, New York, USA

    J. Chodosh

  4. Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York, USA

    J. Wylie-Rosett

  5. Department of Psychology, Ferkauf Graduate School, Bronx, New York, USA

    L. Deluca

  6. Division of General Internal Medicine and Clinical Innovation, NYU School of Medicine, 462 First Avenue, 6th Floor CD673, New York, NY, 10016, USA

    Jeannette M. Beasley

Authors
  1. M. El Shatanofy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J. Chodosh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M. A. Sevick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. J. Wylie-Rosett
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. L. Deluca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Jeannette M. Beasley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeannette M. Beasley.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate: This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board at New York University Langone School of Medicine. All participants provided verbal informed consent.

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

El Shatanofy, M., Chodosh, J., Sevick, M.A. et al. Characterizing Intervention Opportunities Among Home-Delivered Meals Program Participants: Results from the 2017 National Survey of Older Americans Act Participants and a New York City Survey. J Frailty Aging 9, 172–178 (2020). https://doi.org/10.14283/jfa.2020.25

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.14283/jfa.2020.25

Key words

Search

Navigation