Objectives: First, to seek if sociodemographic and health factors contribute differentially to the explanation of loneliness in institutionalized and noninstitutionalized older adults; and second, to analyze the influence of institutionalization on loneliness. Method: This work was based on two surveys of older adults aged 60 years or more in Spain. A group of 234 community-dwelling people and 234 nursing homes residents were selected (n = 468). Logistic regression models were applied using the six-item De Jong Gierveld Loneliness Scale as dependent variable. Results: Depression was associated with loneliness in both populations. Sex and marital status contributed to explain loneliness among those living at home, whereas gathering with family, friends, and neighbors showed a significant effect in the institutionalized group. Institutionalization per se showed a strong effect on loneliness. Discussion: Findings have potential implications for targeting older adults at risk for loneliness.

Objectives: Active ageing, considered from the perspective of participation in leisure activities, promotes life satisfaction and personal well-being. The aims of this work are to define and explain leisure activity profiles among institutionalized older adults, considering their sociodemographic characteristics and objective and subjective conditions in relation to their quality of life. Methods: Two samples of institutionalized people aged 60 and over were analysed together: 234 older adults without dementia and 525 with dementia. Sociodemographic, economic, family and social network, and health and functioning variables were selected. Cluster analysis was applied to obtain activity profiles according to the leisure activities, and ordinal regression models were performed to analyse factors associated to activity level. Results: The sample was clustered into three groups of people: active (27%), moderately active (35%) and inactive people (38%). In the final regression model (Nagelkerke pseudo R² = 0.500), a higher level of activity was associated with better cognitive function (Pfeiffer scale), self-perceived health status and functional ability, as well as with a higher frequency of gathering with family and friends, and higher educational level. Conclusion: The decline in physical and mental health, the loss of functional capabilities and the weakening of family and social ties represent a significant barrier to active ageing in a context of institutionalization.

Purpose: Loneliness and social isolation have detrimental effects on health in old age; however, the prospective associations with quality of life (QoL) remain unclear. Furthermore, despite the existence of a European north-south gradient in the distribution of loneliness and social isolation, little is known whether the associations are context-specific. We investigated the relationships between loneliness, social isolation and QoL of older adults residing in the North (Sweden) and South (Spain) of Europe. Methods: Study sample consisted of 2995 Swedish and 4154 Spanish older adults who participated in waves six and seven of the Study on Health, Aging and Retirement in Europe (SHARE). Loneliness and social isolation were measured at the baseline, and QoL was measured at the baseline and follow-up using CASP-12. Prospective associations were assessed via multivariate linear regression. Results: In Sweden, subjects with higher vs. lower loneliness had 1.01 (95% CI: −1.55, −0.40) units lower QoL, while every standard deviation increase in social isolation was associated with a 0.27 (95% CI: −0.42, −0.09)-unit decrease in QoL. In Spain, every standard deviation increase in social isolation was associated with a 0.66 (95% CI: −1.11, −0.22)-unit decrease in QoL. The association was stronger in subjects aged ≤65 years old and those with no chronic diseases. The association with loneliness was not statistically significant in Spain. Conclusion: Loneliness and social isolation are prospectively associated with decreased QoL among older adults, yet the associations are contextually bound. Future interventions should target both exposures, among others, in order to increase QoL in this group.

Background: The academic literature contains little information regarding the interventions that create age-friendly cities and communities in order to promote active ageing. Objectives: A systematic review was carried out to determine the available empirical evidence in relation to the characteristics, content and effectiveness of interventions aimed at improving environmental and psychosocial risk factors for older people, from the perspective of age-friendly communities and the promotion of active ageing. Methods: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, the studies retained in this review were identified through a systematic search of the academic literature in selected electronic databases including Web of Science and Scopus. Independent critical appraisal and data extraction were conducted by two reviewers. The checklist was used to assess the quality of the articles. Findings: The search identified 1020 potentially eligible documents, of which 11 satisfied the established criteria. Non-exhaustive practices prevailed over rigorous investigations, with a high proportion of studies observed to be of low methodological quality and at high risk of bias. This reflected the predominance of uncontrolled interventions. Environmental interventions were focused on reducing risk and adapting the everyday environmental setting, while psychosocial interventions prioritised social strategies (behavioural changes, promotion of participation) and training. Interventions were more effective in certain domains of age-friendly cities and communities such as transportation and housing, followed by increased participation as a lifestyle-related behavioural change. The inferred changes were associated with providing information and enhancing skills; modifying access, barriers, exposures, and opportunities; enhancing services and support; continuity and effectiveness of changes over time; and modifying policies based on the bottom-up approach of age-friendly cities and communities (AFCC). Discussion and conclusion: Interventions focused on personal and organisational aspects might have positive effects in the longer term. However, fewer changes would be observed in interventions revolving around changing lifestyles owing to the impact of complex multi-causal factors. The relative effectiveness in terms of health calls into question the design of interventions and the supposed “friendliness” of certain communities. There is a need to encourage sound longitudinal research aimed at providing key knowledge for the implementation and evaluation of public policies, and to encourage age-friendly community programmes to promote active ageing.