Interventions to reduce social isolation and loneliness during COVID-19 physical distancing measures: A rapid systematic review
- PMID: 33596273
- PMCID: PMC7888614
- DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0247139
Interventions to reduce social isolation and loneliness during COVID-19 physical distancing measures: A rapid systematic review
Abstract
Background: A significant proportion of the worldwide population is at risk of social isolation and loneliness as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to identify effective interventions to reduce social isolation and loneliness that are compatible with COVID-19 shielding and social distancing measures.
Methods and findings: In this rapid systematic review, we searched six electronic databases (Medline, Embase, Web of Science, PsycINFO, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and SCOPUS) from inception to April 2020 for systematic reviews appraising interventions for loneliness and/or social isolation. Primary studies from those reviews were eligible if they included: 1) participants in a non-hospital setting; 2) interventions to reduce social isolation and/or loneliness that would be feasible during COVID-19 shielding measures; 3) a relevant control group; and 4) quantitative measures of social isolation, social support or loneliness. At least two authors independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using the Downs and Black checklist. Study registration: PROSPERO CRD42020178654. We identified 45 RCTs and 13 non-randomised controlled trials; none were conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic. The nature, type, and potential effectiveness of interventions varied greatly. Effective interventions for loneliness include psychological therapies such as mindfulness, lessons on friendship, robotic pets, and social facilitation software. Few interventions improved social isolation. Overall, 37 of 58 studies were of "Fair" quality, as measured by the Downs & Black checklist. The main study limitations identified were the inclusion of studies of variable quality; the applicability of our findings to the entire population; and the current poor understanding of the types of loneliness and isolation experienced by different groups affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.
Conclusions: Many effective interventions involved cognitive or educational components, or facilitated communication between peers. These interventions may require minor modifications to align with COVID-19 shielding/social distancing measures. Future high-quality randomised controlled trials conducted under shielding/social distancing constraints are urgently needed.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
References
-
- WHO Director-General’s opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19–11 March 2020 [Internet]. [cited 2020 Mar 24]. Available from: https://www.who.int/dg/speeches/detail/who-director-general-s-opening-re...
-
- Kmietowicz Z. Covid-19: Highest risk patients are asked to stay at home for 12 weeks. BMJ [Internet]. 2020. March 23 [cited 2020 Jun 22];368. Available from: https://www.bmj.com/content/368/bmj.m1170 10.1136/bmj.m1170 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Iacobucci G. Covid-19: UK lockdown is “crucial” to saving lives, say doctors and scientists. BMJ [Internet]. 2020. March 24 [cited 2020 Jun 22];368. Available from: https://www.bmj.com/content/368/bmj.m1204 10.1136/bmj.m1204 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Mahase E. Covid-19: Harshest restrictions are imposed on Greater Manchester after talks collapse. BMJ [Internet]. 2020. October 21 [cited 2020 Oct 22];371. Available from: https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4084 10.1136/bmj.m4084 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Looi M-K. Covid-19: Is a second wave hitting Europe? BMJ [Internet]. 2020. October 28 [cited 2020 Oct 31];371 Available from: https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4113 10.1136/bmj.m4113 - DOI - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous
