Is Greater Social Support a Protective Factor against Elder Mistreatment?

• Published in: Gerontology (Basel) Vol. 54; no. 6; pp. 381 - 388
• Main Authors: Dong, XinQi, Simon, Melissa A.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Basel, Switzerland Karger 01.01.2008; S. Karger AG
• Subjects: Adult abuse & neglect; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Asian Continental Ancestry Group - statistics & numerical data; Behavioural Science Section; Biological and medical sciences; China; Cross-Sectional Studies; Development. Metamorphosis. Moult. Ageing; Elder Abuse - ethnology; Elder Abuse - prevention & control; Elder Abuse - statistics & numerical data; Elder care; Female; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology; Geriatric Assessment; Gerontology; Humans; Logistic Models; Male; Middle Aged; Odds Ratio; Risk Factors; Social Support; Surveys and Questionnaires; Urban Population - statistics & numerical data; Vertebrates: anatomy and physiology, studies on body, several organs or systems; China; Elder mistreatment; Chinese population; Social support; Elderly abuse; Vertebrata; Senescence; Mammalia; Chinese; Victimology
• ISSN: 0304-324X; 1423-0003; 1423-0003
• DOI: 10.1159/000143228

Background: Elder mistreatment (EM) is a pervasive global health issue and a violation of basic human rights. Our prior study indicates that EM is alarmingly common in an urban Chinese population, yet little is known about risk and/or protective factors for EM. Objective: This study’s goal was to examine the association of social support with the risk of EM and underlying hypothesis is that greater social support is associated with a lower risk for EM. Methods: A cross-sectional descriptive study was performed in a major urban medical center in Nanjing, China. A total of 412 subjects aged 60 years or older who presented to the general medical clinic were surveyed. Social support was assessed using validated instruments Social Support Index (SSI); direct questions were asked about their mistreatment since age 60 using the modified Vulnerability to Abuse Screening Scale (VASS). Results: EM was found in 35% of the participants. After adjusting for potential confounding factors, several factors were associated with a lower risk of mistreatment: having someone to listen to and talk to (OR = 0.18, 95% CI, 0.08–0.39), having someone to get you good advice from (OR = 0.15 (0.07–0.34)), having someone to show love and affection to (OR = 0.30 (0.12–0.75)), having someone available who can help with daily chores (OR = 0.43 (0.22–0.85)), having contact with someone they can trust and confide in (OR = 0.08 (0.03–0.23)), and having someone they can count on for emotional support (OR = 0.11 (0.04–0.28)). Regarding total social support scores (range 1–32), every point higher in social support was associated with a 6% lower risk for EM (OR = 0.94 (0.91–0.97)). Greater social support was associated with a 59% lower risk for EM (OR = 0.41 (0.19–0.90)). Conclusion: Greater social support may be a protective factor against EM in this population. Prospective studies are needed to confirm this finding. Interventions that improve social support may prevent EM.