Enhancing Quality of Life for Older Adults With and Without Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) Through Social Engagement Over Video Technology

Enhancing Quality of Life for Older Adults With and Without Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) Through Social Engagement Over Video Technology

Enhancing Quality of Life for Older Adults With and Without Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) Through Social Engagement Over Video Technology

The goal of this randomized controlled trial is to rigorously assess the efficacy of an 8-week social engagement OneClick intervention. A total of 120 older adults with and without mild cognitive impairment (60 per group) will be randomized after a baseline assessment to the social engagement OneClick intervention group or the waitlist control group. Participants assigned to the intervention group will receive the social engagement OneClick intervention for 8 weeks, and will complete a mid-assessment at week 4, and a post-assessment at week 8. Participants assigned to the waitlist control group will receive no intervention for the first 8 weeks and will complete assessments at week 4 and week 8. Subsequently, as an extension to this study, participants assigned to the waitlist control group will have an opportunity to participate in 8 weeks of social engagement OneClick intervention, with intervention effects assessed at week 4 and week 8.

All primary and secondary outcome assessments completed at Week 4 and Week 8 are blinded. Participants are told ahead of time to not share their group information with the blinded assessor during administration of measures. Supplementary outcome measures require the assessor to know the group assignment, as these measures pertain to their current experience in the intervention. Thus, all supplementary outcome measures are administered at a separate time by an unblinded assessor

Intervention group participants will receive the social engagement OneClick intervention for 8 weeks, and will complete a mid-assessment at week 4, and a post-assessment at week 8.

Waitlist control group participants will receive no intervention for the first 8 weeks and will complete assessments at week 4 and week 8. Following the completion of the 8-week controlled portion, waitlist participants will be provided with the opportunity to participate in the OneClick social engagement intervention through the intervention extension.

Intervention group participants will receive the social engagement OneClick intervention for 8 weeks, and will complete a mid-assessment at week 4, and a post-assessment at week 8. Participants will use a computer or tablet to participate in two social engagement events per week. The intervention events will be delivered through the OneClick video conferencing platform. During each session participants will watch a short slideshow around a series of topics (e.g., nature, technology, hobbies) and get to engage in conversations surround the topics presented, which will be held in breakout rooms. Breakout room discussions will be set for 30 minutes, and participants will be provided with questions surrounding the topics to help stimulate conversation.

Waitlist control group participants will receive no intervention for the first 8 weeks and will complete assessments at week 4 and week 8. Following the completion of the 8-week controlled portion, waitlist participants will be provided with the opportunity to participate in the OneClick social engagement intervention through the intervention extension. Waitlist participants will use a computer or tablet to participate in two social engagement events per week. The intervention events will be delivered through the OneClick video conferencing platform over the span of 8 weeks. Intervention effects will be measured at week 4 and week 8 of the intervention extension.

Measures six dimensions that contribute to social isolation. Lower scores indicate lower extent of social isolation. Range (0-24)

Measures the respondents' subjective feeling of loneliness. Higher scores indicate a greater feeling of loneliness. Range (20-80).

Measures quality of life indicators such as physical health, energy, family, and money. Lower scores indicate a lower quality of life. Range (13-52).

Time Frame: Baseline, Week 4, Week 8, Waitlist Group Extension Week 4, Waitlist Group Extension Week 8

Measures social network size for both family and friends and also the frequency of interaction with them. Higher scores indicate higher level of social engagement. Range (0-30).

Measures how often during the past year participants have engaged in various social activities. Lower scores indicate less engagement in social activities. Range (10-50).

Measures the respondents' perception of usability of the OneClick system. Higher scores indicate higher ease of use and usefulness, and lower scores indicate more difficulty to use the system and decreased usefulness. Range (0-100).

Measures technology acceptance including ease of use, usefulness, enjoyment, and intention to use a system. Lower scores indicate lower acceptance. Range (17-119).

Measures the ability to perform a number of tasks using a computer. Tasks include computer basics, printing, communication, internet, scheduling, and multimedia. Higher scores indicated higher rates of proficiency. Range (6-30).

Inclusion Criteria: Age 65+ Fluent in English Adequate visual and auditory acuity Passing score on Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status - Modified (TICS-M) of 22 and above included Passing score on Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) of 20 and above included Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) score of less than 9 Stated willingness to comply with all study procedures and availability for the duration of the study Access to and ability to use necessary resources for participating in technology-based intervention Exclusion Criteria: Diagnosis of dementia Live in assisted living facility or skilled nursing facility

Hawthorne G. Measuring Social Isolation in Older Adults: Development and Initial Validation of the Friendship Scale. Soc Indic Res. 2006 Jul 1;77(3):521-48.

Russell DW. UCLA Loneliness Scale (Version 3): reliability, validity, and factor structure. J Pers Assess. 1996 Feb;66(1):20-40. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa6601_2.

Logsdon RG, Gibbons LE, McCurry SM, Teri L. Assessing quality of life in older adults with cognitive impairment. Psychosom Med. 2002 May-Jun;64(3):510-9. doi: 10.1097/00006842-200205000-00016.

Lubben J, Blozik E, Gillmann G, Iliffe S, von Renteln Kruse W, Beck JC, Stuck AE. Performance of an abbreviated version of the Lubben Social Network Scale among three European community-dwelling older adult populations. Gerontologist. 2006 Aug;46(4):503-13. doi: 10.1093/geront/46.4.503.

Amano T, Morrow-Howell N, Park S. Patterns of Social Engagement Among Older Adults With Mild Cognitive Impairment. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2020 Aug 13;75(7):1361-1371. doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbz051.

Bennett DA, Schneider JA, Buchman AS, Barnes LL, Boyle PA, Wilson RS. Overview and findings from the rush Memory and Aging Project. Curr Alzheimer Res. 2012 Jul;9(6):646-63. doi: 10.2174/156720512801322663.

J. Brooke, "SUS-A Quick and Dirty Usability Scale," In P. W. Jordan, B. Thomas, B. A. Weerdmeester, A. L. McClelland, Eds., Usability Evaluation in Industry, Taylor and Francis, London, 1996.

Davis FD. Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly. 1989;13(3):319-40.

Pikkarainen T, Pikkarainen K, Karjaluoto H, Pahnila S. Consumer acceptance of online banking: An extension of the Technology Acceptance Model. Internet Research. 2004 Jul 1;14:224-35.

Boot WR, Charness N, Czaja SJ, Sharit J, Rogers WA, Fisk AD, Mitzner T, Lee CC, Nair S. Computer proficiency questionnaire: assessing low and high computer proficient seniors. Gerontologist. 2015 Jun;55(3):404-11. doi: 10.1093/geront/gnt117. Epub 2013 Oct 9.