Background
Family caregivers should focus on maintaining independence when assisting older adults with mobility. This may, however, bring about a counterproductive effect, namely Informal Caregiver-induced Forced Immobility (ICFI). This study explored the perceptions and experiences of older adults and their informal caregivers regarding ICFI.
Methods
This qualitative study used a conventional content analysis approach and was conducted from January to September 2023 in Tabriz, Iran. Twenty older adults (aged 60 years and above) who had used a mobility aid, such as a cane or walker, and 14 informal caregivers were purposefully (purposive sampling) selected to participate in the study. Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted until data saturation was achieved. MAXQDA ver. 20.0 software (VERBI Software, Germany) was used to manage and analyze the data.
Results
Based on the participants’ perceptions, ICFI means that for an older adult, “social interaction/social participation is limited,” “performing activities of daily living is disallowed,” and “engaging in physical activities and exercising is prohibited.”
Conclusion
Our findings revealed the concept of ICFI from various perspectives in Iranian families with older adults, leading to a clearer understanding of this phenomenon. This aspect should be considered when developing intervention strategies for the care of older adults in home and residential care settings by, health practitioners, gerontologists, and policymakers. This research can serve as a foundation for future studies to develop pertinent indicators and tools for measuring ICFI in the hope of providing sufficient evidence to support interventions that aim to prevent or stop ICFI.

Background
Establishing cost-effective informal care services for lonely older adults living at home in developing countries can be an innovative approach for improving their well-being. This study investigated the effectiveness of an informal home care support intervention program (HoSIP) reducing the loneliness and improving quality of life of lonely community-dwelling older adults.
Methods
This quasi-experimental pre-post study employed a non-randomized control group design with a 12-week intervention period and three follow-up points at the end of the HoSIP. Questionnaires were used to measure feelings of loneliness (20-item UCLA Loneliness Scale), quality of life (Control, Autonomy, Self‐Realization and Pleasure Scale), general health (12-item General Health Questionnaire), social network (six-item Lubben Social Network Scale), social support (12-item Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support), and self-care ability (17-item Self-care Ability Scale for the Elderly). Repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to gauge the effect of the intervention program over time and in comparison to the control group. Data analyses were performed using the IBM SPSS Statistics software (IBM Corp., USA).
Results
We found a significant relationship between the outcome variables, including feelings of loneliness (P<0.001) and quality of life (P<0.001), at different stages of measurement. Despite the positive feasibility results, the implementation of the HoSIP faced challenges due to a lack of facilities (e.g., place restriction for holding educational classes, educational facilities like computers, video projector, and whiteboard at daycare center) and the absence of supporting organizations.
Conclusion
Utilizing the existing capabilities of older adults to provide online and face-to-face care services can be a cost-effective way to improve their quality of life and reduce loneliness. The process of facilitating such informal care services for lonely older adults should be managed by either governmental or non-governmental organizations to reduce the rate of social isolation among this vulnerable population.

Potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) is a major public health concern with several undesirable health consequences for older adults. In this overview, we aimed to map and gather information from existing literature to provide a better insight into the prevalence of PIP among community dwellers. Electronic databases were searched from their inception to April 2022. The quality of the included systematic reviews (SRs) was assessed using the assessment of multiple systematic reviews checklist. The degree of overlap within the SRs was also evaluated (2% overlap). All SRs on the prevalence of PIP in older individuals in community settings were included, and a narrative approach was used to synthesize data. Nineteen SRs comprising 548 primary studies met the inclusion criteria, and the average quality of the included SRs was moderate. More than half (50.5%) of the primary studies were conducted in Europe, followed by the United States (22.8%), and Asia (18.9%). Thirty different criteria were used in the primary studies to estimate the prevalence of PIP. The most widely used criteria were those presented in Beers (41.8%) and STOPP (Screening Tool of Older Persons’ Prescriptions)/START (Screening Tool to Alert to Right Treatment) (21.8%) criteria. Benzodiazepines, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and antidepressants were the most frequently reported PIPs. A considerable variation in the prevalence of PIP ranging from 0% to 98% was reported by SRs. However, there is a high degree of uncertainty regarding the extent of PIP in community settings. To identify knowledge-to-action gaps, SR authors should consider the differences in prevalence of PIP according to settings, applied tools, data sources, geographical areas, and specific pathologies. There is also a need for primary and SR studies from low- and middle-income countries regarding the prevalence of PIP.

This study aimed to identify the indices/indicators used for evaluating the “creating supportive environments” mechanism of the Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion, with a focus on built environments, in different settings. A search for literature with no time limit constraint was performed across Medline (via PubMed), Scopus, and Embase databases. Search terms included “Ottawa Charter,” “health promotion,” “supportive environments,” “built environments,” “index,” and “indicator.” we included the studies conducted on developing, identifying, and/or measuring health promotion indices/indicators associated with “built environments” in different settings. The review articles were excluded. Extracted data included the type of instrument used for measuring the index/indicator, the number of items, participants, settings, the purpose of indices/indicators, and a minimum of two associated examples of the indices domains/indicators. The key definitions and summarized information from studies are presented in tables. In total, 281 studies were included in the review, within which 36 indices/indicators associated with “built environment” were identified. The majority of the studies (77%) were performed in developed countries. Based on their application in different settings, the indices/indicators were categorized into seven groups: (1) Healthy Cities (n=5), (2) Healthy Municipalities and Communities (n=18), (3) Healthy Markets (n=3), (4) Healthy Villages (n=1), (5) Healthy Workplaces (n=4), (6) Health-Promoting Schools (n=3), and (7) Healthy Hospitals (n=3). Health promotion specialists, health policymakers, and social health researchers can use this collection of indices/indicators while designing/evaluating interventions to create supportive environments for health in various settings.

Citations

• The Role of Pharmacists in Health Promotion
  Pallav Dave
  Asian Journal of Dental and Health Sciences.2024; 4(2): 32.     CrossRef