Login to MyKarger

New to MyKarger? Click here to sign up.

Login with Facebook

Forgot Password? Reset your password

Authors, Editors, Reviewers

For Manuscript Submission, Check or Review Login please go to Submission Websites List.

Submission Websites List

Institutional Login (Shibboleth)

For the academic login, please select your country in the dropdown list. You will be redirected to verify your credentials.

Table of Contents
Vol. 54, No. 6, 2008
Issue release date: November 2008
Section title: Behavioural Science Section
Free Access
Gerontology 2008;54:381–388

Is Greater Social Support a Protective Factor against Elder Mistreatment?

Dong X.a · Simon M.A.b
aDepartment of Internal Medicine, Rush University Medical Center, and bDepartment of Obstetrics/Gynecology, Northwestern Medical Center, Chicago, Ill., USA
email Corresponding Author

XinQi Dong, MD

Section of Geriatric Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine

Rush University Medical Center

Chicago, IL 60612 (USA)

Tel. +1 312 942 6087, Fax +1 312 563 4212, E-Mail xinqi_dong@rush.edu

Do you have an account?

Login Information

Contact Information

I have read the Karger Terms and Conditions and agree.


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.

© 2008 S. Karger AG, Basel

Article / Publication Details

First-Page Preview
Abstract of Behavioural Science Section

Received: December 21, 2007
Accepted: April 22, 2008
Published online: July 07, 2008
Issue release date: November 2008

Number of Print Pages: 8
Number of Figures: 2
Number of Tables: 2

ISSN: 0304-324X (Print)
eISSN: 1423-0003 (Online)

For additional information: http://www.karger.com/GER

Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer

Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher or, in the case of photocopying, direct payment of a specified fee to the Copyright Clearance Center.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.