Instruments to evaluate mental well-being in old age: a systematic review

Abstract

Objective

The aim of this study is to identify and appraise existing instruments to evaluate mental well-being in old age.

Method

Systematic literature searches in PubMed, PsycINFO, ProQuest Research Library, AgeLine and CINAHL databases were performed. The COnsensus‐based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guideline was used to assess the measurement properties, reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. For each measurement property, results were classified as positive, negative or indeterminate. The quality level of evidence was rated as high, moderate, low or very low following the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

Results

A total of 28 instruments were found. Most instruments evaluated different dimensions of mental well-being, including various subscales. The quality was adequate overall. Six instruments showed high quality (Perceived Well-Being Scale-PWB, Salamon-Conte Life Satisfaction in the Elderly Scale-SCLSES, Herth Hope Scale-HHS, Life Satisfaction Index Third Age-LSITA, Meaning in Life Scale-MLS, and SODdisfazione dell’Anziano-SODA), and other six a moderate level (Scale of Happiness of the Memorial University of Newfoundland-MUNSH, Six Scales of Psychological Well-Being-PWBS, Valuation Of Life-VOL, Life Satisfaction Scale for Chinese Elders-LSS-C, Meaningful Activity Participation Assessment-MAPA and Will To Life-WTL).

Conclusion

This review provides the first comprehensive synthesis of instruments assessing mental well-being in older populations. The PWB, SCLSES, HHS, LSITA, MLS and SODA were the most appropriated instruments. An instrument that specifically measures mental well-being in the oldest old age group (aged 80 plus) and that considers its multidimensional nature is needed.

Keywords:

• Older adults
• measurement tools
• evaluative well-being
• hedonic well-being
• eudaimonic well-being

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

This study was funded by The Joint Programming Initiative (JPI) ‘More Years, Better Lives- The Potential and Challenges of Demographic Change’; and has received funding by the ‘Acciones de Programación Conjunta Internacional 2016’ programme (PCIN-2016-118) of the Spanish Research Agency (AEI) of the Spanish Ministry of Sciences and Innovation, and by the Instituto de Salud Carlos III-FIS (research grant PI16/00177); the Italian Ministry of Health; the Academy of Finland; and the Research Council of Norway; N. M.-M. is supported by the programme ‘Contratos predoctorales para Formación de Personal Investigador, FPI-UAM’, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Spain. E. L.’s work is supported by the Sara Borrell postdoctoral programme (CD18/00099) from the Instituto de Salud Carlos III (Spain) and co-funded by European Union (ERDF/ESF, ‘Investing in your future’.