Hospital admissions and deaths due to acute cardiovascular events during the COVID-19 pandemic in residents of long-term care facilities.

Hospital admissions due to acute cardiovascular events dropped during the COVID-19 pandemic in the general population; however, evidence for residents of long-term care facilities (LTCF) is sparse. We investigated rates of hospital admissions and deaths due to myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke in LTCF residents during the pandemic. Our nationwide cohort study used claims data. The sample comprised 1,140,139 AOK-ensured LTCF residents over 60 years of age (68.6% women; age 85.3 ± 8.5 years) from the largest statutory health insurance in Germany (AOK), which is not representative for all LTCF residents. We included MI and stroke admission and compared numbers of in-hospital deaths from January 2020 to end of April 2021 (i.e., during the first three waves of the pandemic) with the number of incidences in 2015-2019. To estimate incidence risk ratios (IRR), adjusted Poisson regression analyses were applied. During the observation period (2015-2021), there were 19,196 MI and 73,953 stroke admissions. MI admissions declined in the pandemic phase by 22.5% (IRR = 0.68 [CI 0.65-0.72]) compared to previous years. This decline was slightly more pronounced for NSTEMI than for STEMI. MI fatality risks remained comparable across years (IRR = 0.97 [CI95% 0.92-1.02]). Stroke admissions dropped by 15.1% (IRR = 0.75 [CI95% 0.72-0.78]) in the pandemic. There was an elevated case fatality risk for haemorrhagic stroke (IRR = 1.09 [CI95% 1.03-1.15]) but not for other stroke subtypes compared to previous years. This study provides first evidence of declines in MI and stroke admissions and in-hospital deaths among LTCF residents during the pandemic. The figures are alarming given the acute nature of the conditions and the vulnerability of the residents.

[Social participation in nursing homes with Covid-19 protection measures in the second pandemic wave? Linkage of prescriptions and survey]. / Soziale Teilhabe in Pflegeheimen mit Covid-19-Schutzmaßnahmen in der zweiten Pandemiewelle?

Social participation in nursing homes with Covid-19 protection measures in the second pandemic wave? Linkage of prescriptions and survey Abstract. Background: The implementation of protective measures in nursing homes during the Covid-19 pandemic was accompanied with the loss of social participation opportunities in the first Covid-19 wave; this has been inadequately studied for the second Covid wave. Aim: To evaluate the association of protective measures and social participation restrictions for the second Covid-19 wave to develop recommendations for action. Methods: Mixed-methods online surve y of nursing home managers (n = 873) in the second wave. Binary logistic generalized estimating equations were used to evaluate the likelihood of the elimination of social participation services in nursing homes as a function of legal protections. Open-ended responses about maintaining social participation were content analyzed (n = 1042). Results: More than one in two nursing home managers reported prohibited group events (66,6%), and more than one in three prohibited creative activities (42,3%). Visitation restrictions (85,2%) were common in the second wave. The loss of participation services and the protective measures were significantly associated. Qualitative data showed that, for example, the acquisition of mobile shopping stores were opportunities to counteract the social exclusion of the residents. Discussion: The association between the loss of social participation services with the implementation of protective measures was clearly pronounced. Nursing practitioners should focus on enabling social participation whilst guaranteeing protection against infection best possible.

[Changes in the provision of primary care and psychotherapy in Germany during the first two lockdowns in 2020 and 2021: A two-wave survey giving consideration to gender identity and sexual orientation]. / Veränderung hausärztlicher und psychotherapeutischer Versorgung in Deutschland während der ersten beiden COVID-19-Lockdowns 2020 und 2021: Zwei Befragungswellen unter Berücksichtigung von Geschlechtsidentität und sexueller Orientierung.

INTRODUCTION: Measures against the COVID-19 pandemic led to restrictions in ambulatory health care in Germany. While the restrictions have been described from claims data, the patients' perspective has been missing. Lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans-, inter- and asexual persons (LGBTIA) might have been particularly affected by these restrictions because of their vulnerability. Thus, our research questions were: 1) How did the restrictions during the pandemic influence primary care and psychotherapy in Germany from the patients' perspective? 2) Are there differences between LGBTIA and cis-heterosexual persons regarding these restrictions? METHODS: We conducted an online survey with two survey waves in March/April 2020 and January/February 2021. Sampling was conducted via multiplicators and via snowball sampling. Amongst others, the survey contained open-ended questions regarding primary care and psychotherapy. From the answers of the first survey wave we constructed quantitative items for the second survey wave. Descriptive and inferential statistical analysis was conducted, including linear regression with R. RESULTS: 6,784 participants took part in the survey (2,641 in the first survey wave), 5,442 of whom identified as LGBTIA. Categories of changes in primary care were: no health care utilization, no changes in primary care, insecurity regarding primary care, and changes in primary care which could be less frequent utilization, differing procedures or changes in ways of communication. In the second wave, LGBTIA participants rated the worsening of primary care during the pandemic as being more pronounced. Regarding psychotherapy, the change can be described as no change in care, changes in the form of therapy, treatment in emergencies only and a longer break from psychotherapy. There was no different rating by LGBTIA persons compared to cis-heterosexual persons in the second survey wave. Telephone and video consultations were more common in psychotherapy than in primary care. DISCUSSION: LGBTIA persons were oversampled, so the sample included more people from urban areas than the German population. Due to the online survey form, older people were underrepresented relative to their numbers in the general German population. CONCLUSION: With respect to future pandemics general practitioners in primary care must be prepared that psychotherapy might be paused and delayed for some time. Video and telephone consultations should be offered to overcome pandemic-related restrictions in the future. General practitioners should know the gender identity and sexual orientation of their patients in order to proactively address health care barriers.

Loneliness and depressive symptoms differ by sexual orientation and gender identity during physical distancing measures in response to COVID-19 pandemic in Germany.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, physical distancing measures to prevent transmission of the virus have been implemented. The effect of physical distancing measures on loneliness especially for vulnerable groups remained unclear. Thus, we aimed to investigate loneliness in relation with depressive symptoms among lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, inter, asexual, and queer (LGBT) persons compared with cis-heterosexual persons during the pandemic. We conducted an online survey during the first two waves of the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany. The survey contained self-categorizations regarding sexual orientation and gender identity, questions on loneliness, social contacts, depressive symptoms, and healthcare. Descriptive and regression analysis and propensity score matching across cohorts was conducted using R; 2641 participants took part in first wave of the survey and 4143 participants in the second wave. The proportion of lonely people was higher in the second wave compared with the first wave. LGBT persons were more lonely than cis-heterosexual persons. In both waves, being LGBT was associated with depressive symptoms, but loneliness mediated the effect, even when adjusting for social contacts. Psychologists and other practitioners should be aware that LGBT clients might have an increased risk for loneliness and depressive symptoms and of the potential burden of the pandemic measures.

General practitioner care in nursing homes during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany: a retrospective survey among nursing home managers.

BACKGROUND: Though evidence on the detrimental impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in nursing homes is vast, research focusing on general practitioners' (GP) care during the pandemic in nursing homes is still scarce. METHODS: A retrospective online survey among 1,010 nursing home managers in Germany was conducted during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic between November 2020 and February 2021. Associations between perceived deficits in GP care (routine and acute visits) and both general and COVID-19-related characteristics of nursing homes were analysed using multiple logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: The majority of nursing home managers reported no deficits in GP care (routine visits, 84.3%; acute visits, 92.9%). Logistic regression analyses revealed that deficits in GP care (routine visits) were significantly associated with visiting restrictions for GPs and nursing home size. Small nursing homes (1-50 residents) were significantly more likely to report deficits in GP care (routine visits) compared to medium (51-100 residents) and large nursing homes (> 100 residents). Further, deficits in GP care (acute visits) were significantly associated with dementia as a focus of care and the burden of insufficient testing for SARS-CoV-2 among residents. Moreover, visiting restrictions for GPs were significantly associated with dementia as the focus of care and the COVID-19 incidence at the federal state level. Finally, COVID-19 cases in nursing homes were significantly associated with size of nursing homes, COVID-19-incidence on the federal state level and the burden of insufficient testing capacities for SARS-CoV-2 among residents. CONCLUSION: We found structural factors associated with GP care deficits during the pandemic. New concepts for GP care should be implemented in pandemic preparedness plans to ensure high quality, consistent, and reliable GP care as well as effective infection prevention measures in nursing homes.

Experiences of Home-living Vulnerable Older Adults with Clinical Depression during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Study.

OBJECTIVES: Little is known about the diversity of older adults' experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic. We therefore investigated the pandemic experiences of home-living vulnerable older adults with depression, an understudied subpopulation. METHODS: We conducted unstructured interviews with N= 20 older (60+ years) adults with clinical depression receiving care in their homes in June and again in December 2020. Interviews were coded according to the grounded theory approach. RESULTS: We identified eight themes. Participants described feeling disconnected before and during the pandemic, which they attributed to their physical impairments and old age. Their social relations with family, medical providers, and caregivers helped them feel connected. Participants did not feel significantly impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, but they missed social and physical contact. During the pandemic, isolation was normalized. Participants therefore experienced loneliness due to their isolation, but also a sense of togetherness with the rest of society. Isolation within the home was re-framed as cocooning, which provided a sense of autonomy. Participants nevertheless expressed resignation. CONCLUSIONS: Home-living vulnerable older adults with depression experienced loneliness but also a degree of relief during the pandemic. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Positively re-framing isolation and the stability of formal caregiving helped participants endure feeling disconnected during the pandemic.

[Covid-19 protections and social life limitations in nursing homes - Analysis of prescriptions and survey data]. / Covid-19-Schutzmaßnahmen und Einschränkungen des sozialen Lebens in Pflegeheimen.

Covid-19 protections and social life limitations in nursing homes - Analysis of prescriptions and survey data Abstract. Background: The tension between health protection and restrictions of social life in nursing homes during the pandemic has been little addressed. Aim: The aim of the study was to systematize state-specific regulations and actual prioritizations as well as implementations of the pandemic measures and to relate them to life changes for residents. Methods: In a mixed-methods design, 450 protective measures for nursing homes nationwide were categorized and fed into a survey of nursing home managers (n = 1,260) on the handling of these measures in a protective measures model. The association of protective measures and limitations of social services in nursing homes was analyzed with binary logistic generalized estimation equations. Results: The prescriptions were categorized into five themes. Primary data show that "visitation bans" (98.3 %) and "physical contact reduction" (90.5 %) represented the largest proportion of restrictions. The regulations were variously associated with the "restriction of social services". Thus, across all offers prohibitions and for most offers "contact reductions" were significantly associated, for example that giving up "group opportunities" was almost two times as high when the protective measure "reduction of physical contact" was implemented. "Visit restrictions" on the other hand showed little significant association. Conclusions: The results provide evidence of an association between protective measures and social restrictions in the care homes during the pandemic. However, as these lost exchanges are of high value for the residents, aversive long-term effects must be assumed.

Psychosocial burden and associated factors among nurses in care homes during the COVID-19 pandemic: findings from a retrospective survey in Germany.

BACKGROUND: Care homes were hit hard by the COVID-19 pandemic. Although high levels of psychosocial burden (i.e., anxiety, depression and stress) during the pandemic have been described for healthcare workers in hospitals, evidence on the psychosocial burden for nurses in care homes during the pandemic is scarce. METHODS: A total of 811 nurses participated in a retrospective online survey between November 2020 and February 2021. Information about the COVID-19 situation (i.e., working demands, COVID-19 cases in their facility, and COVID-19-related burden) of nurses in German care homes during the first wave of the pandemic (March 2020 to June 2020) was gathered. The Stress Scale of the Depression Anxiety and Stress Scales (SDASS-21), the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale-2 (GAD-2), the Patients-Health-Questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2), and the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire (COPSOQ) were used to screen for psychosocial burden. RESULTS: Among nurses, 94.2% stated that working demands since the COVID-19 pandemic increased. Further, 59.1% showed clinically relevant levels of either stress, anxiety, and/or depression. Multiple regression analysis showed significant associations between COVID-19-related burden and qualification (p < .01), dissatisfaction with COVID-19 management of care home manager (p < .05), COVID-19-related anxiety (p < .001), and dementia as a focus of care (p < .05). Stress, depression, and anxiety showed associations with COVID-19 related burden at work (p < .01), COVID-19-related anxiety (p < .001), social support (p < .01), and sense of community (p < .05). Stress was also associated with COVID-19 cases among residents (p < .05), and size of care home (p < .05). CONCLUSION: Short- and long-term strategies (i.e., psychosocial counseling, mandatory team meetings, more highly qualified nurses, additional training) in the work environment of nursing, in crises, but beyond, should be encouraged to reduce the burden on nursing staff in care homes.

Validation of the German Life-Space Assessment (LSA-D): cross-sectional validation study in urban and rural community-dwelling older adults.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a German version of the original University of Alabama at Birmingham Study of Aging Life-Space Assessment (LSA-D) for measurement of community mobility in older adults within the past 4 weeks and to evaluate its construct validity for urban and rural populations of older adults. DESIGN: Cross-sectional validation study. SETTING: Two study centres in urban and rural German outpatient hospital settings. PARTICIPANTS: In total, N=83 community-dwelling older adults were recruited (n=40 from urban and n=43 from rural areas; mean age was 78.5 years (SD=5.4); 49.4% men). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The final version of the translated LSA-D was related to limitations in activities and instrumental activities of daily living (ADL/iADL) as primary outcome measure (primary hypothesis); and with sociodemographic factors, functional mobility, self-rated health, balance confidence and history of falls as secondary outcome measures to obtain construct validity. Further descriptive measurements of health included hand grip strength, screening of cognitive function, comorbidities and use of transportation. To assess construct validity, correlations between LSA-D and the primary and secondary outcome measures were examined for the total sample, and urban and rural subsamples using bivariate regression and multiple adjusted regression models. Descriptive analyses of LSA-D included different scoring methods for each region. All parameters were estimated using non-parametric bootstrapping procedure. RESULTS: In the multiple adjusted model for the total sample, number of ADL/iADL limitations (ß=-0.26; 95% CI=-0.42 to -0.08), Timed Up and Go Test (ß=-0.37; 95% CI=-0.68 to -0.14), shared living arrangements (ß=0.22; 95% CI=0.01 to 0.44) and history of falls in the past 6 months (ß=-0.22; 95% CI=-0.41 to -0.05) showed significant associations with the LSA-D composite score, while living in urban area (ß=-0.19; 95% CI=-0.42 to 0.03) and male gender (ß=0.15; 95% CI=-0.04 to 0.35) were not significant. CONCLUSION: The LSA-D is a valid tool for measuring life-space mobility in German community-dwelling older adults within the past 4 weeks in ambulant urban and rural settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: DRKS00019023.

Informal caregivers during the COVID-19 pandemic perceive additional burden: findings from an ad-hoc survey in Germany.

BACKGROUND: While the relation between care involvement of informal caregivers and caregiver burden is well-known, the additional psychosocial burden related to care involvement during the COVID-19 pandemic has not yet been investigated. METHODS: A total of 1000 informal caregivers, recruited offline, participated in a cross-sectional online survey from April 21 to May 2, 2020. Questionnaires were used to assess COVID-19-specific changes in the care situation, negative feelings in the care situation, problems with implementation of COVID-19 measures, concerns/excessive demands, loss of support, change in informal caregivers' own involvement in care and problems with provision, comprehension & practicability of COVID-19 information, and to relate these issues to five indicators of care involvement (i.e., being the main caregiver, high expenditure of time, high level of care, dementia, no professional help). Binomial and multiple regression analyses were applied. RESULTS: Across indicators of care involvement, 25.5-39.7% reported that the care situation rather or greatly worsened during the COVID-19 pandemic, especially for those caring for someone with dementia or those usually relying on professional help. In a multiple regression model, the mean number of involvement indicators met was associated with age (ß = .18; CI .10-.25), excessive demands (ß = .10, CI .00-.19), problems with implementation of COVID-19 measures (ß = .11, CI .04-.19), an increase in caregiving by the informal caregivers themselves (ß = .14, CI .03-.24) as well as with no change in the amount of caregiving (ß = .18, CI .07-.29) and loss of support (ß = -.08, CI -.16-.00). No significant associations with the mean number of involvement indicators met were found for gender, educational level, change in the care situation, negative feelings, and provision, comprehension & practicability of COVID-19 information. CONCLUSION: Those caregivers who perceived extensive care burden were those who suffered most during the pandemic, calling for structural support by the healthcare system now and in the future. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This article does not report the results of a health care intervention on human participants.