COVID-19 government measures and their impact on mental health: a cross-sectional study of older primary care patients in Germany.

Background: With the outbreak of COVID-19, government measures including social distancing and restrictions of social contacts were imposed to slow the spread of the virus. Since older adults are at increased risk of severe disease, they were particularly affected by these restrictions. These may negatively affect mental health by loneliness and social isolation, which constitute risk factors for depressiveness. We aimed to analyse the impact of perceived restriction due to government measures on depressive symptoms and investigated stress as mediator in an at-risk-population in Germany. Methods: Data were collected in April 2020 from the population of the AgeWell.de-study, including individuals with a Cardiovascular Risk Factors, Aging, and Incidence of Dementia (CAIDE) score ≥9, using the depression subscale of the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI-18) and the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-4). Feeling restricted due to COVID-19 government measures was surveyed with a standardized questionnaire. Stepwise multivariate regressions using zero-inflated negative binomial models were applied to analyse depressive symptoms, followed by a general structural equation model to assess stress as mediator. Analysis were controlled for sociodemographic factors as well as social support. Results: We analysed data from 810 older adults (mean age = 69.9, SD = 5). Feeling restricted due to COVID-19 government measures was linked to increased depressiveness (b = 0.19; p < 0.001). The association was no longer significant when adding stress and covariates (b = 0.04; p = 0.43), while stress was linked to increased depressive symptoms (b = 0.22; p < 0.001). A final model confirms the assumption that the feeling of restriction is mediated by stress (total effect: b = 0.26; p < 0.001). Conclusion: We found evidence that feeling restricted due to COVID-19 government measures is associated with higher levels of depressive symptoms in older adults at increased risk for dementia. The association is mediated by perceived stress. Furthermore, social support was significantly associated with less depressive symptoms. Thus, it is of high relevance to consider possible adverse effects of government measures related to COVID-19 on mental health of older people.

The early impacts of COVID-19 on unpaid carers of people living with dementia: part II of a mixed-methods systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: With a lack of existing comprehensive reviews, the aim of this mixed-method systematic review was to synthesise the evidence on the early impacts of the pandemic on unpaid dementia carers across the globe. METHODS: This review was registered on PROSPERO [CDR42021248050]. PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science were searched from 2020 to July 2021. Studies were included if they reported on the different impacts of the pandemic on unpaid dementia carers aged 18+, with papers published in English, German, Polish, or Spanish. A number of research team members were involved in the selection of studies following PRISMA guidance. RESULTS: Thirty-six studies (43 papers) from 18 countries reported on the early impact of the pandemic on unpaid dementia carers. Impacts were noted on accessing care and support; carer burden; and well-being. Studies found that carers had limited access to care and support services, increased workload, enhanced feelings of social isolation, and reduced wellbeing. Specifically, reductions in access to care and support increased carer's unpaid caring tasks, removing any opportunities for temporary respite, and thus further increasing carer burden and reducing mental well-being in many. CONCLUSIONS: The needs of unpaid dementia carers appear to have increased during the pandemic, without adequate support provided. Policy initiatives need to enable better mental health support and formal care provision for unpaid carers and their relatives with dementia, whilst future research needs to explore the long-term implications of carer needs in light of care home restrictions and care delivery.

The early impacts of COVID-19 on people living with dementia: part I of a mixed-methods systematic review.

Objectives: The aim of this Part I systematic review was to understand the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the lives of people with dementia living in the community or in residential care. Part II focused on unpaid carers.Methods: This review was registered on PROSPERO [CRD42021248050]. Five data bases (PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science) were searched in July 2021. Studies were included if they reported on the impacts of the pandemic on people living with dementia, either in the community or residential settings, and published in English, German, Polish, or Spanish. Risk of bias was assessed using the Standard Quality Assessment QualSyst.Results: Forty papers from 33 studies reported on the effects of COVID-19 on people with dementia. Included studies were conducted across 15 countries, focusing on single-country evaluations except in one study. Three studies focused on care homes, whilst the remainder reported on the community. Studies were categorised into five impacts: Cognition; Independence and physical functioning; Behavioural symptoms; Well-being; and Access to care. All studies evidenced the negative pandemic impacts, including faster cognitive, physical, and behavioural deterioration, limited access to care, and poorer mental and social health.Conclusions: Future restrictions need to consider the need for people with dementia to stay cognitively, physically, and socially stimulated to live well, and this review provides a call for a future pandemic strategy for dementia. Longitudinal research is required on the long-term impacts of the pandemic on the lives of people with dementia, including time to care home entry.

Depression and Anxiety in Old Age during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Comparative Study of Individuals at Cardiovascular Risk and the General Population.

Our study aims to examine the associations of sociodemographic factors, social support, resilience, and perceptions of the COVID-19 pandemic with late-life depression and anxiety symptoms in a cardiovascular risk group and a matched sample from the German general population during the beginning of the pandemic and draw a comparison regarding psychosocial characteristics. Data of n = 1236 participants (aged 64-81 years) were analyzed, with n = 618 participants showing a cardiovascular risk profile, and n = 618 participants from the general population. The cardiovascular risk sample had slightly higher levels of depressive symptoms and felt more threatened by the virus due to pre-existing conditions. In the cardiovascular risk group, social support was associated with less depressive and anxiety symptoms. In the general population, high social support was associated with less depressive symptoms. Experiencing high levels of worries due to COVID-19 was associated with more anxiety in the general population. Resilience was associated with less depressive and anxiety symptoms in both groups. Compared to the general population, the cardiovascular risk group showed slightly higher levels of depressive symptomatology even at the beginning of the pandemic and may be supported by addressing perceived social support and resilience in prevention programs targeting mental health.

Structures for the care of people with dementia: a European comparison.

BACKGROUND: Dementia is a disease that impacts people with dementia, their families, and the healthcare system. In 2018, the number of people with dementia in the EU, the European Free Trade Association (EFTA), and the UK was estimated to be 9.1 million. National dementia strategies and publications by organisations such as Alzheimer Europe outline how dementia-specific care should be designed. This study aims to provide insights into existing formal care structures, models of good practise, and gaps in dementia-specific care for people with dementia in 17 European countries. METHODS: The research is based on guided interviews with country-specific care experts. A mixed-methods approach with a combination of open and closed questions was used. All interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim based on the transcription rules of Kuckarts (2010). For data evaluation, the qualitative content analysis model of Mayring (2014) was used. RESULTS: In all 17 countries, efforts for dementia-friendly care and models of good care practise exist. However, there are large differences between European countries regarding the spread of dementia-specific services. In nine countries (Bulgaria, Finland, Italy, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, the UK), there are already nationwide structures, while in five countries (Belgium, Greece, Ireland, Portugal, Romania), services are only available in certain regions. In three countries (Austria, Denmark, Germany) dementia-specific outpatient services are widespread nationwide, whereas inpatient services are not. Simultaneously, in all countries, areas with major care gaps exist. Several European states have an urgent need for action concerning the expansion of the provision of dementia-specific services, the reduction of regional differences regarding the provision of care, the elimination of barriers to access to care, the dementia-friendliness of services, and the participation of people with dementia and their relatives in care and research. CONCLUSIONS: To reduce the existing structural inequalities in care between and within European countries, and to establish quality-related minimum standards in the care of people with dementia, transnational concepts are needed. The EU, in cooperation with care planners, research institutions, care providers, and patient organisations, should develop European care guidelines or dementia plans that contain concrete measures, schedules, and budgets.

["You have to take it that way." A study of the subjective experience of the corona pandemic by older people in need of help and care living at home]. / "Das muss man so nehmen." Eine Studie zum subjektiven Erleben der Coronapandemie älterer hilfe- und pflegebedürftiger Menschen in der Häuslichkeit.

BACKGROUND: As older people are at increased risk of severe and fatal courses of SARS-CoV­2 infection, they receive special attention, which, however, often refers one-sidedly to their need for protection. What is needed is a discussion that considers the subjective reality and resources as well as risks. OBJECTIVE: The study focused on the perspectives of older people. The aim was to shed light on their subjective experience of the corona pandemic. The questions were how they experienced the pandemic, the risks, consequences and protective measures, to what extent these affected their everyday life and how they dealt with it. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 12 guideline-based telephone interviews were conducted in May and June 2020 with 9 women and 3 men between 77 and 91 years of age, who lived in their own homes, had impaired health and needed help and care. The data were evaluated by structuring content analysis. RESULTS: The respondents were generally concerned about the corona pandemic but considered their own risk to be low. They saw themselves as hardly affected by the immediate consequences of the crisis or severely restricted in their everyday lives. They experienced insecurity in social life and fear of loneliness was central. Overall, they considered the protective measures to be appropriate but criticized early cancelling, family contact restrictions and dealing with the dying. CONCLUSION: A moderate degree of direct personal involvement, acceptance and adaptability characterized the experience and handling of the corona pandemic. Resources and skills in dealing with the crisis become visible.

Recruitment and Baseline Characteristics of Participants in the AgeWell.de Study-A Pragmatic Cluster-Randomized Controlled Lifestyle Trial against Cognitive Decline.

Targeting dementia prevention, first trials addressing multiple modifiable risk factors showed promising results in at-risk populations. In Germany, AgeWell.de is the first large-scale initiative investigating the effectiveness of a multi-component lifestyle intervention against cognitive decline. We aimed to investigate the recruitment process and baseline characteristics of the AgeWell.de participants to gain an understanding of the at-risk population and who engages in the intervention. General practitioners across five study sites recruited participants (aged 60-77 years, Cardiovascular Risk Factors, Aging, and Incidence of Dementia/CAIDE dementia risk score ≥ 9). Structured face-to-face interviews were conducted with eligible participants, including neuropsychological assessments. We analyzed group differences between (1) eligible vs. non-eligible participants, (2) participants vs. non-participants, and (3) between intervention groups. Of 1176 eligible participants, 146 (12.5%) dropped out before baseline; the study population was thus 1030 individuals. Non-participants did not differ from participants in key sociodemographic factors and dementia risk. Study participants were M = 69.0 (SD = 4.9) years old, and 52.1% were women. The average Montreal Cognitive Assessment/MoCA score was 24.5 (SD = 3.1), indicating a rather mildly cognitively impaired study population; however, 39.4% scored ≥ 26, thus being cognitively unimpaired. The bandwidth of cognitive states bears the interesting potential for differential trial outcome analyses. However, trial conduction is impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, requiring adjustments to the study protocol with yet unclear methodological consequences.

The situation of elderly with cognitive impairment living at home during lockdown in the Corona-pandemic in Germany.

BACKGROUND: The outbreak of the Corona virus is a challenge for health care systems worldwide. The aim of this study is to analyze a) knowledge about, and feelings related to the Corona-pandemic. Describe b) loneliness, depression and anxiety and, c) the perceived, immediate impact of the lockdown on frequency of social contacts and quality of health care provision of people with cognitive impairment during social distancing and lockdown in the primary care system and living at home in Germany. METHODS: This analysis is based on data of a telephone-based assessment in a convenience sample of n = 141 people with known cognitive impairment in the primary care setting. Data on e.g. cognitive and psychological status prior to the pandemic was available. Attitudes, knowledge about and perceived personal impact of the pandemic, social support, loneliness, anxiety, depression, change in the frequency of social activities due to the pandemic and perceived impact of the pandemic on health care related services were assessed during the time of lockdown. RESULTS: The vast majority of participants are sufficiently informed about Corona (85%) and most think that the measures taken are appropriate (64%). A total of 11% shows one main symptom of a depression according to DSM-5. The frequency of depressive symptoms has not increased between the time before pandemic and lockdown in almost all participants. The sample shows minimal (65.0%) or low symptoms of anxiety (25%). The prevalence of loneliness is 10%. On average seven activities have decreased in frequency due to the pandemic. Social activities related to meeting people, dancing or visiting birthdays have decreased significantly. Talking with friends by phone and activities like gardening have increased. Utilization of health care services like day clinics, relief services and prescribed therapies have been reported to have worsened due to the pandemic. Visits to general practitioners decreased. CONCLUSIONS: The study shows a small impact of the pandemic on psychological variables like depression, anxiety and loneliness in the short-term in Germany. There is a decrease in social activities as expected. The impact on health care provision is prominent. There is a need for qualitative, in-depth studies to further interpret the results.