Background Despite the increasing availability of telemedicine video visits during the COVID-19 pandemic, older adults have greater challenges in getting care through telemedicine. Objective We aim to better understand the barriers to telemedicine in community-dwelling older adults to improve the access to and experience of virtual visits. Methods We conducted a mixed methods needs assessment of older adults at two independent living facilities (sites A and B) in Northern California between September 2020 and March 2021. Voluntary surveys were distributed. Semistructured interviews were then conducted with participants who provided contact information. Surveys ascertained participants’ preferred devices as well as comfort level, support, and top barriers regarding telephonic and video visits. Qualitative analysis of transcribed interviews identified key themes. Results Survey respondents’ (N=249) average age was 84.6 (SD 6.6) years, and 76.7% (n=191) of the participants were female. At site A, 88.9% (111/125) had a bachelor’s degree or beyond, and 99.2% (124/125) listed English as their preferred language. At site B, 42.9% (51/119) had a bachelor’s degree or beyond, and 13.4% (16/119) preferred English, while 73.1% (87/119) preferred Mandarin. Regarding video visits, 36.5% (91/249) of all participants felt comfortable connecting with their health care team through video visits. Regarding top barriers, participants at site A reported not knowing how to connect to the platform (30/125, 24%), not being familiar with the technology (28/125, 22.4%), and having difficulty hearing (19/125, 15.2%), whereas for site B, the top barriers were not being able to speak English well (65/119, 54.6%), lack of familiarity with technology and the internet (44/119, 36.9%), and lack of interest in seeing providers outside of the clinic (42/119, 35.3%). Three key themes emerged from the follow-up interviews (n=15): (1) the perceived limitations of video visits, (2) the overwhelming process of learning the technology for telemedicine, and (3) the desire for in-person or on-demand help with telemedicine. Conclusions Substantial barriers exist for older adults in connecting with their health care team through telemedicine, particularly through video visits. The largest barriers include difficulty with technology or using the video visit platform, hearing difficulty, language barriers, and lack of desire to see providers virtually. Efforts to improve telemedicine access for older adults should take into account patient perspectives.

Objective To determine the feasibility and safety of aripiprazole augmentation for incomplete response to sequential SSRI and SNRI pharmacotherapy in late-life depression. Method This study was a 12-week open-label pilot study of 24 patients aged 65 and above (mean age 73.9) diagnosed with MDD who responded partially (Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression [HRSD, 17-item] score of 11–15) or not at all (HRSD >15) to a 16-week trial of escitalopram, followed by either duloxetine (up to 120 mg/d for 12 weeks) or venlafaxine (up to 225 mg/d for 12 weeks). Subjects received 2.5–15 mg/day of adjunctive aripiprazole (average dose 9.0 mg) for 12 weeks. The criterion for remission during treatment with aripiprazole was HRSD ≤ 10 for 2 consecutive weeks. Results Of 24 subjects in the intent to treat study group, 19 completed 12 weeks of augmentation with aripiprazole, 12/24 (50%) met criteria for remission, and 2/24 discontinued due to side effects (sedation, akathisia). The mean HRSD score decreased significantly by 6.4 (5.8) points (paired t-test for means, p<0.01, df=16). There were no relapses among the 12 subjects who participated in continuation treatment over a median period of 27.6 weeks. Conclusions In older adults with MDD with incomplete response to SSRI and SNRI pharmacotherapy, aripiprazole was well tolerated, and symptoms of depression improved significantly during treatment with aripiprazole. A randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of adjunctive aripiprazole for incomplete response in late-life depression is warranted, to further evaluate benefit and risk.

BackgroundIt is unknown whether older adults in the United States would be willing to take a test predictive of future Alzheimer’s disease, or whether testing would change behavior. Using a nationally representative sample, we explored who would take a free and definitive test predictive of Alzheimer’s disease, and examined how using such a test may impact advance care planning.MethodsA cross-sectional study within the 2012 Health and Retirement Study of adults aged 65 years or older asked questions about a test predictive of Alzheimer’s disease (N = 874). Subjects were asked whether they would want to take a hypothetical free and definitive test predictive of future Alzheimer’s disease. Then, imagining they knew they would develop Alzheimer’s disease, subjects rated the chance of completing advance care planning activities from 0 to 100. We classified a score > 50 as being likely to complete that activity. We evaluated characteristics associated with willingness to take a test for Alzheimer’s disease, and how such a test would impact completing an advance directive and discussing health plans with loved ones.ResultsOverall, 75% (N = 648) of the sample would take a free and definitive test predictive of Alzheimer’s disease. Older adults willing to take the test had similar race and educational levels to those who would not, but were more likely to be ≤75 years old (odds ratio 0.71 (95% CI 0.53–0.94)). Imagining they knew they would develop Alzheimer’s, 81% would be likely to complete an advance directive, although only 15% had done so already.ConclusionsIn this nationally representative sample, 75% of older adults would take a free and definitive test predictive of Alzheimer’s disease. Many participants expressed intent to increase activities of advance care planning with this knowledge. This confirms high public interest in predictive testing for Alzheimer’s disease and suggests this may be an opportunity to engage patients in advance care planning discussions.

Spurious weights are common in EMRs. Straightforward algorithms can identify and remove them, and thus enhance the reliability of EMR data.

Incomplete response in the treatment of late-life depression is a large public health challenge: at least 50% of older people fail to respond adequately to first-line antidepressant pharmacotherapy, even under optimal treatment conditions. Treatment-resistant late-life depression (TRLLD) increases risk for early relapse, undermines adherence to treatment for coexisting medical disorders, amplifies disability and cognitive impairment, imposes greater burden on family caregivers, and increases the risk for early mortality, including suicide. Getting to and sustaining remission is the primary goal of treatment, yet there is a paucity of empirical data on how best to manage TRLLD. A pilot study by our group on aripiprazole augmentation in 24 incomplete responders to sequential SSRI and SRNI pharmacotherapy found that 50% remitted over 12 weeks with the addition of aripiprazole, and that remission was sustained in all participants during 6 months of continuation treatment. In addition to controlled assessment, evidence is needed to support personalized treatment by testing the moderating role of clinical (e.g., comorbid anxiety, medical burden, and executive impairment) and genetic (eg, selected polymorphisms in serotonin, norepinephrine, and dopamine genes) variables, while also controlling for variability in drug exposure. Such studies may advance us toward the goal of personalized treatment in late-life depression.