Objective: Loneliness and physical activity are important targets for research into the impact of COVID-19 because they have established links with mental health, could be exacerbated by social distancing policies and are potentially modifiable. In this study we aimed to identify whether loneliness and physical activity were associated with worse mental health during a period of mandatory social distancing in the UK. Design: Population-based observation cohort study. Setting: Mental health data collected online during COVID-19 from an existing sample of adults aged 50 and over taking part in a longitudinal study of ageing. All had comparable annual data collected between 2015 and 2019. Participants: 3,281 participants aged 50 and over. Measurements: Trajectories of depression (measured by PHQ-9) and anxiety (measured by GAD-7) between 2015 and 2020 were analyzed with respect to loneliness, physical activity levels and a number of socioeconomic and demographic characteristics using zero-inflated negative binomial regression. Results: In 2020, PHQ-9 score for loneliness, adjusted for covariates, was 3.23 (95% CI: 3.01-3.44), an increase of around one point on all previous years in this group and 2 points higher than people not rated lonely, whose score did not change in 2020 (1.22, 95% CI: 1.12-1.32). PHQ-9 was 2.60, 95% CI: 2.43-2.78 in people with decreased physical activity, an increase of 0.5 on previous years. In contrast, PHQ-9 in 2020 for people whose physical activity had not decreased was 1.66, 95% CI: 1.56-1.75, similar to previous years. A similar relationship was observed for GAD-7 though the absolute burden of symptoms lower. Conclusion: After accounting for pre-COVID-19 trends, we show that experiencing loneliness and decreased physical activity are risk factors for worsening mental health during the pandemic. Our findings highlight the need to examine policies which target these potentially modifiable risk factors.
Psychosis (delusions or hallucinations) in Alzheimer’s disease (AD + P) occurs in up to 50% of individuals and is associated with significantly worse clinical outcomes. Atypical antipsychotics, first developed for schizophrenia, are commonly used in AD + P, suggesting shared mechanisms. Despite this implication, little empirical research has been conducted to examine whether there are mechanistic similarities between AD + P and schizophrenia. In this study, we tested whether polygenic risk score (PRS) for schizophrenia was associated with AD + P. Schizophrenia PRS was calculated using Psychiatric Genomics Consortium data at ten GWAS p value thresholds (PT) in 3111 AD cases from 11 cohort studies characterized for psychosis using validated, standardized tools. Association between PRS and AD + P status was tested by logistic regression in each cohort individually and the results meta-analyzed. The schizophrenia PRS was associated with AD + P at an optimum PT of 0.01. The strongest association was for delusions where a one standard deviation increase in PRS was associated with a 1.18-fold increased risk (95% CI: 1.06–1.3; p = 0.001). These new findings point towards psychosis in AD—and particularly delusions—sharing some genetic liability with schizophrenia and support a transdiagnostic view of psychotic symptoms across the lifespan.
Antipsychotics have long been the mainstay of treatment for agitation and psychosis in Alzheimer's disease. Despite their current use successive studies have shown that they only confer a modest benefit which must be balanced against their well-established serious side effects (extrapyramidal symptoms, stroke, accelerated cognitive decline and mortality). Areas covered: This review outlines the current guidance on antipsychotic usage and the evidence of their continued usage against a backdrop of emerging pharmacological treatments and an increasing emphasis on the importance of non-pharmacological interventions. Expert commentary: The current justification for antipsychotic use in the context of the changing landscape of prescribing and provide a view on the most promising alternative candidates to this class of drug are appraised.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.