Background COVID-19 forced the implementation of restrictive measures in Spain, such as lockdown, home confinement, social distancing, and isolation. It is necessary to study whether limited access to basic services and decreased family and social support could have deleterious effects on cognition, quality of life, and mental health in vulnerable older people. Objective This study aims to explore the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on cognition in older adults with mild cognitive impairment or dementia as the main outcome and the quality of life, perceived health status, and depression as secondary outcomes and to analyze the association of living alone and a change in living arrangements with those outcomes and other variables related with the use of technology and health services. Likewise, this study aims to analyze the association of high and low technophilia with those variables, to explore the access and use of health care and social support services, and, finally, to explore the informative-, cognitive-, entertainment-, and socialization-related uses of information and communications technologies (ICTs) during the COVID-19 outbreak. Methods This cohort study was conducted in Málaga (Spain). In total, 151 participants with mild cognitive impairment or mild dementia, from the SMART4MD (n=75, 49.7%) and TV-AssistDem (n=76, 50.3%) randomized clinical trials, were interviewed by telephone between May 11 and June 26, 2020. All participants had undergone 1-3 assessments (in 6-month intervals) on cognition, quality of life, and mood prior to the COVID-19 breakout. Results The outbreak did not significantly impact the cognition, quality of life, and mood of our study population when making comparisons with baseline assessments prior to the outbreak. Perceived stress was reported as moderate during the outbreak. After correction for multiple comparisons, living alone, a change in living arrangements, and technophilia were not associated with negative mental health outcomes. However, being alone was nominally associated with self-perceived fear and depression, and higher technophilia with better quality of life, less boredom, perceived stress and depression, and also less calmness. Overall, health care and social support service access and utilization were high. The most used ICTs during the COVID-19 outbreak were the television for informative, cognitive, and entertainment-related uses and the smartphone for socialization. Conclusions Our findings show that the first months of the outbreak did not significantly impact the cognition, quality of life, perceived health status, and depression of our study population when making comparisons with baseline assessments prior to the outbreak. Living alone and low technophilia require further research to establish whether they are risk factors of mental health problems during lockdowns in vulnerable populations. Moreover, although ICTs have proven to be useful for informative-, cognitive-, entertainment-, and socialization-related uses during the pandemic, more evidence is needed to support these interventions. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04385797; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04385797 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) RR2-10.2196/26431

Background Information and communication technologies are promising tools to increase the quality of life of people with dementia or mild cognitive impairment and that of their caregivers. However, there are barriers to their use associated with sociodemographic factors and negative attitudes, as well as inadequate knowledge about technologies. Objective The aim of this study was to analyze technophilia (attitudes toward new technologies) and the use of smartphones and tablets along with associated factors in people with dementia/mild cognitive impairment and their caregivers. Methods Data from the first visit of the Support Monitoring and Reminder for Mild Dementia (SMART4MD) randomized multicenter clinical trial were used for this analysis. Data were obtained from two European countries, Spain and Sweden, and from three centers: Consorci Sanitari de Terrassa (Catalonia, Spain), Servicio Andaluz de Salud (Andalusia, Spain), and the Blekinge Institute of Technology (Sweden). Participants with a score between 20 and 28 in the Mini Mental State Examination, with memory problems (for more than 6 months), and who were over the age of 55 years were included in the study, along with their caregivers. The bivariate Chi square and Mann-Whitney tests, and multivariate linear and logistic regression models were used for statistical analysis. Results A total of 1086 dyads were included (N=2172). Overall, 299 (27.53%) of people with dementia/mild cognitive impairment had a diagnosis of dementia. In addition, 588 (54.14%) of people with dementia/mild cognitive impairment reported using a smartphone almost every day, and 106 (9.76%) used specific apps or software to support their memory. Among the caregivers, 839 (77.26%) used smartphones and tablets almost every day, and 181 (16.67%) used specific apps or software to support their memory. The people with dementia/mild cognitive impairment showed a lower level of technophilia in comparison to that of their caregivers after adjusting for confounders (B=0.074, P=.02) with differences in technology enthusiasm (B=0.360, P<.001), but not in technology anxiety (B=–0.042, P=.37). Technophilia was associated with lower age (B=–0.009, P=.004), male gender (B=–0.160, P<.001), higher education level (P=.01), living arrangement (living with children vs single; B=–2.538, P=.01), country of residence (Sweden vs Spain; B=0.256, P<.001), lower depression (B=–0.046, P<.001), and better health status (B=0.004, P<.001) in people with dementia/mild cognitive impairment. Among caregivers, technophilia was associated with comparable sociodemographic factors (except for living arrangement), along with a lower caregiver burden (B=–0.005, P=.04) and better quality of life (B=0.348, P<.001). Conclusions Technophilia was associated with a better quality of life and sociodemographic variables in people with dementia/mild cognitive impairment and caregivers, suggesting potential barriers for technological interventions. People with dementia/mild cognitive impairment frequently use smartphones and tablets, but the use of specific apps or software to support memory is limited. Interventions using these technologies are needed to overcome barriers in this population related to sociodemographic characteristics and the lack of enthusiasm for new technologies. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03325699; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03325699

BackgroundComorbidity between diabetes mellitus and depression is highly prevalent. The risk of depression in a person with diabetes is approximately twice that of a person without this disease. Depression has a major impact on patient well-being and control of diabetes. However, despite the availability of effective and specific therapeutic interventions for the treatment of depression in people with diabetes, 50% of patients do not receive psychological treatment due to insufficient and difficult accessibility to psychological therapies in health systems. The use of information and communication technologies (ICTs) has therefore been proposed as a useful tool for the delivery of psychological interventions, but it continues to be a field in which scientific evidence is recent and controversial. This systematic review aims to update the available information on the efficacy of psychological interventions delivered through ICTs to improve depressive symptomatology in patients with diabetes.MethodsA systematic review of the literature was performed following the PRISMA guidelines and using MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases to search for randomized clinical trials of eHealth treatments for patients with diabetes and comorbid depression from 1995 through 2020. In addition, studies related to follow-up appointments were identified. Inclusion criteria were as follows: (a) randomized clinical trials (RCTs); (b) patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes; (c) adult population over 18 years of age; (d) presence of depressive symptomatology assessed with standardized instruments; (e) treatments for depression based on established psychotherapeutic techniques and principles; (f) delivered through eHealth technologies. We did not limit severity of depressive symptomatology, delivery setting or comparison group (treatment as usual or other treatment). Two coauthors independently reviewed the publications identified for inclusion and extracted data from the included studies. A third reviewer was involved to discuss discrepancies found. The PEDro scale was used to assess the quality of the RCTs. No meta-analysis of the results was performed. The protocol used for this review is available in PROSPERO (Reg; CRD42020180405).ResultsThe initial search identified 427 relevant scientific publications. After removing duplicates and ineligible citations, a total of 201 articles were analyzed in full text. Ten articles met the criteria of this review and were included, obtaining very good scientific quality after evaluation with the PEDro scale. The main results show that the eHealth psychological intervention for depression in patients with diabetes showed beneficial effects both at the end of treatment and in the short (3 months) and long term (6 and 12 months) for the improvement of depressive symptomatology. The methodology used (type of diabetes, eHealth technology used, recruitment context, implementation and follow-up) was very heterogeneous. However, all studies were based on cognitive-behavioral tools and used standardized assessment instruments to evaluate depressive symptomatology or diagnosis of MDD. Glycemic control was assessed by glycosylated hemoglobin, but no benefits were found in improving glycemic control. Only four studies included psychoeducational content on diabetes and depression, but none used tools to improve or enhance adherence to medical prescriptions or diabetes self-care.ConclusionsICT-based psychological interventions for the treatment of depression in people with diabetes appear to be effective in reducing depressive symptomatology but do not appear to provide significant results with regard to glycemic control. Nonetheless, the scientific evidence reported to date is still very limited and the methodology very diverse. In addition, no studies have implemented these systems in routine clinical practice, and no studies are available on the economic analysis of these interventions. Future research should focus on studying and including new tools to ensure improvements in diabetes outcomes and not only on psychological well-being in order to advance knowledge about these treatments. Economic evaluations should also be undertaken to analyze whether these treatment programs implemented using eHealth technologies are cost-effective.