This study examined whether risk status and cumulative risk were associated with autonomic nervous system reactivity and recovery, and emotion regulation in infants. The sample included 121 6-month-old infants. Classification of risk status was based on World Health Organization criteria (e.g., presence of maternal psychopathology, substance use, and social adversity). Heart rate, parasympathetic respiratory sinus arrhythmia, and sympathetic preejection period were examined at baseline and across the still face paradigm. Infant emotion regulation was coded during the still face paradigm. Infants in the high-risk group showed increased heart rate, parasympathetic withdrawal, and sympathetic activation during recovery from the still face episode. Higher levels of cumulative risk were associated with increased sympathetic nervous system activation. Moreover, increased heart rate during recovery in the high-risk group was mediated by both parasympathetic and sympathetic activity, indicating mobilization of sympathetic resources when confronted with socioemotional challenge. Distinct indirect pathways were observed from maternal risk to infant emotion regulation during the still face paradigm through parasympathetic and sympathetic regulation. These findings underline the importance of specific measures of parasympathetic and sympathetic response and recovery, and indicate that maternal risk is associated with maladaptive regulation of stress early in life reflecting increased risk for later psychopathology.
This study examined whether prenatal reflective functioning (RF) was related to mothers’ interactive style across contexts with their 6‐month‐old infants (M age = 6.02 months, SD = 0.41, 54% boys), and to what extent quality of prenatal RF could account for the influence of accumulated risk on maternal interactive behavior. Accumulated risk was defined as the sum‐score of a selection of risk factors that have been associated with suboptimal infant development. Mother–infant dyads (N = 133) were observed during free play, two teaching tasks, and the Still‐Face Paradigm (SFP). Better prenatal RF was associated with more positive maternal behavior in all settings and less negative behavior during teaching and SFP reengagement. Accumulated risk and prenatal RF predicted shared variance in maternal interactive behavior (with unique predictive effects observed only for RF on sensitivity during teaching and SFP play, and for accumulated risk on sensitivity and positive engagement during SFP play, and internalizing‐helplessness during SFP reengagement). Accumulated risk had an indirect effect on maternal sensitivity during teaching and SFP play through prenatal RF. These findings suggest not only that RF may be targeted prenatally to improve mother–infant interactions, but also that enhancing RF skills may ameliorate some of the negative consequences from more stable perinatal risk factors that influence parent–child interactions.
The concept of maternal reflective functioning (RF) has been gaining increasing interest as a possible intermediate mechanism in associations between a wide range of psychosocial risk factors and poor child outcomes. The purpose of the present study was to determine which psychosocial risk factors are linked to prenatal RF in a high-risk (HR) group of primiparous women. Differences in prenatal RF between the HR group and a low-risk (LR) control group also were examined. The sample consisted of 162 women (M = 22.22 years, SD = 2.39; 83 classified as HR). RF was coded from the Pregnancy Interview (A. Slade, 2007a). Risk status was assessed by means of the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview-plus (M.I.N.I.-plus; D.V. Sheehan et al., 1997) and several questionnaires. HR women demonstrated significantly lower RF quality than did the LR group. Regression analyses indicated that maternal education, size of social support network, and substance use during pregnancy were the strongest predictors of prenatal RF for the HR group. The results suggest that maternal RF potentially could be an important target for those prevention and intervention programs that aim to reduce adverse psychosocial development in offspring of HR mothers.
Social distancing measures imposed because of the COVID-19 pandemic presented challenges to the health and wellbeing of people with dementia, family carers, and healthcare professionals. This study investigated the impact of these measures on all involved in the care for people with dementia. For this qualitative study, 20 family carers and 20 healthcare professionals from home care and long-term care (LTC) participated in a semi-structured interview. Interviews were analysed using an inductive thematic analysis approach. For people with dementia, the social distancing measures resulted in a deterioration of physical health. The impact on their emotional state and behaviour depended on the stage of dementia. Family carers experienced difficulty coping with visiting restrictions, anxiety regarding safety, and changes in carer burden. Healthcare professionals had an increased workload, and felt guilty about adhering to restrictive measures. Differences between home care and LTC were reported (i.e., societal initiatives focussed on LTC, scarcity of activities for community-dwelling people with dementia, use of personal protective equipment more intrusive for home care). The social distancing measures had a negative impact on persons with dementia, their family carers, and healthcare professionals. More attention is needed for community-dwelling people with dementia and family carers in times of social isolation.
IntroductionQuality of life of people with advanced dementia living in nursing homes is often suboptimal. Family caregivers can feel frustrated with limited contact with their relatives, which results in visits that are perceived as stressful and not very meaningful. Few psychosocial interventions are specifically developed for people with advanced dementia, and actively involve family caregivers or volunteers. Also, interventions usually stop when it becomes difficult for people to participate. The Namaste Care Family programme aims to increase the quality of life of people with advanced dementia, and improve family caregiving experiences through connecting to people and making them comfortable.Methods and analysisOur study will evaluate the effects of the Namaste Care Family programme on quality of life of people with advanced dementia living in nursing homes and family caregiving experiences using a cluster-randomised controlled trial. Longitudinal analyses will be performed taking into account clustering at the nursing home level. Both a cost-effectiveness and a cost-utility analysis from a societal perspective will be performed. We will modify the Namaste Care Family programme to increase family and volunteer involvement in ongoing and end-of-life care. Data collection involves assessments by family caregivers, nursing staff and elderly care physicians using questionnaires, and observations by the researchers at baseline and multiple times over 12 months. The last questionnaire will be sent up to month 24 after the death of the person with dementia. During semistructured interviews, the feasibility, accessibility and sustainability of the Namaste Care Family programme will be assessed.Ethics and disseminationThe study protocol is approved by the Medical Ethics Review Committee of the VU University Medical Center in Amsterdam (protocol no. 2016.399) and registered with the Nederlands Trial Register (NTR5692). The findings will be disseminated via publications in peer-reviewed journals, conference presentations and presentations for healthcare professionals where appropriate.Trial registration numberNTR5692.
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.