Background Aim of the present study is to describe characteristics of COVID-19-related deaths and to compare the clinical phenotype and course of COVID-19-related deaths occurring in adults (<65 years) and older adults (≥65 years). Method Medical charts of 3,032 patients dying with COVID-19 in Italy (368 aged < 65 years and 2,664 aged ≥65 years) were revised to extract information on demographics, preexisting comorbidities, and in-hospital complications leading to death. Results Older adults (≥65 years) presented with a higher number of comorbidities compared to those aged <65 years (3.3 ± 1.9 vs 2.5 ± 1.8, p < .001). Prevalence of ischemic heart disease, atrial fibrillation, heart failure, stroke, hypertension, dementia, COPD, and chronic renal failure was higher in older patients (≥65 years), while obesity, chronic liver disease, and HIV infection were more common in younger adults (<65 years); 10.9% of younger patients (<65 years) had no comorbidities, compared to 3.2% of older patients (≥65 years). The younger adults had a higher rate of non-respiratory complications than older patients, including acute renal failure (30.0% vs 20.6%), acute cardiac injury (13.5% vs 10.3%), and superinfections (30.9% vs 9.8%). Conclusions Individuals dying with COVID-19 present with high levels of comorbidities, irrespective of age group, but a small proportion of deaths occur in healthy adults with no preexisting conditions. Non-respiratory complications are common, suggesting that the treatment of respiratory conditions needs to be combined with strategies to prevent and mitigate the effects of non-respiratory complications.

Numerous studies have endeavoured to explore the nature of cognitive impairment in nondemented elderly persons. Comparison of this literature is hampered by huge variations in criteria and methodology. Despite these limitations, there are repeated reports that nondemented persons with cognitive impairment have a higher chance of progressing to dementia. Evidence also indicates higher mortality in cognitively impaired persons but there is also a chance of improvement in cognition over time. The current paper provides an overview of the various concepts and criteria proposed for cognitive impairment in nondemented persons, discusses some of the problems with current research in this field, and presents some of the findings concerning the evolution of cognitive impairment in relation to dementia, mortality and cognitive improvement.

Introduction:We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the cognitive effects of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in adults with no prior history of cognitive impairment. Methods: Searches in Medline/Web of Science/Embase from January 1, 2020, to December 13, 2021, were performed following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A meta-analysis of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) total score comparing recovered COVID-19 and healthy controls was performed. Results: Oof 6202 articles, 27 studies with 2049 individuals were included (mean age = 56.05 years, evaluation time ranged from the acute phase to 7 months post-infection). Impairment in executive functions, attention, and memory were found in post-COVID-19 patients. The meta-analysis was performed with a subgroup of 290 individuals and showed a difference in MoCA score between post-COVID-19 patients versus controls

Aims: This study aimed to describe how the first phase of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic affected older persons from the general Finnish population who are at risk of developing or have cognitive impairment, specifically, to describe whether participants experienced a change in risk factors that are relevant for the prevention of cognitive decline including diet, physical activity, access to medical care, socially and cognitively stimulating activities, and emotional health and well-being.Method: A postal survey was sent in June 2020 to 859 participants from the Finnish Geriatric Intervention Study to Prevent Cognitive Impairment and Disability (FINGER), an ongoing longitudinal study. The survey was developed to assess the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic and related infection-control measures on daily life, specifically commitment to distancing measures, access to health care and social services, daily activities, and changes in cognitive and social activities.Results: By September 2020, 613 (71%) participants responded (mean age = 77.7 years, 32% lived alone, and 80% had at least one chronic condition). Three quarters adopted some distancing practices during the first months of the pandemic. Older participants were more likely to practice total isolation than younger ones (29 vs. 19%; p = 0.003). Non-acute health-care visits were canceled for 5% of the participants who needed appointments, but cancellations in dental health care (43%), home aid (30%), and rehabilitative services (53%) were more common. Pandemic-related changes were reported in social engagements, for example, less contact with friends (55%) and family (31%), or less frequent attendance in cultural events (38%) or associations (25%), although remote contact with others increased for 40%. Feelings of loneliness increased for 21%, particularly those who were older (p = 0.023) or living alone (p < 0.001). Physical activity reduced for 34%, but dietary habits remained stable or improved. Pandemic-related changes in lifestyle and activities were more evident among those living alone.Conclusions: Finnish older persons generally reported less negative changes in lifestyles and behaviors during the pandemic than expected. Older people and those living alone seemed more susceptible to negative changes. It is important to compare how coping strategies may compare with other European countries to identify factors that may help older individuals to maintain healthy lifestyles during future waves of COVID-19.

Objective – This study examined the prevalence of psychiatric syndromes and symptoms in elderly persons with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Methods – Data from a population‐based study (the Kungsholmen Project) were used. All subjects with a Mini‐Mental State Examination (MMSE) score ≤23 and a comparable random of those ≥24 were selected for further examination. Physicians carefully examined the included persons and those affected with dementia were excluded. The rest were stratified into 14 groups according to age and level of education. The mean MMSE score was calculated for each group and those subjects with scores 1SD below the age‐ and education‐specific mean were classified as MCI. A structured psychiatric interview was performed and diagnoses of depression, anxiety and psychosis were made according to DSM‐III‐R. Results – Being suspicious was the only symptom and being affected by an anxiety syndrome was the only diagnosis found to be associated with MCI. The association with suspiciousness might reflect the feeling of losing control that probably accompanies the loss of cognitive function experienced by the person. The association with anxiety syndromes might be a result of the fact that physical disorders have been reported to be more common in persons with cognitive impairment, as well as in persons with anxiety syndromes. Conclusion – The results of this study suggest that the psychiatric syndromes present in MCI might be related to MCI per se. Additionally, it might reflect a developing dementia or a concomitant physical disorder.

The presence of pain in elderly persons with cognitive decline is often neglected, under-reported, underestimated, misdiagnosed and not adequately treated, with consequences that have a strong impact on health, independence in activities of daily living and quality of life. There is no empirical evidence that people with dementia experience less pain; therefore, in patients with severe cognitive impairment the progression of cognitive decline dramatically affects the ability to verbalize the presence of pain. Self-assessment scales are considered the “gold standard” for pain assessment, but the presence of cognitive impairment is likely to reduce the reliability of these measures. Treatment of pain in elderly with cognitive decline or dementia is based on non-pharmacological and pharmacological strategies. Pharmacological treatment should consider physiological changes, high comorbidity and drug interactions that occur frequently in the elderly. This narrative review aims to describe current knowledge, methods of detection and treatment approaches for chronic pain in elderly persons with cognitive deficits.

Background Epidemiological data obtained during the initial wave of the COVID-19 epidemic showed that persons dying with COVID-19 were typically older men with multiple chronic conditions. No studies have assessed if the characteristics of patients dying with COVID-19 have changed in the second phase of the epidemic, when the initial wave subsided. The aim of the present study was to compare characteristics of patients dying with COVID-19 in Italy in the first ‘peak’ phase of the epidemic and in its second phase. Methods Medical charts of patients with COVID-19 who died while in hospital in Italy were reviewed to extract information on pre-existing comorbidities, in-hospital complications, and disease trajectories. The course of the epidemic was classified in two 3-month periods: March–May 2020 and June–August 2020. Findings Overall, in the Italian population, 34,191 COVID-19 deaths occurred in March–May 2020 and 1,404 in June–August 2020. Patients dying in March–May were significantly younger (80.1 ± 10.6 vs. 82.8 ± 11.1 years, p < 0.001) and less frequently female (41.9% vs. 61.8%, p < 0.001) than those dying in June–August. The medical charts of 3533 patients who died with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in March–May 2020 (10.3% of all deaths occurring in this period) and 203 patients who died in June–August 2020 (14.5% of all deaths occurring in this period) were analysed. Patients who died in March–May 2020, compared to those who died in June–August 2020, had significantly lower rates of multiple comorbidities (3 or more comorbidities: 61.8% vs 74.5%, p = 0.001) and superinfections (15.2% vs. 52.5%, p < 0.001). Treatment patterns also substantially differed in the two study periods, with patients dying in March–May 2020 being less likely to be treated with steroids (41.7% vs. 69.3%, p < 0.001) and more likely to receive antivirals (59.3% vs. 41.4%, p < 0.001). Survival time also largely differed, with patients dying in March–May 2020 showing a shorter time from symptoms onset to death (mean interval: 15.0 vs. 46.6 days, p < 0.001). The differences observed between the two periods remained significant in a multivariate analysis. Interpretation The clinical characteristics of patients dying with COVID-19 in Italy, their treatment and symptom-to-death survival time have significantly changed overtime. This is probably due to an improved organization and delivery of care and to a better knowledge of disease treatment.

Patients with multimorbidity (defined as the co-occurrence of multiple chronic diseases) frequently experience fragmented care, which increases the risk of negative outcomes. A recently proposed Integrated Multimorbidity Care Model aims to overcome many issues related to fragmented care. In the context of Joint Action CHRODIS-PLUS, an implementation methodology was developed for the care model, which is being piloted in five sites. We aim to (1) explain the methodology used to implement the care model and (2) describe how the pilot sites have adapted and applied the proposed methodology. The model is being implemented in Spain (Andalusia and Aragon), Lithuania (Vilnius and Kaunas), and Italy (Rome). Local implementation working groups at each site adapted the model to local needs, goals, and resources using the same methodological steps: (1) Scope analysis; (2) situation analysis—“strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats” (SWOT) analysis; (3) development and improvement of implementation methodology; and (4) final development of an action plan. This common implementation strategy shows how care models can be adapted according to local and regional specificities. Analysis of the common key outcome indicators at the post-implementation phase will help to demonstrate the clinical effectiveness, as well as highlight any difficulties in adapting a common Integrated Multimorbidity Care Model in different countries and clinical settings.