Introduction: Psychological studies undertaken during the COVID-19 pandemic rarely include people in their 60s or older. In our study, we studied the predictors of quality of life, well-being, and life satisfaction (including risky behavior, trait anxiety, feeling of threat, sleep quality, and optimism) during the pandemic in older people from Germany and Poland and compared them to three different age groups. Methods: A total of 494 adults in four groups−60+ ( N = 60), 50–60 ( N = 139), 36–49 ( N = 155), <35 ( N = 140)—completed validated self-report questionnaires assessing: socio-demographic data, quality of life, trait anxiety, risk tolerance, Coronavirus threat, optimism regarding the pandemic, difficulty relaxing, life satisfaction, well-being, and sleep quality during the pandemic period. Results: Older people rated their quality of life higher than did young (mean difference=0.74, SE =0.19, p < 0.01) and middle-aged (mean difference=0.79, SE =0.18, p < 0.01) participants, rated their life satisfaction higher than young (mean difference=1.23, SE = 0.31, p < 0.01) and middle-aged (mean difference=0.92, SE = 0.30, p < 0.05) participants, and rated their well-being higher than young (mean difference=1.40, SE = 0.31, p < 0.01) and middle-aged (mean difference=0.91, SE = 0.31, p < 0.05) participants. They also experienced lower levels of trait anxiety and Coronavirus threat (mean difference=-9.19, SE = 1.90, p < 0.01) than the younger age groups. They experienced greater risk tolerance (mean difference=1.38, SE =0.33, p < 0.01), sleep quality ( F =1 .25; eta 2 = 0.01), and optimism ( F = 1.96; eta 2 = 0.01), and had less difficulty relaxing during the pandemic ( F = 3.75; eta 2 = 0.02) than middle-aged respondents. Conclusions: Quality of life, life satisfaction, and well-being during the pandemic is affected by age, trait anxiety, and Coronavirus threat. Older people rated their quality of life, life satisfaction, and well-being during pandemic higher than young people, and experienced lower levels of trait anxiety and Coronavirus threat than the younger age groups. They experienced greater risk tolerance, sleep quality, and optimism, and had less difficulty relaxing than middle-aged respondents.

No abstract

ObjectiveThis was a flexible-dosed study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of duloxetine 30–120 mg once daily in the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) in older adult patients.MethodsPatients with GAD, who were at least 65 years of age, were randomly assigned to double-blind treatment with either duloxetine (N = 151) or placebo (N = 140). The primary efficacy measure was the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) total score, and the primary endpoint was at week 10. Global functioning was assessed by the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS). Safety and tolerability was assessed by the occurrence of treatment-emergent adverse events, serious adverse events, laboratory analyses, and vital signs. Analyses were conducted on an intent-to-treat basis.ResultsThe overall baseline mean HAM-A total score was 24, and SDS global score was 14. Completion rates were 75% for placebo and 76% for duloxetine. At week 10, duloxetine was superior to placebo on mean changes from baseline in HAM-A total scores (−15.9 vs. −11.7, p < 0.001) and in SDS global scores (−8.6 vs. −5.4, p < 0.001). Treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in ≥5% of duloxetine-treated patients and twice the rate than with placebo including constipation (9% vs. 4%, p = 0.06), dry mouth (7% vs. 1%, p = 0.02), and somnolence (6% vs. 2%, p = 0.14).ConclusionDuloxetine treatment was efficacious in the improvement of anxiety and functioning in older adult patients with GAD, and the safety profile was consistent with previous GAD studies. © 2014 The Authors. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Key pointsTreatment with duloxetine versus placebo can significantly reduce symptoms of generalized anxiety disorder and was associated with improved global function and increased enjoyment and satisfaction with life in patients 65 years and older.The safety and tolerability profile for duloxetine in this older adult patient population was consistent with the established profile for treatment of generalized anxiety disorder in the broader mostly younger (≥18 years of age) population, and there were no new safety findings.

SummaryBackgroundThe symptoms of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) are numerous, including worsening of mood, psychotic symptoms, aggressive and impulsive behaviours, and many others. It is generally assumed that there exists a relationship between the severity of dementia and aggressive symptoms. The aim of this study was to assess the relationship between aggressive and impulsive behaviours and cognitive function disorders in AD patients.Material/MethodsForty-eight AD patients living in a nursing home were included in the research group on the basis of NINCDS/ADRDA criteria. The subjects underwent two years of naturalistic observation. The intensity of agitation and aggressive behaviours was assessed on the basis of the Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory (CMAI). The Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale Cog (ADAS-cog) was used to assess cognitive function. Pharmacotherapy administered during the observation period was also taken into account.ResultsThirty-one patients completed the two year long observation. Individuals with more severe cognitive deficiencies demonstrated a greater intensity of aggressive and impulsive behaviours, as assessed using the CMAI scale. Aggression escalated together with the development of dementia disorders. The intensity of dementia disorders was most significantly connected with physical agitation and verbal aggression. The use of neuroleptics and mood stabilisers decreased the progression of aggressive and impulsive behaviours.ConclusionsThere is a relationship between cognitive functioning disorders and the intensification of aggressive and impulsive behaviours. More severe forms of dementia are connected with greater intensification of aggressive and impulsive behaviours as the disease progresses. Periodical administration of pharmacotherapy may reduce the development of aggressive behaviours.

BackgroundOur goal was to specify the relationship between the level of activity (intellectual, physical, and social) in persons diagnosed with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and the further progression of cognitive dysfunction.Material/MethodsWe examined 193 patients diagnosed with MCI (according to the criteria of the Working Group on Mild Cognitive Impairment) and under treatment at our Mental Disorders Clinic. It was assumed that these persons would remain under systematic psychiatric observation until dementia was diagnosed. The present study results from a seven-year observation period. The mini–mental state examination (MMSE), the Activity Scale (with the intellectual, physical, and social subscales), and the Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) scale were used to evaluate the participants’ status at baseline. The MMSE was re-administered after one year and again at the end of the observation (either upon diagnosis of dementia or after seven years). At each meeting with the participant, the clinical diagnosis was verified to determine if the patient had dementia or not. Of the 193 people initially qualified for the study, 75 were available for the final analysis.ResultsIt was found that there was no statistically significant difference in the baseline MMSE scores between the persons with stable MCI and the persons who had progressed to dementia. However, statistically significant differences in the level of activity at baseline on both the global IADL scale and the Activity Scale between those with stable MCI and those who had progressed to dementia were found. These differences were manifested in the IADL subscales for telephone use, shopping, transportation, and personal finances, and in the physical activity subscale.ConclusionsAn evaluation of intellectual, physical, and social activity can be useful in determining the prognosis for the future course of MCI.