Using a gratitude intervention to enhance wellbeing in older adults.

The increasingly ageing population includes a proportion of generally well older adults that may benefit from low-level psychological support to help maintain their wellbeing. A factor consistently regarded as integral to wellbeing is gratitude. The effect of a ‘Three good things in life’ gratitude diary on subjective wellbeing in non-clinically depressed older adults was examined in the context of hedonic and eudemonic wellbeing measures and perceived stress. This intervention has not been tested on older adults previously. Participants were 88 community living adults aged 60 years or over. Beneficial outcomes following the 14 day intervention were evidenced by improved post-test scores on hedonistic wellbeing (life satisfaction and positive and negative affect) with further improvement at 30 days post-test. In contrast, improvements occurred in eudemonic wellbeing and perceived stress immediately following diary completion but these were not fully sustained at 30 days post-test. The acceptability of online versus paper delivery of the self-directed intervention was compared. Outcomes varied with completion route, health status, baseline gratitude and perceived stress. This age group managed and many preferred online delivery, Gratitude diaries seem to be a cost-effective method of producing beneficial improvements in wellbeing for older adults

Positive ageing: to what extent can current models of well-being categorize the life events perceived as positive by older adults?

Life expectancy is increasing globally, which makes understanding what contributes to well-being in older adults crucial for social and economic reasons. This is the first study to categorize positive life events in community dwelling older adults, to explore their fit with psychological well-being models. Volunteers selfdefined as well (N = 88), completed diaries identifying three positive events daily for 14 days. Diary entries combated negative stereotypes of ageing by describing older adults with active lives contributing to society. Of nine themes identified through thematic analysis of over 3,500 events; seven supported existing well-being models, being activities delivering positive affect and life satisfaction (hedonic model) and demonstrating competence, autonomy, relatedness, self-acceptance, purpose in life, and personal growth (eudemonic models). However, two well-supported new dimensions were also identified within the themes ‘interaction with the physical environment’ and ‘personal well-being’. These new dimensions were labelled ‘life-affirmation and ‘mindfulness’. This suggests the existence of additional considerations related to well-being specifically for older populations, which may indicate a need to broaden the existing models

The feasibility and acceptability of a psychosocial intervention to support people with dementia with Lewy bodies and family care partners

OBJECTIVES: Psychosocial support for people with dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) and family care partners is frequently lacking, despite the need expressed by those with lived experience. Our objective was to examine the feasibility and acceptability of an intervention designed to build coping capability. DESIGN: The design was non-randomised with all participants receiving the intervention. SETTING: The setting was a Memory Assessment and Management Service in the Northeast of England. PARTICIPANTS: Participants comprised 19 dyads consisting of a person with DLB and a family care partner. INTERVENTION: The intervention was group-based, with weekly sessions attended for up to four successive weeks. It was informed by Social Cognitive Theory. MEASUREMENTS: Data were collected on recruitment, attendance and attrition, self-efficacy, mood, stress and participant experience. RESULTS: Recruitment was achieved with minimal attrition and three successive groups were delivered. Care partners felt more in control and able to cope in at least 3 of 13 areas with 73% feeling this way in eight or more areas. Three themes were identified from post-intervention interviews: people like us, outcomes from being a group member and intervention design. CONCLUSIONS: A DLB-specific group intervention is acceptable to people with DLB and family care partners, and recruitment is feasible within a specialist service. Participation may enhance understanding of this condition and reduce social isolation. It may improve care partners' coping capability particularly if targeted towards those with low prior understanding of DLB and more stress. Means of evaluating outcomes for people with DLB need further development

The challenges of COVID-19 for people with dementia with Lewy bodies and family caregivers.

Introduction During the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic dementia has been identified as disproportionally common in adults aged over 65 who develop severe COVID-19.1 Observational data from the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infections Consortium also confirms a high prevalence of dementia in older adults hospitalised with COVID-19.2 It is so far unclear whether there is any direct effect of dementia pathologies as dementia is a disease of old age, and thus likely to be associated with a variety of comorbidities, in particular, frailty, which may further exacerbate the risk of severe infection. In addition up to one third of COVID patients have demonstrated neurological sequelae3 and there may be both direct (viral infection within the brain, vascular effects) and indirect effects (e.g. host immunological response, impact of treatment) of SARS-CoV-2 on the brain.4 It is therefore possible that SARS-CoV-2 infection may accentuate any pre-existing neurodegenerative disease

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK.

BACKGROUND: A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. METHODS: This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0-75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4-97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8-80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3-4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. INTERPRETATION: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

Background A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. Methods This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. Findings Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. Interpretation ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials