Search results

Rural communities need access to effective interventions that can prevent functional decline among a growing population of older adults. We describe the conceptual framework and rationale for a multicomponent intervention ("Mind, Mood, Mobility") delivered by Area Agency on Aging staff for rural older adults at risk for functional decline due to early impairments in cognition, mood, or mobility. Our proposed model utilizes primary care to identify at-risk older adults, combines evidence-based interventions that address multiple risk factors simultaneously, and leverages a community-based aging services workforce for intervention delivery.

ObjectiveTo determine the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of older adults with pre-existing major depressive disorder (MDD).ParticipantsParticipants were 73 community-living older adults with pre-existing MDD (mean age 69 [SD 6]) in Los Angeles, New York, Pittsburgh, and St Louis.Design and measurementsDuring the first 2 months of the pandemic, the authors interviewed participants with a semistructured qualitative interview evaluating access to care, mental health, quality of life, and coping. The authors also assessed depression, anxiety, and suicidality with validated scales and compared scores before and during the pandemic.ResultsFive themes from the interviews highlight the experience of older adults with MDD: 1) They are more concerned about the risk of contracting the virus than the risks of isolation. 2) They exhibit resilience to the stress and isolation of physical distancing. 3) Most are not isolated socially, with virtual contact with friends and family. 4) Their quality of life is lower, and they worry their mental health will suffer with continued physical distancing. 5) They are outraged by an inadequate governmental response to the pandemic. Depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation symptom scores did not differ from scores before the pandemic.ConclusionMost older adults with pre-existing MDD show resilience in the first 2 months of the COVID-19 pandemic but have concerns about the future. Policies and interventions to provide access to medical services and opportunities for social interaction are needed to help to maintain mental health and quality of life as the pandemic continues.

BackgroundDistinguishing a disorder of persistent and impairing grief from normative grief allows clinicians to identify this often undetected and disabling condition. As four diagnostic criteria sets for a grief disorder have been proposed, their similarities and differences need to be elucidated.MethodsParticipants were family members bereaved by US military service death (N = 1732). We conducted analyses to assess the accuracy of each criteria set in identifying threshold cases (participants who endorsed baseline Inventory of Complicated Grief ⩾30 and Work and Social Adjustment Scale ⩾20) and excluding those below this threshold. We also calculated agreement among criteria sets by varying numbers of required associated symptoms.ResultsAll four criteria sets accurately excluded participants below our identified clinical threshold (i.e. correctly excluding 86-96% of those subthreshold), but they varied in identification of threshold cases (i.e. correctly identifying 47-82%). When the number of associated symptoms was held constant, criteria sets performed similarly. Accurate case identification was optimized when one or two associated symptoms were required. When employing optimized symptom numbers, pairwise agreements among criteria became correspondingly 'very good' (κ = 0.86-0.96).ConclusionsThe four proposed criteria sets describe a similar condition of persistent and impairing grief, but differ primarily in criteria restrictiveness. Diagnostic guidance for prolonged grief disorder in International Classification of Diseases, 11th Edition (ICD-11) functions well, whereas the criteria put forth in Section III of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) are unnecessarily restrictive.