Thursday, April 29, 2021

 

Fish oil supplements linked with heart rhythm disorder

omega 3
Credit: CC0 Public Domain

Omega-3 supplements are associated with an increased likelihood of developing atrial fibrillation in people with high blood lipids. That's the finding of a study published today in European Heart Journal—Cardiovascular Pharmacotherapy, a journal of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC).

29 april 2021--"Currently, fish oil supplements are indicated for patients with elevated plasma triglycerides to reduce cardiovascular risk," said study author Dr. Salvatore Carbone of Virginia Commonwealth University, U.S. "Due to the high prevalence of elevated triglycerides in the population, they can be commonly prescribed. Of note, low dose omega-3 fatty acids are available over the counter, without the need for a prescription."

Some clinical trials have suggested that omega-3 fatty acids may be associated with an increased risk for atrial fibrillation, the most common heart rhythm disorder. People with the disorder have a five times greater likelihood of having a stroke.

These studies tested different formulations of omega-3 fatty acids at different doses. The authors therefore performed a comprehensive meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to answer the question of whether fish oils were consistently related to a raised risk for atrial fibrillation.

The analysis included five randomized controlled trials investigating the effects of omega-3 fatty acid supplementation on cardiovascular outcomes. Participants had elevated triglycerides and were either at high risk for cardiovascular disease or had established cardiovascular disease. A total of 50,277 patients received fish oils or placebo and were followed up for between 2 and 7.4 years. The dose of fish oils varied from 0.84 g to 4 g per day.

The researchers found that omega-3 fatty acid supplementation was associated with a significantly increased risk for atrial fibrillation compared to placebo with an incidence rate ratio of 1.37 (95% confidence interval 1.22-1.54; p<0.001).

Dr. Carbone said: "Our study suggests that fish oil supplements are associated with a significantly greater risk of atrial fibrillation in patients at elevated cardiovascular risk. Although one clinical trial indicated beneficial cardiovascular effects of supplementation, the risk for atrial fibrillation should be considered when such agents are prescribed or purchased over the counter, especially in individuals susceptible to developing the heart rhythm disorder."


More information: Marco Lombardi et al, Omega-3 fatty acids supplementation and risk of atrial fibrillation: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials, European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Pharmacotherapy (2021). DOI: 10.1093/ehjcvp/pvab008
Provided by European Society of Cardiology 

Sunday, April 25, 2021

 

Frequent internet use by older people during lockdown linked to mental health benefits

grandma online
Credit: Unsplash/CC0 Public Domain

A new study from the University of Surrey has found that among people aged 55 to 75 more frequent use of the internet was beneficial for mental health and quality of life under lockdown. Those who used the internet more, particularly for staying in touch with friends and family, were at lower risk of depression and reported a higher quality of life.

25 april 2021--Loneliness and social isolation have been major problems for many under lockdown, and for older peoplein particular.Loneliness raises risk of depression and othernegative health outcomes.In a paper published in the journalHealthcare,researchers from Surrey investigated whether more frequentinternet use in older people helped reduce this risk.

Researchers studied 3,491 individual participants drawn from the English Longitudinal Study of Aging in Summer 2020, whilst social distancing measures were in place across the country. Participants were surveyed on the frequency and type of their internet usage—such as information searching or for communication purposes.

Those who reported using the internet frequently (once a day or more) had much lower levels of depression symptoms and reported higher quality of life compared to those who used the internet only once a week or less. Using the internet for communication was particularly linked to these beneficial effects, suggesting that going online to stay connected with friends and family helped combat the negative psychological effects of social distancing and lockdown in adults aged 55-75.

Conversely,the study found that people who mostly used the internet to search for health-related information reported higher levels of depression symptoms. This might be due to a greater degree of worry triggered by reading COVID-19 and other health-related internet sources.

Dr. Simon Evans, lecturer in neuroscience at the University of Surrey, said: "As social restrictions continue during the COVID-19 pandemic, older people are at greater risk of loneliness and mental health issues. We found that older adults who used the internet more frequently under lockdown, particularly to communicate with others,had lower depression scores and an enhanced quality of life. As theCovid-19 situation evolves, morefrequent internet use could benefit the mental health of older people by reducing loneliness and risk of depression, particular if further lockdowns are imposed in the future."


More information: Anna-Stiina Wallinheimo et al. More Frequent Internet Use during the COVID-19 Pandemic Associates with Enhanced Quality of Life and Lower Depression Scores in Middle-Aged and Older Adults, Healthcare (2021). DOI: 10.3390/healthcare9040393
Provided by University of Surrey 

Saturday, April 24, 2021

 

3 doses, then 1 each year: Why Pfizer, not AstraZeneca, is best for the long haul

vaccine
Credit: Pixabay/CC0 Public Domain

Last week, the chief executive of Pfizer said anyone who receives its COVID-19 vaccine will probably need to have a third dose within 6-12 months after being fully immunized, and then likely one dose every year going forward.

24 April 2021--We'll need these because it's likely that, for many of us, immunity will begin to wane within that time frame. The vaccine will also need to be tweaked to cover new coronavirus variants as they emerge.

The advantage of mRNA vaccines like Pfizer's is they're much easier to update than the "viral vector" vaccines like AstraZeneca's. We should still use AstraZeneca now for over-50s, but our best long-term strategy is to use mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, and therefore to develop the capacity to manufacture them here in Australia.

Immunity to coronaviruses doesn't last

We know our immunity to different coronaviruses wanes over time. This is true for the four common cold (endemic) coronaviruses that circulate all the time—there are always sufficient numbers of people who have lost their immunity to ensure these viruses can persist and continue to cause respiratory illnesses.

Our immunity to SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, also seems to wane quickly, although the rate at which this happens can be quite variable. Data suggest immunity acquired from the Pfizer shot is pretty robust for six months, but it isn't clear how quickly our immunity is lost after that. However, it's reasonable to predict that within 12 months of a population being vaccinated, a substantial number of people will have likely lost protection against SARS-CoV-2. This will particularly be the case if the prevalent SARS-CoV-2 strain circulating at that time is substantially different from the virus against which people were originally vaccinated.


This relates to the fact that some coronavirus variants have mutations that reduce the effectiveness of vaccine-induced immunity. They've been described as "variants of concern" and include a virus that originated in South Africa, which has reduced the efficacy of both the AstraZeneca and Pfizer vaccines. As the pandemic surges around the world, more variants will certainly crop up.

Both waning immunity and viral variants will conspire to reduce our protection over time. So we'll need booster shots, ideally updated to deal with the viral variant that poses the greatest threat.

Using AstraZeneca is not our best long-term solution

I understand why Australia's government originally prioritized getting the AstraZeneca vaccine. It's easier to manufacture, store and distribute. It made sense in the early stages of the pandemic. And it's still an effective vaccine that people, here and abroad, should be receiving as soon as possible—any immunity is better than none and you will certainly be protected from severe COVID-19.

But as time goes on, using the AstraZeneca shot isn't the best long-term strategy.

One reason for this is what immunologists call "vector immunity". The AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson vaccines use a viral vector, which is an inactivated (cannot replicate) form of a common type of virus called an "adenovirus". They use this adenovirus as a delivery vehicle to get DNA into our cells to give them the instructions to develop immunity against the coronavirus. However, you can't be repeatedly immunized with this type of vaccine because you'll likely develop immunity to the adenovirus vector (the delivery vehicle) itself. When that happens your  interferes with the delivery vehicle getting into your cells and the effectiveness of these vaccines would erode over time.

What's more, in a very, very small number of people, this viral vector seems to be linked with an extremely rare but serious blood clotting syndrome. In these people, it's thought that a consequence of the immune response to the viral vector is their immune systems make "auto-antibodies". These are antibodies that, in addition to fighting a foreign invader (or targeting the adenovirus-based vector used in the AstraZeneca vaccine), also attack our own cells. In this case, these auto-antibodies are attacking blood cells called platelets, leading to the  and low platelet counts seen in around 1 in 250,000 people vaccinated with the AstraZeneca shot.

There are also clotting concerns with the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, which is also an adenovirus-vector-based vaccine, after six women developed the condition in the United States out of 6.8 million given the shot. However, this link is yet to be proven for this vaccine.

By contrast, mRNA vaccines like Pfizer's (and Moderna's) can be updated much more quickly. Pfizer just needs to rework its RNA sequence to cover variants, which is a minor modification. Nothing changes about the delivery system of the vaccine, so reapproval will likely be much easier. Regulatory bodies have indicated there will be a quick path for approval for vaccines updated for variants.

The mRNA vaccines consist of a lipid-based delivery system that protects the mRNA and gets it into cells. Then, the cells can start manufacturing the spike protein to present to your immune system. There's no protein in the vaccine itself, so there's no chance of developing immunity to the vaccine components.

mRNA vaccines are our best bet going forward

There's a fear among researchers, including myself, that we'll be chasing our tails with these new variants. We'll identify a new variant and set out to update our vaccines against it, but by the time the formulation is updated, approved, manufactured and distributed, we may already be dealing with another variant, or many variants across different locations.

It's absolutely vital Australia develops the ability to make mRNA vaccines onshore, particularly if new variants pop up here or in our region. This will be far more effective than waiting months to get new shots from overseas.

Federal health minister Greg Hunt has indicated Australia is interested in developing this capacity.

Right now, the AstraZeneca vaccine still has a role in Australia's current vaccine strategy. We have it and we can make more of it, so let's get it out there for over-50s as well as give those under 50 the opportunity to make an informed choice to have this vaccine.

So few Australians currently have immunity to the virus, we remain vulnerable to outbreaks. If there are new outbreaks, we would have to rely on lockdowns, masks and other strategies again, and could find ourselves back to where we were last year. And let's not forget people will become ill and some will die. The vaccine rollout is lagging, and we really need to catch up as soon as possible.

But as time goes on, the AstraZeneca vaccine will become less attractive, and mRNA vaccines such as Pfizer's should eventually take its place.


Provided by The Conversation 

Saturday, April 17, 2021

 

Prolonged brain dysfunction in COVID-19 survivors: A pandemic in its own right

reflective
Credit: Unsplash/CC0 Public Domain

One in three survivors of COVID-19, those more commonly referred to as COVID-19 long-haulers, suffered from neurologic or psychiatric disability six months after infection, a recent landmark study of more than 200,000 post-COVID-19 patients showed.

17 april 2021--Researchers looked at 236,379 British patients diagnosed with COVID-19 over six months, analyzing neurologic and psychiatric complications during that time period. They compared those individuals to others who had experienced similar respiratory illnesses that were not COVID-19.

They found a significant increase in several medical conditions among the COVID-19 group, including memory loss, nerve disorders, anxiety, depression, substance abuse and insomnia. Additionally, the symptoms were present among all age groups and in patients who were asymptomatic, isolating in home quarantine, and those admitted to hospitals.

The results of this study speak to the seriousness of long-term consequences of COVID-19 infection. Numerous reports of brain fog, post-traumatic stress disorder, heart disease, lung disease and gastrointestinal disease have peppered the media and puzzled scientists over the past 12 months, begging the question: What effect does COVID-19 have on the body long after the acute symptoms have resolved?

I am an assistant professor of neurology and neurosurgery and can't help but wonder what we have learned from past experience with other viruses. One thing in particular stands out: COVID-19 consequences will be with us for quite some time.

Learning from history

Past virus outbreaks, such as the 1918 flu pandemic and the SARS epidemic of 2003, have provided examples of the challenges to expect with COVID-19. And, the long-term effects of other viral infections help provide insight.

Several other viruses, including a large majority of those that cause common upper and lower respiratory infections, have been shown to produce such chronic symptoms as anxiety, depression, memory problems and fatigue. Experts believe that these symptoms are likely due to long-term effects on the immune system. Viruses trick the body into producing a persistent inflammatory response resistant to treatment.

Myalgic encephalomyelitis, also known as chronic fatigue syndrome, is one such illness. Researchers believe this condition results from continuous activation of the immune system long after the initial infection has resolved.

In contrast to other viral infections, the COVID-19 survivors in the study reported persistent symptoms lasting more than six months, with no significant improvement over time. The abundance of psychiatric symptoms was also notable and likely attributable to both infection and pandemic-related experience.

These findings are leading researchers to hypothesize several mechanisms following acute COVID-19 infection that may lead to long-haul COVID-19. With the known historical context of chronic symptoms following other viruses, doctors and researchers may have a glimpse into the future of COVID-19 with the potential to create therapies to alleviate patients' persistent symptoms.

When does COVID-19 really end?

COVID-19 is now known to be a disease that affects all organ systems, including the brain, lungs, heart, kidneys and intestines.

Several theories exist as to the cause of chronic, lingering symptoms. Hypotheses include direct organ damage from the virus, continual activation of the immune system after acute  and persistent lasting virus particles that find safe harbor within the body.

To date, autopsy studies have not confirmed the presence or overabundance of COVID-19 particles in the brain, making the immune theories the most likely cause of brain dysfunction.

Some recovered COVID-19 patients detail significant improvement or resolution of long symptoms following inoculation with the COVID-19 vaccine. Others report improvement following a short course of steroids. The most plausible explanation for the direct effects of long COVID-19 on the brain are due to its body-wide connections and the fact that COVID-19 is a multi-organ disease.

These findings may point to a direct immune related cause of long COVID-19, though no real answers yet exist to define the true cause and duration of the disease.

The post-COVID-19 world

In February, the National Institutes of Health announced a new initiative to study long COVID-19, now collectively defined as Post-Acute Sequelae of SARS-CoV-2. The NIH created a fund of US$1.15 billion to study this new disease. The aims of the study include the cause of long-term symptoms, the number of people affected by the disease and vulnerabilities leading to long COVID-19.

In my view, public health officials should continue to be open and transparent when discussing the short- and long-term effects of COVID-19. Society as a whole needs the best information possible to understand its effects and resolve the problem.

COVID-19 remains and will continue to be one of the largest socioeconomic problems across the world as we begin to recognize the true long-term impacts of the disease. Both the scientific and research communities should continue to be diligent in the fight long after the acute infections are gone. It appears that the chronic effects of the disease will be with us for some time to come.


Provided by The Conversation 

Saturday, April 10, 2021

 

COVID reinfection is rare, but seniors more vulnerable: study

COVID reinfection is rare, but seniors more vulnerable: study

Reinfection with COVID-19 in people who've already had the illness is very rare, and most people are protected against reinfection for at least six months, a new report finds. However, immunity appears to drop sharply in those aged 65 and older, researchers found.

10 april 2021--Reporting Wednesday in The Lancet, a team of Danish scientists looked at reinfection rates among 4 million people during the second surge of COVID-19—from September through Dec. 31—and compared this to infection rates during the first surge between March and May.

Of the 11,068 people who tested positive during the first surge, only 72 tested positive again during the second.

But age mattered.

The older age group had only about 47% protection against repeat infection, compared to younger people who seemed to have about 80% protection from reinfection, the team discovered. Less than 1% of those under 65 were reinfected, while 3.6% of people 65 and older suffered a second bout of COVID-19.

The finding does not come as a complete surprise, since people's immune systems weaken as they age.

"Given what is at stake, the results emphasize how important it is that people adhere to measures implemented to keep themselves and others safe, even if they have already had COVID-19," study co-author Dr. Steen Ethelberg, of the Statens Serum Institut in Denmark, said in a journal news release.

"The take away is that the elderly must continue to practice mitigation measures such as wearing masks and social distancing—along with getting vaccinated—even if they have been previously diagnosed with COVID-19," said Dr. Robert Glatter, an emergency physician who's cared for many patients with the illness

"Rapid vaccination is our single best weapon against the continued spread of COVID-19," said Glatter, who practices at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City.

Dr. Amesh Adalja is an infectious disease specialist and senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security in Baltimore. He said that second bouts of COVID-19 might not turn out to be as severe as a first encounter, at least.

"We've known that with other coronaviruses, reinfection is common after a several months-long period of time—which appears to be the case with SARS-CoV-2 as well—and they are are generally mild," he said. "It is important to know what severity of clinical symptoms and level of contagiousness these rare re-infections are associated with."

In a commentary that accompanied the study, immunologists Dr. Rosemary Boyton and Daniel Altmann, of Imperial College London, called the variation in reinfection rates "relatively alarming."

"Only 80% protection from reinfection in general, decreasing to 47% in people aged 65 years and older, are more concerning figures than offered by previous studies," they wrote."These data are all confirmation, if it were needed, that for SARS-CoV-2 the hope of protective immunity through natural infections might not be within our reach and a global vaccination program with high-efficacy vaccines is the enduring solution."

Edwards noted that, "There's a reason why people over 60 have to get extra vaccines to boost their immunity to various infections, because we know that the immune system starts waning in later life."

One reassuring thing about the mRNA vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna is that the vaccines do seem to overcome some of the immunity concerns among older people because they produce such robust protection.

A limitation of the study is that it looked at infections before there were a lot of the variants in circulation, so it's unclear what impact that could have on future reinfection rates. That's something scientists will have to look at going forward.

"With the rise of variants, especially B117, which is not only more infectious but deadly, we must continue to vaccinate as fast as possible in order to prevent them from becoming dominant," Glatter said.

States expand COVID vaccine eligibility

States are rapidly expanding eligibility for coronavirus vaccines as they race to meet President Joe Biden's deadline to have shots for all American adults by May 1.

At the beginning of the vaccine rollout, COVID-19 vaccines were available only to the most vulnerable Americans and some essential workers. Now, three states—Maine, Virginia and Wisconsin—along with Washington, D.C., have said they will open eligibility to their general population by May 1, The New York Times reported. At least six other states—including Colorado, Connecticut, Ohio, Michigan, Montana and Utah—hope to do so this month or next.

Meanwhile, anyone aged 16 or older can now get a vaccine In Mississippi and Alaska, while Arizona and Michigan have made the vaccines available to all adults in some counties, the Times reported.

With three coronavirus vaccines now in use, Biden has set a lofty goal that many states intend to reach.

Several have already been expanding eligibility for vaccinations. In Ohio, vaccines will open to anyone 40 and up as of Friday, and to more residents with certain medical conditions, the Times reported. Indiana extended access to people 45 and older, effective immediately.

Coloradans age 50 and up will be eligible for a shot on Friday, along with anyone 16 years and older with certain medical conditions, the Times reported. And Wisconsin said on Tuesday that residents aged 16 and up with certain medical conditions would be eligible a week earlier than initially planned. On Monday, Texans age 50 and older and Georgians over 55 became eligible for vaccines.

In New York, residents aged 60 and older are eligible to receive a vaccine, and more frontline workers will become eligible on Wednesday, including government employees, building services workers and employees of nonprofit groups. Gov. Andrew Cuomo has yet to announce how or when the state will open eligibility to all adults.

Since vaccinations began in December, the federal government has delivered more than 147.6 million vaccine doses to states and territories, and more than 77 percent have been administered, according to the latest figures from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The country is averaging about 2.4 million shots a day, compared with well under 1 million a day in January, the Times said.

As of Thursday, 65.4 percent of the country's seniors had received at least one vaccine dose, with 37.6 percent fully vaccinated.

At the same time, coronavirus cases, deaths and hospitalizations are significantly down from the peak levels reported in January, the Times reported. But progress has slowed noticeably since the beginning of March, with continued drops in some states offset by persistent outbreaks in other parts of the country, especially the Northeast.

Biden weighs national face mask standard for workplaces

The Biden Administration is deliberating on a nationwide face mask standard for workplaces, although it has already missed its own deadline for a decision.

On Jan. 21, Biden told the Labor Department's Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to determine by March 15, if such a standard is needed, CBS News reported.

An emergency temporary standard on face masks in the workplace is expected to be issued soon, but the analysis has not yet been completed, three people familiar with the process told CBS News.The nationwide temporary standard for face masks in the workplace would impact millions of workers and would likely last six months.

Public health and workplace safety experts told CBS News the emergency temporary standard could provide valuable social distancing advice for workers and safety guidance for face masks, since they vary in their protective abilities.

OSHA workplace standards typically take years to implement, so an emergency temporary standard has sometimes been used to counter "grave dangers" facing workers, CBS News reported.

The last time an emergency standard was used was in 1983 to limit asbestos exposure in the workplace, according to the Congressional Research Service. The rule was eventually struck down in court.

Without a nationwide standard so far during the pandemic, several states have enacted their own standards, CBS News reported.

Dr. David Michaels, a former assistant secretary of labor for OSHA who served on Biden's presidential transition team, explained to CBS News the technical aspects of any emergency temporary standard must be balanced with the urgent need to protect workers from the spread of COVID-19.

"The Occupational Safety and Health Administration has been working diligently, as appropriate, to consider what standards may be necessary, and is taking the time to get this right," a Labor Department spokesperson told CBS News on Monday. This official did not offer any timeline for their decision.

A global scourge

By Thursday, the U.S. coronavirus case count passed 29.6 million while the death toll passed 537,000, according to a Times tally. On Thursday, the top five states for coronavirus infections were: California with over 3.6 million cases; Texas with more than 2.7 million cases; Florida with nearly 2 million cases; New York with more than 1.7 million cases; and Illinois with over 1.2 million cases.

Curbing the spread of the coronavirus in the rest of the world remains challenging.

In Brazil, the  case count was nearly 11.7 million by Thursday, with nearly 283,000 deaths, a Johns Hopkins University tally showed. India had nearly 11.5 million cases and over 159,000 deaths as of Thursday, the Hopkins tally showed.

Worldwide, the number of reported infections passed 121 million on Thursday, with nearly 2.7 million deaths recorded, according to the Hopkins tally.

More information: Christian Holm Hansen et al, Assessment of protection against reinfection with SARS-CoV-2 among 4 million PCR-tested individuals in Denmark in 2020: a population-level observational study, The Lancet (2021). dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00575-4
Journal information: The Lancet 

 

Pay for elderly to live in care homes in lower income countries, rich nations advised

elderly
Credit: Unsplash/CC0 Public Domain

Rich nations should consider paying for elderly people to live in care homes in lower income countries in a bid to ease the pressure on domestic residential and nursing care provision, argues an ethicist in the Journal of Medical Ethics.

10 april 2021--Providing such a move wouldn't disadvantage local residents, and that appropriate quality checks could be made, this policy would enable older citizens to access affordable and decent care when they need it, contends Dr. Bouke de Vries, University of UmeÃ¥, Sweden.

The reality is that many higher-income countries are struggling to provide affordable and decent care for their relatively old and ageing populations, says De Vries.

Something has to be done, and there are already examples of German and Swiss citizens who have opted to live in care homes in Eastern Europe and South East Asia, he points out.

Paying for provision in lower income countries would be morally acceptable if five criteria are met he suggests:

a significant proportion of citizens don't currently have access to adequate residential or nursing carethe care in homes abroad isn't worse than that provided in domestic care homessending states conduct regular quality checks or delegate this to reliable local monitoring bodiesappropriate steps are taken to ensure that this type of migration doesn't disadvantage local residents in the receiving countriesthe public money allocated for this isn't better spent on other ways of easing the pressure on domestic care/nursing homes

How much a richer nation should pay will depend on several factors, he suggests. These include its wealth; the magnitude of the strain on domestic provision; and how much the public purse will save, as well as the amount of taxpayers' money needed to convince citizens to make the move, to monitor the quality of those care homes, and to offset any disadvantage to local citizens.

This disadvantage might include fierce competition for care  places that would otherwise be available to locals and/or increasing the costs of residential care, because of the ability of migrants from richer countries to afford higher prices.

But this could be overcome by the sending countries subsidising the construction of affordable care homes for local people or building care homes within the receiving countries that partly if not wholly accommodate their own citizens, suggests De Vries.

In a linked blog, De Vries acknowledges that this migration policy is not the only solution to the crisis facing elderly care.

Others include paying formal caregivers more; providing better support to informal caregivers; and investing in robot caregivers and other forms of assistive technology. But he nevertheless believes his solution shows "great promise."

Some people might object on the grounds that the policy might put undue pressure on people on lower incomes to migrate while others might simply feel that it is unpalatable.

"My proposal for higher-income countries to pay their residents to move to care homes within lower-income countries will undoubtedly prove controversial," he accepts.

But should it, if the eligibility criteria are strictly adhered to? he asks.

"The proposal could have significant benefits for lower-income countries. "By incentivising comparatively wealthy foreigners to live in  within these countries, it might indirectly stimulate their economies. In addition, it might reduce the need for local clinicians and care workers to move to higher income countries to earn higher wages, meaning that fewer of them would be separated from their family and friends," he writes.


More information: Should higher-income countries pay their citizens to move to foreign care homes? Journal of Medical Ethics (2021). DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2020-106380 


 

How specialist palliative care services around the world coped in response to COVID-19

care home
Credit: Pixabay/CC0 Public Domain

Specialist palliative care services have been flexible, highly adaptive and have embraced a low-cost "frugal innovation" model in response to the COVID-19 pandemic say researchers.

10 appril 2021--The CovPall study, published in Palliative Medicine, is a collaborative project between Lancaster University, Cicely Saunders Institute at King's College London, Hull York Medical School and the University of York.

It aims to understand the multinational specialist palliative care response to COVID-19 through an online survey of more than 450 hospice and specialist palliative care providers throughout the world.

Lesley Dunleavy, Professor Catherine Walshe and Professor Nancy Preston from the International Observatory on End of Life care at Lancaster University led on mapping and analyzing the types of innovations and practice changes made by specialist palliative care services in response to the pandemic.

Examples included:

  • creating a single point of access for patients, family carers and health care professionals,
  • using communication technology to provide clinical care
  • developing COVID-19 symptom control guidelines and providing training in end of life care.

Services reported a number of challenges and concerns when responding to the pandemic that included working within a climate of heightened fear and anxiety, a lack of IT infrastructure, how to sustain out of hours cover without adequate funding and how to keep abreast of the ever-changing situation. There was evidence that services sometimes duplicated guideline and policy development.

The study highlighted that specialist palliative care services need better financial support but also need to build organizational resilience and drive forward innovation through greater collaboration to manage the impact of the COVID 19 pandemic or any future crisis.

Lesley Dunleavy, Senior Research Associate and lead author said: "Services have demonstrated considerable flexibility and adaptability in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and have played an important role in the crisis, but going forward greater financial support as well national and international collaboration is needed to manage the impact of this and any future crisis."


More information: Lesley Dunleavy et al. 'Necessity is the mother of invention': Specialist palliative care service innovation and practice change in response to COVID-19. Results from a multinational survey (CovPall), Palliative Medicine (2021). DOI: 10.1177/02692163211000660
Provided by Lancaster University 

 

During the first wave of the coronavirus pandemic, older adults left home predominantly for physical exercise

During the first wave of the coronavirus pandemic, older adults left home predominantly for physical exercise
Physical exercise was the most common reason to leave home during the first wave of the pandemic in 2020. Credit: University of Jyväskylä

In spring 2020, when the first wave of the coronavirus pandemic hit Finland, older adults drastically reduced their out-of-home activities. During the period of government restrictions, physical exercise was the most common reason to leave home,a recent study at the University of Jyväskylä Faculty of Sport and Health Sciences finds.

10 april 2020--"In spring 2020, it was feared that the closure of many activity destinations and the recommendations to avoid close contact with persons from other households put in place by the government would decrease physical activity levels, and thus, negatively affect ' physical functional capacity," Senior Researcher Erja Portegijs explains. "According to our research results, this was however, not the case."

Throughout the restriction period, physical exercise and walking outdoors, for example, in nature was possible, and even encouraged by the government later in the spring.

"This study shows that physical exercise was the most common reason to go out," Portegijs adds. "Otherwise, older participants had few reasons to go out beyond grocery shopping during the first spring of the pandemic."

Previous research shows that all activities outside of one's home are beneficial for physical activity. As the reasons to leave home were markedly limited during the first spring of the pandemic, more research is needed to determine the long-term effects on mobility and maintaining functional capacity.

"This research is unique, even though it was based on the data of 44 participants only," Portegijs says. "Previously, we did not know where older adults moved and for what reason. Studying where people go to is possible using a map-based questionnaire. This is one of the first studies utilizing such a questionnaire among older adults."

As coronavirus-related measures have varied significantly between countries, it is not sure whether these results are generalizable to other countries. In Finland, curfews were not implemented and governmental restrictions were mostly based on recommendations rather than enforced regulations.

In 2017 and 2018, a map-based questionnaire was used to collect data on frequently visited activity destinations as part of the larger AGNES study among 75-, 80-, and 85-year-old adults living in Jyväskylä city in Central Finland. In May and June 2020, participants were invited to complete the map-based questionnaire following a postal questionnaire. Only a small portion of participants was able to use digital devices independently and thus to participate. These participants had somewhat better health and function than the others.

"As abilities to use digital devices improve among the aging population, the relevance of map-based research methods will further increase," Portegijs says.


More information: Erja Portegijs et al. Older adults' activity destinations before and during COVID-19 restrictions: From a variety of activities to mostly physical exercise close to home, Health & Place (2021). DOI: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2021.102533
Journal information: Health & Place 

 

For older patients, focusing on what matters is often the best medicine

patient
Credit: Unsplash/CC0 Public Domain

A woman in her 80s wanted to play with her great-grandchildren when they came to visit, but knee pain made it difficult for her. A man in his late 70s said he enjoyed going out to dinner, but was constrained by the meal preparation guidelines that he needed to follow because of his diabetes.

10 april 2021--Both people have multiple chronic conditions. They also have life goals, things they want to do to live their lives fully, like playing with grandchildren and going out to eat. Understanding these goals and barriers to them, helps doctors align care with what matters most to their patients while eliminating unwanted health care, said the authors of a report that was published March 24 in JAMA Network Open.

The report, the first systematic description of older adults' health care priorities, describes a structured process called Patient Health Priorities that health care providers can follow to identify the life goals of older adults with multiple chronic conditions as well as their health care preferences.

"There is growing awareness of the need to transition health care, particularly for people with multiple chronic conditions, from treating single diseases in isolation to health care that is aligned with patients' priorities," said Mary Tinetti, MD, the principal investigator of the Patient Priorities Care study, and the Gladys Phillips Crofoot Professor of Medicine (Geriatrics) at Yale School of Medicine (YSM).

During the study, health care providers asked 163 patients who were 65 and older and have multiple chronic conditions to identify what they value most in life such as connecting with family, being productive, or remaining independent. They then asked what specific and realistic activities they most wanted to be able to do that reflected their values. The participants also were asked to describe the barriers that prevented them from achieving their goals, such as unnecessary doctors' visits, taking too many medications, or health concerns such as fatigue and shortness of breath.

"The medications, health care visits, testing, procedures, and self-management tasks entailed in treating multiple chronic conditions require investments of time and effort that may be burdensome and conflict with what patients are willing and able to do," Tinetti said.

The study was conducted among patients of 10 primary care doctors from a multi-site practice in Connecticut who invited patients to participate during routine visits. Participants had to be 65 or older and have at least three chronic health conditions that were treated with at least 10 prescription medications. They also had to be under the care of two or more specialists, or have visited the emergency room at least two times, or had been hospitalized once, during the past year. Of the 236 patients at the practice, 163 agreed to participate. Most participants were white, female, about 78 years old, and had four chronic conditions. Nearly half had high school-level or less education.

Participants were asked to identify their values with questions such as, "What does enjoying life mean to you?" and "When you have a good day, what happens?" Their health care providers then worked with them to make sure their care was focused on achieving those goals. Participants also were asked what health issues most interfered with their goals, and what aspects of their health care they found helpful and which they felt were unhelpful to too burdensome.

The 163 participants identified 459 outcome goals, the most common of which were sharing meals with friends and family (7.8%); visiting with grandchildren (16.3%); going shopping (6.1%), and exercising (4.6%). Twenty participants (4.4%) said they wanted to be able to stay in their homes and live independently. Common barriers to their goals were pain (41%); fatigue, lack of energy or poor sleep (14.4%); unsteadiness (13.5%); and shortness of breath and dizziness (6.1%).

Thirty-two participants (19.8%) felt they were taking too many medications, while 57 (35.0%) reported having bothersome symptoms from their medications but did not mention specific drugs. Also, 43 (26%) participants said that visits to their primary care physicians and specialists were helpful, although 15 (9%) said they have too many visits or doctors. "I'm tired of going to so many doctors."

Understanding what's important to patients can help with patient-doctor communication and decision-making, Tinetti said. "If a patient's outcome goals are not achievable or realistic given their health status, a conversation might include, "I worry that you might not be able to continue driving your friends to the theater. I wonder if there are other ways to fulfill your desire to see shows and connect with your friends that could be more achievable."

Participants were drawn from a single practice with a homogeneous patient population; results may not generalize to other populations, and identifying the priorities of diverse groups is essential, the report's authors noted. "While further research is needed, the study suggests the feasibility of asking people about their goals and preferences, and getting responses that can inform decision-making," Tinetti said.

Self-Directed Website Launches

A newly launched website, MyHealthPriorities.org, grew out of the Patient Priorities Care initiative. People can use the website to identify their priorities so they can discuss them with their health care team.

"When there isn't a healthcare provider available to do the health priorities identification, there is now this option of the self-directed website," said Jessica Esterson, MPH, project director in the Section of Geriatrics at YSM. "We want to spread this capability to as many older adults as possible. By providing the website directly to individuals we greatly expand its reach and potential."

The website walks people through the Patient Priorities Care health priorities identification process. At the end they will have a summary to bring to their doctors that outlines their health priorities—the activities they want their health care to help them achieve based on what they are willing and able to do.

Tinetti encourages people of all ages, particularly older adults with multiple health conditions, to use MyHealthPriorities.org. "It will help you think about things you haven't thought about before, and better understand what matters most to you about your health and health care," Tinetti said. "It's important to you, your family, and your doctors."


More information: Mary E. Tinetti et al. Outcome Goals and Health Care Preferences of Older Adults With Multiple Chronic Conditions, JAMA Network Open (2021). DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.1271
Provided by Yale University 

Wednesday, April 07, 2021

 

GlyNAC improves multiple defects in aging to boost strength and cognition in older humans

old people
Credit: CC0 Public Domain

A pilot human clinical trial conducted by researchers at Baylor College of Medicine reveals that supplementation with GlyNAC—a combination of glycine and N-acetylcysteine as precursors of the natural antioxidant glutathione—could improve many age-associated defects in older humans to improve muscle strength and cognition, and promote healthy aging.

07 april 2021--Published in the journal Clinical and Translational Medicine, the results of this study show that older humans taking GlyNAC for 24 weeks saw improvements in many characteristic defects of aging, including glutathione deficiency, oxidative stress, mitochondrial dysfunction, inflammation, insulin resistance, endothelial dysfunction, body fat, genomic toxicity, muscle strength, gait speed, exercise capacity and cognitive function. The benefits declined after stopping supplementation for 12 weeks. GlyNAC supplementation was well tolerated during the study period.

"There is limited understanding as to why these defects occur in older humans, and effective interventions to reverse these defects are currently limited or lacking," said corresponding author endocrinologist Dr. Rajagopal Sekhar, associate professor of medicine in the Section of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism at Baylor.

For the last 20 years, Sekhar and his team have been studying natural aging in older humans and aged mice. Their work brings mitochondria, known as the batteries of the cell, as well as free radicals and glutathione to the table in discussions about why we age.

Mitochondrial dysfunction and aging

Mitochondria generate energy needed for supporting cellular functions by burning fat and sugar from foods, therefore mitochondrial health is critically important for life. Sekhar believes that improving the health of malfunctioning mitochondria in aging is the key.

As mitochondria generate energy, they produce waste products such as free radicals. These highly reactive molecules can damage cells, membranes, lipids, proteins and DNA. Cells depend on antioxidants, such as glutathione, the most abundant antioxidant in our cells, to neutralize these toxic free radicals. Failing to neutralize free radicals leads to harmful and damaging oxidative stress that can affect mitochondrial function.

Interestingly, glutathione levels in older people are much lower than those in younger people, and the levels of oxidative stress are much higher.

Animal studies conducted in the Sekhar lab have shown that restoring glutathione levels by providing GlyNAC reverses glutathione deficiency, reduces oxidative stress and fully restores mitochondrial function in aged mice.

"In previous work we showed that supplementing HIV patients with GlyNAC improved multiple deficits associated with premature aging observed in those patients," Sekhar said. "In this study, we wanted to understand the effects of GlyNAC supplementation on many age-associated defects in older adults."

GlyNAC improves several hallmark defects in aging

The world population of older humans is rapidly increasing and with it comes an increase in many age-related illnesses. To understand what causes unhealthy aging, scientific research has identified nine hallmark defects which are believed to contribute to the aging process.

"It is believed that correcting these aging hallmarks could improve or reverse many age-related disorders and help people age in a healthier way," Sekhar said. "However, we do not fully understand why these hallmark defects happen, and there are currently no solutions to fix even a single hallmark defect in aging."

This is where Sekhar's trial results become encouraging, because GlyNAC supplementation for 24 weeks appears to improve four of the nine aging hallmark defects.

To further understand whether GlyNAC holds the keys to mitochondrial recovery and more, Sekhar and his team conducted this pilot clinical trial.

"We worked with eight older adults 70 to 80 years of age, comparing them with gender-matched younger adults between 21 and 30 years old," Sekhar said. "We measured glutathione in red-blood cells, mitochondrial fuel-oxidation, plasma biomarkers of oxidative stress and oxidant damage, inflammation, endothelial function, glucose and insulin, gait-speed, muscle strength, exercise capacity, cognitive tests, gene-damage, glucose-production and muscle-protein breakdown rates and body composition. Before taking GlyNAC, all these measurements were abnormal in older adults when compared with those in younger people."

The older participants took GlyNAC for 24 weeks, and then stopped it for 12 weeks. Sekhar and his colleagues repeated the above measurements at the halfway point at 12 weeks, after 24 weeks of taking GlyNAC, and again after stopping GlyNAC for 12 weeks.

"We are very excited by the results," Sekhar said. "After taking GlyNAC for 24 weeks, all these defects in older adults improved and some reversed to the levels found in young adults." The researchers also determined that older adults tolerated GlyNAC well for 24 weeks. The benefits, however, declined after stopping GlyNAC supplementation for 12 weeks.

"I am particularly encouraged by the improvements in cognition and muscle strength," Sekhar said. "Alzheimer's disease and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) are serious medical conditions affecting memory in older people and leading to dementia, and there are no effective solutions for these disorders. We are exploring the possibility that GlyNAC could help with these conditions by conducting two pilot randomized clinical trials to test whether GlyNAC supplementation could improve defects linked to cognitive decline in Alzheimer's disease and in MCI, and possibly improve cognitive function."

"The overall findings of the current study are highly encouraging," Sekhar said. "They suggest that GlyNAC supplementation could be a simple and viable method to promote and improve healthy aging in older adults. We call this the 'Power of 3' because we believe that it takes the combined benefits of glycine, NAC and glutathione to reach this far reaching and widespread improvement. We also have completed a randomized clinical trial on supplementing GlyNAC vs. placebo in older adults and those results will be forthcoming soon."


More information: Premranjan Kumar et al, Glycine and N‐acetylcysteine (GlyNAC) supplementation in older adults improves glutathione deficiency, oxidative stress, mitochondrial dysfunction, inflammation, insulin resistance, endothelial dysfunction, genotoxicity, muscle strength, and cognition: Results of a pilot clinical trial, Clinical and Translational Medicine (2021). DOI: 10.1002/ctm2.372
Provided by Baylor College of Medicine