User login
Regular Physical Activity Linked to Larger Brain Volume
TOPLINE:
, new data suggest.
METHODOLOGY:
- The potential neuroprotective effects of regular physical activity on brain structure are unclear despite reported links between physical activity and reduced dementia risk.
- To investigate, researchers analyzed MRI brain scans from 10,125 healthy adults (mean age, 53 years; 52% male) who self-reported their level of physical activity.
- Moderate to vigorous physical activities, defined as those increasing respiration and pulse rate for at least 10 continuous minutes, was modeled with brain volumes, adjusting for covariates.
- The threshold for defining physically active (vs nonactive) adults was intentionally set at 2.5 days per week, a level far lower than current guidelines.
TAKEAWAY:
- Three quarters of the cohort reported engaging in moderate to vigorous physical activity approximately 4 days per week.
- Physically active adults tended to be younger, with a higher proportion of White individuals, and with lower rates of hypertension and type 2 diabetes.
- After adjusting for multiple factors, increased days of moderate to vigorous activity correlated with larger normalized brain volume in multiple regions including total gray matter; white matter; hippocampus; and frontal, parietal, and occipital lobes.
IN PRACTICE:
“We found that even moderate levels of physical activity, such as taking fewer than 4,000 steps a day, can have a positive effect on brain health. This is much less than the often-suggested 10,000 steps, making it a more achievable goal for many people,” co-author David Merrill, MD, with Pacific Brain Health Center, Santa Monica, California, said in a statement.
SOURCE:
The study, with first author Cyrus A. Raji, MD, PhD, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, was published online in the Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease.
LIMITATIONS:
Participants self-reported physical activity in the past 2 weeks, which does not reflect a lifetime of activity levels. The correlation identified between physical activity and brain volumes may not be solely attributable to physical activity alone.
DISCLOSURES:
The study received funding from several health centers and foundations. Dr. Raji consults for Brainreader ApS, Neurevolution LLC, Apollo Health, Voxelwise Imaging Technology, and Pacific Neuroscience Foundation and is an editorial board member of the Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease but was not involved in the peer-review process.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
, new data suggest.
METHODOLOGY:
- The potential neuroprotective effects of regular physical activity on brain structure are unclear despite reported links between physical activity and reduced dementia risk.
- To investigate, researchers analyzed MRI brain scans from 10,125 healthy adults (mean age, 53 years; 52% male) who self-reported their level of physical activity.
- Moderate to vigorous physical activities, defined as those increasing respiration and pulse rate for at least 10 continuous minutes, was modeled with brain volumes, adjusting for covariates.
- The threshold for defining physically active (vs nonactive) adults was intentionally set at 2.5 days per week, a level far lower than current guidelines.
TAKEAWAY:
- Three quarters of the cohort reported engaging in moderate to vigorous physical activity approximately 4 days per week.
- Physically active adults tended to be younger, with a higher proportion of White individuals, and with lower rates of hypertension and type 2 diabetes.
- After adjusting for multiple factors, increased days of moderate to vigorous activity correlated with larger normalized brain volume in multiple regions including total gray matter; white matter; hippocampus; and frontal, parietal, and occipital lobes.
IN PRACTICE:
“We found that even moderate levels of physical activity, such as taking fewer than 4,000 steps a day, can have a positive effect on brain health. This is much less than the often-suggested 10,000 steps, making it a more achievable goal for many people,” co-author David Merrill, MD, with Pacific Brain Health Center, Santa Monica, California, said in a statement.
SOURCE:
The study, with first author Cyrus A. Raji, MD, PhD, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, was published online in the Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease.
LIMITATIONS:
Participants self-reported physical activity in the past 2 weeks, which does not reflect a lifetime of activity levels. The correlation identified between physical activity and brain volumes may not be solely attributable to physical activity alone.
DISCLOSURES:
The study received funding from several health centers and foundations. Dr. Raji consults for Brainreader ApS, Neurevolution LLC, Apollo Health, Voxelwise Imaging Technology, and Pacific Neuroscience Foundation and is an editorial board member of the Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease but was not involved in the peer-review process.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
, new data suggest.
METHODOLOGY:
- The potential neuroprotective effects of regular physical activity on brain structure are unclear despite reported links between physical activity and reduced dementia risk.
- To investigate, researchers analyzed MRI brain scans from 10,125 healthy adults (mean age, 53 years; 52% male) who self-reported their level of physical activity.
- Moderate to vigorous physical activities, defined as those increasing respiration and pulse rate for at least 10 continuous minutes, was modeled with brain volumes, adjusting for covariates.
- The threshold for defining physically active (vs nonactive) adults was intentionally set at 2.5 days per week, a level far lower than current guidelines.
TAKEAWAY:
- Three quarters of the cohort reported engaging in moderate to vigorous physical activity approximately 4 days per week.
- Physically active adults tended to be younger, with a higher proportion of White individuals, and with lower rates of hypertension and type 2 diabetes.
- After adjusting for multiple factors, increased days of moderate to vigorous activity correlated with larger normalized brain volume in multiple regions including total gray matter; white matter; hippocampus; and frontal, parietal, and occipital lobes.
IN PRACTICE:
“We found that even moderate levels of physical activity, such as taking fewer than 4,000 steps a day, can have a positive effect on brain health. This is much less than the often-suggested 10,000 steps, making it a more achievable goal for many people,” co-author David Merrill, MD, with Pacific Brain Health Center, Santa Monica, California, said in a statement.
SOURCE:
The study, with first author Cyrus A. Raji, MD, PhD, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, was published online in the Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease.
LIMITATIONS:
Participants self-reported physical activity in the past 2 weeks, which does not reflect a lifetime of activity levels. The correlation identified between physical activity and brain volumes may not be solely attributable to physical activity alone.
DISCLOSURES:
The study received funding from several health centers and foundations. Dr. Raji consults for Brainreader ApS, Neurevolution LLC, Apollo Health, Voxelwise Imaging Technology, and Pacific Neuroscience Foundation and is an editorial board member of the Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease but was not involved in the peer-review process.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
H pylori Infection Linked to Increased Alzheimer’s Risk
TOPLINE:
results of a large and lengthy population-based study suggest.
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers identified all cases with a first-time diagnosis of AD and matched each AD case to up to 40 AD-free control cases on the basis of age, sex, cohort entry date, and duration of follow-up.
- The exposure of interest was CAHPI, defined based on an algorithm using clinical guidelines and recommendations on the management of H pylori (HP) infection, with researchers focusing on infected individuals presenting with symptoms or developing serious complications from the infection.
- Researchers performed several sensitivity analyses, which included repeating the primary analysis using alternate lag periods, restricting the cohort to participants with AD (not vascular, alcoholic, and unspecified dementia), and using salmonellosis, an infection not previously associated with AD, as a negative control exposure.
TAKEAWAY:
- Compared with no exposure to CAHPI, exposure to CAHPI was associated with a moderately increased risk for AD (odds ratio [OR], 1.11; 95% CI, 1.01-1.21), with no major effect modification by demographics or socioeconomic status.
- The increased risk peaked 7.3-10.8 years after CAHPI onset (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.05-1.47) before decreasing.
- Sensitivity analyses yielded findings that were overall consistent with those of the primary analysis.
- The analysis with salmonellosis as a negative control exposure showed no association with the risk for AD (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.82-1.29).
IN PRACTICE:
“These results support the notion of HP infection as a potential modifiable risk factor of AD” and “pave the way for future randomized controlled trials that would assess the impact and cost-effectiveness of population-based targeted interventions such as individualized HP eradication programs, on the development of AD,” the authors write.
SOURCE:
The study was conducted by Antonios Douros, Department of Medicine, and Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics, and Occupational Health, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, and colleagues. It was published online in Alzheimer’s & Dementia.
LIMITATIONS:
Given the observational nature of the study, residual confounding is possible. Because the exposure definition was on the basis of CAHPI recorded by general practitioners, exposure misclassification due to symptomatic patients not seeking primary care is possible, as is outcome misclassification. The authors can’t rule out the possibility of an association between asymptomatic H pylori infection and AD risk.
DISCLOSURES:
The study received funding from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Douros has no relevant conflicts of interest; see paper for disclosures of other authors.
Pauline Anderson has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
results of a large and lengthy population-based study suggest.
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers identified all cases with a first-time diagnosis of AD and matched each AD case to up to 40 AD-free control cases on the basis of age, sex, cohort entry date, and duration of follow-up.
- The exposure of interest was CAHPI, defined based on an algorithm using clinical guidelines and recommendations on the management of H pylori (HP) infection, with researchers focusing on infected individuals presenting with symptoms or developing serious complications from the infection.
- Researchers performed several sensitivity analyses, which included repeating the primary analysis using alternate lag periods, restricting the cohort to participants with AD (not vascular, alcoholic, and unspecified dementia), and using salmonellosis, an infection not previously associated with AD, as a negative control exposure.
TAKEAWAY:
- Compared with no exposure to CAHPI, exposure to CAHPI was associated with a moderately increased risk for AD (odds ratio [OR], 1.11; 95% CI, 1.01-1.21), with no major effect modification by demographics or socioeconomic status.
- The increased risk peaked 7.3-10.8 years after CAHPI onset (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.05-1.47) before decreasing.
- Sensitivity analyses yielded findings that were overall consistent with those of the primary analysis.
- The analysis with salmonellosis as a negative control exposure showed no association with the risk for AD (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.82-1.29).
IN PRACTICE:
“These results support the notion of HP infection as a potential modifiable risk factor of AD” and “pave the way for future randomized controlled trials that would assess the impact and cost-effectiveness of population-based targeted interventions such as individualized HP eradication programs, on the development of AD,” the authors write.
SOURCE:
The study was conducted by Antonios Douros, Department of Medicine, and Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics, and Occupational Health, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, and colleagues. It was published online in Alzheimer’s & Dementia.
LIMITATIONS:
Given the observational nature of the study, residual confounding is possible. Because the exposure definition was on the basis of CAHPI recorded by general practitioners, exposure misclassification due to symptomatic patients not seeking primary care is possible, as is outcome misclassification. The authors can’t rule out the possibility of an association between asymptomatic H pylori infection and AD risk.
DISCLOSURES:
The study received funding from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Douros has no relevant conflicts of interest; see paper for disclosures of other authors.
Pauline Anderson has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
results of a large and lengthy population-based study suggest.
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers identified all cases with a first-time diagnosis of AD and matched each AD case to up to 40 AD-free control cases on the basis of age, sex, cohort entry date, and duration of follow-up.
- The exposure of interest was CAHPI, defined based on an algorithm using clinical guidelines and recommendations on the management of H pylori (HP) infection, with researchers focusing on infected individuals presenting with symptoms or developing serious complications from the infection.
- Researchers performed several sensitivity analyses, which included repeating the primary analysis using alternate lag periods, restricting the cohort to participants with AD (not vascular, alcoholic, and unspecified dementia), and using salmonellosis, an infection not previously associated with AD, as a negative control exposure.
TAKEAWAY:
- Compared with no exposure to CAHPI, exposure to CAHPI was associated with a moderately increased risk for AD (odds ratio [OR], 1.11; 95% CI, 1.01-1.21), with no major effect modification by demographics or socioeconomic status.
- The increased risk peaked 7.3-10.8 years after CAHPI onset (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.05-1.47) before decreasing.
- Sensitivity analyses yielded findings that were overall consistent with those of the primary analysis.
- The analysis with salmonellosis as a negative control exposure showed no association with the risk for AD (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.82-1.29).
IN PRACTICE:
“These results support the notion of HP infection as a potential modifiable risk factor of AD” and “pave the way for future randomized controlled trials that would assess the impact and cost-effectiveness of population-based targeted interventions such as individualized HP eradication programs, on the development of AD,” the authors write.
SOURCE:
The study was conducted by Antonios Douros, Department of Medicine, and Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics, and Occupational Health, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, and colleagues. It was published online in Alzheimer’s & Dementia.
LIMITATIONS:
Given the observational nature of the study, residual confounding is possible. Because the exposure definition was on the basis of CAHPI recorded by general practitioners, exposure misclassification due to symptomatic patients not seeking primary care is possible, as is outcome misclassification. The authors can’t rule out the possibility of an association between asymptomatic H pylori infection and AD risk.
DISCLOSURES:
The study received funding from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Douros has no relevant conflicts of interest; see paper for disclosures of other authors.
Pauline Anderson has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Hearing Aids and Dementia Risk Study Retracted
The study was published April 13 in The Lancet Public Health and reported at that time. It was retracted by the journal on December 12.
According to the retraction notice, the journal editors in late November were informed by the authors of the paper that an error was introduced in the output format setting of their SAS codes, which led to data for people with hearing loss using hearing aids and those with hearing loss without using hearing aids being switched.
This led to errors in their analysis, “which render their findings and conclusions false and misleading,” the retraction notice states.
These errors were identified by the researchers following an exchange with scientists seeking to reproduce the authors’ findings.In a statement, The Lancet Group said it “takes issues relating to research integrity extremely seriously” and follows best-practice guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).
“Retractions are a rare but important part of the publishing process, and we are grateful to the scientists who prompted the re-examination of the data,” the statement reads.
Despite the retraction, other studies have suggested a link between hearing and dementia.
One study of US Medicare beneficiaries found a 61% higher dementia prevalence in those with moderate to severe hearing loss compared to those with normal hearing.
In this research, even mild hearing loss was associated with increased dementia risk, although it was not statistically significant, and use of hearing aids was tied to a 32% decrease in dementia prevalence.
In addition, a large meta-analysis showed that hearing aids significantly reduce the risk for cognitive decline and dementia and even improve short-term cognitive function in individuals with hearing loss.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
The study was published April 13 in The Lancet Public Health and reported at that time. It was retracted by the journal on December 12.
According to the retraction notice, the journal editors in late November were informed by the authors of the paper that an error was introduced in the output format setting of their SAS codes, which led to data for people with hearing loss using hearing aids and those with hearing loss without using hearing aids being switched.
This led to errors in their analysis, “which render their findings and conclusions false and misleading,” the retraction notice states.
These errors were identified by the researchers following an exchange with scientists seeking to reproduce the authors’ findings.In a statement, The Lancet Group said it “takes issues relating to research integrity extremely seriously” and follows best-practice guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).
“Retractions are a rare but important part of the publishing process, and we are grateful to the scientists who prompted the re-examination of the data,” the statement reads.
Despite the retraction, other studies have suggested a link between hearing and dementia.
One study of US Medicare beneficiaries found a 61% higher dementia prevalence in those with moderate to severe hearing loss compared to those with normal hearing.
In this research, even mild hearing loss was associated with increased dementia risk, although it was not statistically significant, and use of hearing aids was tied to a 32% decrease in dementia prevalence.
In addition, a large meta-analysis showed that hearing aids significantly reduce the risk for cognitive decline and dementia and even improve short-term cognitive function in individuals with hearing loss.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
The study was published April 13 in The Lancet Public Health and reported at that time. It was retracted by the journal on December 12.
According to the retraction notice, the journal editors in late November were informed by the authors of the paper that an error was introduced in the output format setting of their SAS codes, which led to data for people with hearing loss using hearing aids and those with hearing loss without using hearing aids being switched.
This led to errors in their analysis, “which render their findings and conclusions false and misleading,” the retraction notice states.
These errors were identified by the researchers following an exchange with scientists seeking to reproduce the authors’ findings.In a statement, The Lancet Group said it “takes issues relating to research integrity extremely seriously” and follows best-practice guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).
“Retractions are a rare but important part of the publishing process, and we are grateful to the scientists who prompted the re-examination of the data,” the statement reads.
Despite the retraction, other studies have suggested a link between hearing and dementia.
One study of US Medicare beneficiaries found a 61% higher dementia prevalence in those with moderate to severe hearing loss compared to those with normal hearing.
In this research, even mild hearing loss was associated with increased dementia risk, although it was not statistically significant, and use of hearing aids was tied to a 32% decrease in dementia prevalence.
In addition, a large meta-analysis showed that hearing aids significantly reduce the risk for cognitive decline and dementia and even improve short-term cognitive function in individuals with hearing loss.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
FROM THE LANCET PUBLIC HEALTH
Light therapy a beacon of hope for Alzheimer’s?
TOPLINE:
Light therapy leads to significant improvement in several sleep measures and helps alleviate depression and agitation in patients with Alzheimer’s disease (AD), a meta-analysis of 15 high-quality trials shows.
METHODOLOGY:
- This meta-analysis included 15 randomized controlled trials involving 598 patients with mild to moderate AD.
- The included trials were written in English, published between 2005 and 2022, and performed in seven countries. A fixed-effects model was used for data analysis.
TAKEAWAY:
- Light therapy significantly improved sleep efficiency (mean difference [MD], −2.42; P < .00001), increased interdaily stability (MD, −0.04; P < .00001), and reduced intradaily variability (MD, −0.04; P < .00001), indicating better sleep quality.
- Light therapy reduced agitation (MD, −3.97; P < .00001), depression (MD, −2.55; P < .00001), and caregiver burden (MD, −3.57; P < .00001).
- Light therapy also had a significant advantage over usual care in reducing the severity of psychobehavioral symptoms as assessed by the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (MD, −3.07; P < .00001).
- Light therapy had no statistically significant effect on improving cognitive function as measured by the Mini-Mental State Examination.
IN PRACTICE:
“These findings, combined with its low side-effects, suggest the role of light therapy as a promising treatment for AD. Although light therapy has fewer side effects than pharmacological treatment, adverse behavioral outcomes in patients due to bright light exposure should be considered,” the authors wrote.
SOURCE:
The study by Lili Zang and colleagues from Weifang Medical University School of Nursing, Shandong Province, China, was published online on December 6, 2023, in PLOS One.
LIMITATIONS:
The types and degrees of dementia in the included studies were inconsistent, potentially affecting the outcome indicators. Some articles did not clearly describe their randomization and allocation concealment methods, indicating possible bias in these studies.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was supported by the Natural Science Foundation of Shandong Province, China. The authors declared no competing interests.
Megan Brooks has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
Light therapy leads to significant improvement in several sleep measures and helps alleviate depression and agitation in patients with Alzheimer’s disease (AD), a meta-analysis of 15 high-quality trials shows.
METHODOLOGY:
- This meta-analysis included 15 randomized controlled trials involving 598 patients with mild to moderate AD.
- The included trials were written in English, published between 2005 and 2022, and performed in seven countries. A fixed-effects model was used for data analysis.
TAKEAWAY:
- Light therapy significantly improved sleep efficiency (mean difference [MD], −2.42; P < .00001), increased interdaily stability (MD, −0.04; P < .00001), and reduced intradaily variability (MD, −0.04; P < .00001), indicating better sleep quality.
- Light therapy reduced agitation (MD, −3.97; P < .00001), depression (MD, −2.55; P < .00001), and caregiver burden (MD, −3.57; P < .00001).
- Light therapy also had a significant advantage over usual care in reducing the severity of psychobehavioral symptoms as assessed by the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (MD, −3.07; P < .00001).
- Light therapy had no statistically significant effect on improving cognitive function as measured by the Mini-Mental State Examination.
IN PRACTICE:
“These findings, combined with its low side-effects, suggest the role of light therapy as a promising treatment for AD. Although light therapy has fewer side effects than pharmacological treatment, adverse behavioral outcomes in patients due to bright light exposure should be considered,” the authors wrote.
SOURCE:
The study by Lili Zang and colleagues from Weifang Medical University School of Nursing, Shandong Province, China, was published online on December 6, 2023, in PLOS One.
LIMITATIONS:
The types and degrees of dementia in the included studies were inconsistent, potentially affecting the outcome indicators. Some articles did not clearly describe their randomization and allocation concealment methods, indicating possible bias in these studies.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was supported by the Natural Science Foundation of Shandong Province, China. The authors declared no competing interests.
Megan Brooks has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
Light therapy leads to significant improvement in several sleep measures and helps alleviate depression and agitation in patients with Alzheimer’s disease (AD), a meta-analysis of 15 high-quality trials shows.
METHODOLOGY:
- This meta-analysis included 15 randomized controlled trials involving 598 patients with mild to moderate AD.
- The included trials were written in English, published between 2005 and 2022, and performed in seven countries. A fixed-effects model was used for data analysis.
TAKEAWAY:
- Light therapy significantly improved sleep efficiency (mean difference [MD], −2.42; P < .00001), increased interdaily stability (MD, −0.04; P < .00001), and reduced intradaily variability (MD, −0.04; P < .00001), indicating better sleep quality.
- Light therapy reduced agitation (MD, −3.97; P < .00001), depression (MD, −2.55; P < .00001), and caregiver burden (MD, −3.57; P < .00001).
- Light therapy also had a significant advantage over usual care in reducing the severity of psychobehavioral symptoms as assessed by the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (MD, −3.07; P < .00001).
- Light therapy had no statistically significant effect on improving cognitive function as measured by the Mini-Mental State Examination.
IN PRACTICE:
“These findings, combined with its low side-effects, suggest the role of light therapy as a promising treatment for AD. Although light therapy has fewer side effects than pharmacological treatment, adverse behavioral outcomes in patients due to bright light exposure should be considered,” the authors wrote.
SOURCE:
The study by Lili Zang and colleagues from Weifang Medical University School of Nursing, Shandong Province, China, was published online on December 6, 2023, in PLOS One.
LIMITATIONS:
The types and degrees of dementia in the included studies were inconsistent, potentially affecting the outcome indicators. Some articles did not clearly describe their randomization and allocation concealment methods, indicating possible bias in these studies.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was supported by the Natural Science Foundation of Shandong Province, China. The authors declared no competing interests.
Megan Brooks has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Specific personality traits may influence dementia risk
TOPLINE:
, whereas those who score highly for neuroticism and have a negative outlook may be at increased risk, new research suggests.
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers examined the link between the “big five” personality traits (conscientiousness, extraversion, openness to experience, neuroticism, and agreeableness) and subjective well-being (positive and negative affect and life satisfaction) and clinical symptoms of dementia (cognitive test performance) and neuropathology at autopsy.
- Data for the meta-analysis came from eight longitudinal studies with 44,531 adults (aged 49-81 years at baseline; 26%-61% women) followed for up to 21 years, during which 1703 incident cases of dementia occurred.
- Bayesian multilevel models tested whether personality traits and subjective well-being differentially predicted neuropsychological and neuropathologic characteristics of dementia.
TAKEAWAY:
- High neuroticism, negative affect, and low conscientiousness were risk factors for dementia, whereas conscientiousness, extraversion, and positive affect were protective.
- Across all analyses, there was directional consistency in estimates across samples, which is noteworthy given between-study differences in sociodemographic and design characteristics.
- No consistent associations were found between psychological factors and neuropathology.
- However, individuals higher in conscientiousness who did not receive a clinical diagnosis tended to have a lower Braak stage at autopsy, suggesting the possibility that conscientiousness is related to cognitive resilience.
IN PRACTICE:
“These results replicate and extend evidence that personality traits may assist in early identification and dementia-care planning strategies, as well as risk stratification for dementia diagnosis. Moreover, our findings provide further support for recommendations to incorporate psychological trait measures into clinical screening or diagnosis criteria,” the authors write. SOURCE:
The study, with first author Emorie Beck, PhD, Department of Psychology, University of California, Davis, was published online on November 29, 2023, in Alzheimer’s & Dementia.
LIMITATIONS:
Access to autopsy data was limited. The findings may not generalize across racial groups. The analysis did not examine dynamic associations between changing personality and cognition and neuropathology over time.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was supported by grants from the National Institute on Aging. The authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
, whereas those who score highly for neuroticism and have a negative outlook may be at increased risk, new research suggests.
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers examined the link between the “big five” personality traits (conscientiousness, extraversion, openness to experience, neuroticism, and agreeableness) and subjective well-being (positive and negative affect and life satisfaction) and clinical symptoms of dementia (cognitive test performance) and neuropathology at autopsy.
- Data for the meta-analysis came from eight longitudinal studies with 44,531 adults (aged 49-81 years at baseline; 26%-61% women) followed for up to 21 years, during which 1703 incident cases of dementia occurred.
- Bayesian multilevel models tested whether personality traits and subjective well-being differentially predicted neuropsychological and neuropathologic characteristics of dementia.
TAKEAWAY:
- High neuroticism, negative affect, and low conscientiousness were risk factors for dementia, whereas conscientiousness, extraversion, and positive affect were protective.
- Across all analyses, there was directional consistency in estimates across samples, which is noteworthy given between-study differences in sociodemographic and design characteristics.
- No consistent associations were found between psychological factors and neuropathology.
- However, individuals higher in conscientiousness who did not receive a clinical diagnosis tended to have a lower Braak stage at autopsy, suggesting the possibility that conscientiousness is related to cognitive resilience.
IN PRACTICE:
“These results replicate and extend evidence that personality traits may assist in early identification and dementia-care planning strategies, as well as risk stratification for dementia diagnosis. Moreover, our findings provide further support for recommendations to incorporate psychological trait measures into clinical screening or diagnosis criteria,” the authors write. SOURCE:
The study, with first author Emorie Beck, PhD, Department of Psychology, University of California, Davis, was published online on November 29, 2023, in Alzheimer’s & Dementia.
LIMITATIONS:
Access to autopsy data was limited. The findings may not generalize across racial groups. The analysis did not examine dynamic associations between changing personality and cognition and neuropathology over time.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was supported by grants from the National Institute on Aging. The authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
, whereas those who score highly for neuroticism and have a negative outlook may be at increased risk, new research suggests.
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers examined the link between the “big five” personality traits (conscientiousness, extraversion, openness to experience, neuroticism, and agreeableness) and subjective well-being (positive and negative affect and life satisfaction) and clinical symptoms of dementia (cognitive test performance) and neuropathology at autopsy.
- Data for the meta-analysis came from eight longitudinal studies with 44,531 adults (aged 49-81 years at baseline; 26%-61% women) followed for up to 21 years, during which 1703 incident cases of dementia occurred.
- Bayesian multilevel models tested whether personality traits and subjective well-being differentially predicted neuropsychological and neuropathologic characteristics of dementia.
TAKEAWAY:
- High neuroticism, negative affect, and low conscientiousness were risk factors for dementia, whereas conscientiousness, extraversion, and positive affect were protective.
- Across all analyses, there was directional consistency in estimates across samples, which is noteworthy given between-study differences in sociodemographic and design characteristics.
- No consistent associations were found between psychological factors and neuropathology.
- However, individuals higher in conscientiousness who did not receive a clinical diagnosis tended to have a lower Braak stage at autopsy, suggesting the possibility that conscientiousness is related to cognitive resilience.
IN PRACTICE:
“These results replicate and extend evidence that personality traits may assist in early identification and dementia-care planning strategies, as well as risk stratification for dementia diagnosis. Moreover, our findings provide further support for recommendations to incorporate psychological trait measures into clinical screening or diagnosis criteria,” the authors write. SOURCE:
The study, with first author Emorie Beck, PhD, Department of Psychology, University of California, Davis, was published online on November 29, 2023, in Alzheimer’s & Dementia.
LIMITATIONS:
Access to autopsy data was limited. The findings may not generalize across racial groups. The analysis did not examine dynamic associations between changing personality and cognition and neuropathology over time.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was supported by grants from the National Institute on Aging. The authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Younger heart disease onset tied to higher dementia risk
TOPLINE:
, with the risk highest — at 36% — if onset is before age 45, results of a large observational study show.
METHODOLOGY:
- The study included 432,667 of the more than 500,000 participants in the UK Biobank, with a mean age of 56.9 years, 50,685 (11.7%) of whom had CHD and 50,445 had data on age at CHD onset.
- Researchers divided participants into three groups according to age at CHD onset (below 45 years, 45-59 years, and 60 years and older), and carried out a propensity score matching analysis.
- Outcomes included all-cause dementia, AD, and VD.
- Covariates included age, sex, race, educational level, body mass index, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, smoking status, alcohol intake, exercise, depressed mood, hypertension, diabetes, statin use, and apolipoprotein E4 status.
TAKEAWAY:
- During a median follow-up of 12.8 years, researchers identified 5876 cases of all-cause dementia, 2540 cases of AD, and 1220 cases of VD.
- Fully adjusted models showed participants with CHD had significantly higher risks than those without CHD of developing all-cause dementia (hazard ratio [HR], 1.36; 95% CI, 1.28-1.45; P < .001), AD (HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.02-1.24; P = .019), and VD (HR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.56-2.02; P < .001). The higher risk for VD suggests CHD has a more profound influence on neuropathologic changes involved in this dementia type, said the authors.
- Those with CHD diagnosed at a younger age had higher risks of developing dementia (HR per 10-year decrease in age, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.20-1.30 for all-cause dementia, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.20-1.38 for AD, and 1.22; 95% CI, 1.13-1.31 for VD; P for all < .001).
- Propensity score matching analysis showed patients with CHD had significantly higher risks for dementia compared with matched controls, with the highest risk seen in patients diagnosed before age 45 (HR, 2.40; 95% CI, 1.79-3.20; P < .001), followed by those diagnosed between 45 and 59 years (HR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.32-1.62; P < .001) and at or above 60 years (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.03-1.19; P = .005), with similar results for AD and VD.
IN PRACTICE:
The findings suggest “additional attention should be paid to the cognitive status of patients with CHD, especially the ones diagnosed with CHD at a young age,” the authors conclude, noting that “timely intervention, such as cognitive training, could be implemented once signs of cognitive deteriorations are detected.”
SOURCE:
The study was conducted by Jie Liang, BS, School of Nursing, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, and colleagues. It was published online on November 29, 2023, in the Journal of the American Heart Association.
LIMITATIONS:
As this is an observational study, it can’t conclude a causal relationship. Although the authors adjusted for many potential confounders, unknown risk factors that also contribute to CHD can’t be ruled out. As the study excluded 69,744 participants, selection bias is possible. The study included a mostly White population.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China, the Non-Profit Central Research Institute Fund of the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, and the China Medical Board. The authors have no relevant conflicts of interest.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
, with the risk highest — at 36% — if onset is before age 45, results of a large observational study show.
METHODOLOGY:
- The study included 432,667 of the more than 500,000 participants in the UK Biobank, with a mean age of 56.9 years, 50,685 (11.7%) of whom had CHD and 50,445 had data on age at CHD onset.
- Researchers divided participants into three groups according to age at CHD onset (below 45 years, 45-59 years, and 60 years and older), and carried out a propensity score matching analysis.
- Outcomes included all-cause dementia, AD, and VD.
- Covariates included age, sex, race, educational level, body mass index, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, smoking status, alcohol intake, exercise, depressed mood, hypertension, diabetes, statin use, and apolipoprotein E4 status.
TAKEAWAY:
- During a median follow-up of 12.8 years, researchers identified 5876 cases of all-cause dementia, 2540 cases of AD, and 1220 cases of VD.
- Fully adjusted models showed participants with CHD had significantly higher risks than those without CHD of developing all-cause dementia (hazard ratio [HR], 1.36; 95% CI, 1.28-1.45; P < .001), AD (HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.02-1.24; P = .019), and VD (HR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.56-2.02; P < .001). The higher risk for VD suggests CHD has a more profound influence on neuropathologic changes involved in this dementia type, said the authors.
- Those with CHD diagnosed at a younger age had higher risks of developing dementia (HR per 10-year decrease in age, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.20-1.30 for all-cause dementia, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.20-1.38 for AD, and 1.22; 95% CI, 1.13-1.31 for VD; P for all < .001).
- Propensity score matching analysis showed patients with CHD had significantly higher risks for dementia compared with matched controls, with the highest risk seen in patients diagnosed before age 45 (HR, 2.40; 95% CI, 1.79-3.20; P < .001), followed by those diagnosed between 45 and 59 years (HR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.32-1.62; P < .001) and at or above 60 years (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.03-1.19; P = .005), with similar results for AD and VD.
IN PRACTICE:
The findings suggest “additional attention should be paid to the cognitive status of patients with CHD, especially the ones diagnosed with CHD at a young age,” the authors conclude, noting that “timely intervention, such as cognitive training, could be implemented once signs of cognitive deteriorations are detected.”
SOURCE:
The study was conducted by Jie Liang, BS, School of Nursing, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, and colleagues. It was published online on November 29, 2023, in the Journal of the American Heart Association.
LIMITATIONS:
As this is an observational study, it can’t conclude a causal relationship. Although the authors adjusted for many potential confounders, unknown risk factors that also contribute to CHD can’t be ruled out. As the study excluded 69,744 participants, selection bias is possible. The study included a mostly White population.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China, the Non-Profit Central Research Institute Fund of the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, and the China Medical Board. The authors have no relevant conflicts of interest.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
, with the risk highest — at 36% — if onset is before age 45, results of a large observational study show.
METHODOLOGY:
- The study included 432,667 of the more than 500,000 participants in the UK Biobank, with a mean age of 56.9 years, 50,685 (11.7%) of whom had CHD and 50,445 had data on age at CHD onset.
- Researchers divided participants into three groups according to age at CHD onset (below 45 years, 45-59 years, and 60 years and older), and carried out a propensity score matching analysis.
- Outcomes included all-cause dementia, AD, and VD.
- Covariates included age, sex, race, educational level, body mass index, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, smoking status, alcohol intake, exercise, depressed mood, hypertension, diabetes, statin use, and apolipoprotein E4 status.
TAKEAWAY:
- During a median follow-up of 12.8 years, researchers identified 5876 cases of all-cause dementia, 2540 cases of AD, and 1220 cases of VD.
- Fully adjusted models showed participants with CHD had significantly higher risks than those without CHD of developing all-cause dementia (hazard ratio [HR], 1.36; 95% CI, 1.28-1.45; P < .001), AD (HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.02-1.24; P = .019), and VD (HR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.56-2.02; P < .001). The higher risk for VD suggests CHD has a more profound influence on neuropathologic changes involved in this dementia type, said the authors.
- Those with CHD diagnosed at a younger age had higher risks of developing dementia (HR per 10-year decrease in age, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.20-1.30 for all-cause dementia, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.20-1.38 for AD, and 1.22; 95% CI, 1.13-1.31 for VD; P for all < .001).
- Propensity score matching analysis showed patients with CHD had significantly higher risks for dementia compared with matched controls, with the highest risk seen in patients diagnosed before age 45 (HR, 2.40; 95% CI, 1.79-3.20; P < .001), followed by those diagnosed between 45 and 59 years (HR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.32-1.62; P < .001) and at or above 60 years (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.03-1.19; P = .005), with similar results for AD and VD.
IN PRACTICE:
The findings suggest “additional attention should be paid to the cognitive status of patients with CHD, especially the ones diagnosed with CHD at a young age,” the authors conclude, noting that “timely intervention, such as cognitive training, could be implemented once signs of cognitive deteriorations are detected.”
SOURCE:
The study was conducted by Jie Liang, BS, School of Nursing, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, and colleagues. It was published online on November 29, 2023, in the Journal of the American Heart Association.
LIMITATIONS:
As this is an observational study, it can’t conclude a causal relationship. Although the authors adjusted for many potential confounders, unknown risk factors that also contribute to CHD can’t be ruled out. As the study excluded 69,744 participants, selection bias is possible. The study included a mostly White population.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China, the Non-Profit Central Research Institute Fund of the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, and the China Medical Board. The authors have no relevant conflicts of interest.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Excessive TV-watching tied to elevated risk for dementia, Parkinson’s disease, and depression
TOPLINE:
whereas a limited amount of daily computer use that is not work-related is linked to a lower risk for dementia.
METHODOLOGY:
- Investigators analyzed data on 473,184 people aged 39-72 years from the UK Biobank who were enrolled from 2006 to 2010 and followed until a diagnosis of dementia, PD, depression, death, or study end (2018 for Wales residents; 2021 for residents of England and Scotland).
- Participants reported on the number of hours they spent outside of work exercising, watching television, and using the computer.
- MRI was conducted to determine participants’ brain volume.
TAKEAWAY:
- During the study, 6096 people developed dementia, 3000 developed PD, 23,600 developed depression, 1200 developed dementia and depression, and 486 developed PD and depression.
- Compared with those who watched TV for under 1 hour per day, those who reported watching 4 or more hours per day had a 28% higher risk for dementia (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.28; 95% CI, 1.17-1.39), a 35% higher risk for depression, (aHR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.29-1.40) and a 16% greater risk for PD (aHR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.03-1.29).
- However, moderate computer use outside of work seemed somewhat protective. Participants who used the computer for 30-60 minutes per day had lower risks for dementia (aHR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.64-0.72), PD, (aHR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.79-0.93), and depression (aHR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.83-0.88) compared with those who reported the lowest levels of computer usage.
- Replacing 30 minutes per day of computer time with an equal amount of structured exercise was associated with decreased risk for dementia (aHR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.85-0.95) and PD (aHR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.78-0.90).
IN PRACTICE:
The association between extended periods of TV use and higher risk for PD and dementia could be explained by a lack of activity, the authors note. They add that sedentary behavior is, “associated with biomarkers of low-grade inflammation and changes in inflammation markers that could initiate and or worsen neuroinflammation and contribute to neurodegeneration.”
SOURCE:
Hanzhang Wu, PhD, of Tianjin University of Traditional Medicine in Tianjin, China, led the study, which was published online in the International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity.
LIMITATIONS:
Screen behaviors were assessed using self-report measures, which is subject to recall bias. Also, there may have been variables confounding the findings for which investigators did not account.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China, the Tianjin Major Public Health Science and Technology Project, the National Health Commission of China, the Food Science and Technology Foundation of Chinese Institute of Food Science and Technology, the China Cohort Consortium, and the Chinese Nutrition Society Nutrition Research Foundation–DSM Research Fund, China. There were no disclosures reported.
Eve Bender has no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
whereas a limited amount of daily computer use that is not work-related is linked to a lower risk for dementia.
METHODOLOGY:
- Investigators analyzed data on 473,184 people aged 39-72 years from the UK Biobank who were enrolled from 2006 to 2010 and followed until a diagnosis of dementia, PD, depression, death, or study end (2018 for Wales residents; 2021 for residents of England and Scotland).
- Participants reported on the number of hours they spent outside of work exercising, watching television, and using the computer.
- MRI was conducted to determine participants’ brain volume.
TAKEAWAY:
- During the study, 6096 people developed dementia, 3000 developed PD, 23,600 developed depression, 1200 developed dementia and depression, and 486 developed PD and depression.
- Compared with those who watched TV for under 1 hour per day, those who reported watching 4 or more hours per day had a 28% higher risk for dementia (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.28; 95% CI, 1.17-1.39), a 35% higher risk for depression, (aHR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.29-1.40) and a 16% greater risk for PD (aHR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.03-1.29).
- However, moderate computer use outside of work seemed somewhat protective. Participants who used the computer for 30-60 minutes per day had lower risks for dementia (aHR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.64-0.72), PD, (aHR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.79-0.93), and depression (aHR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.83-0.88) compared with those who reported the lowest levels of computer usage.
- Replacing 30 minutes per day of computer time with an equal amount of structured exercise was associated with decreased risk for dementia (aHR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.85-0.95) and PD (aHR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.78-0.90).
IN PRACTICE:
The association between extended periods of TV use and higher risk for PD and dementia could be explained by a lack of activity, the authors note. They add that sedentary behavior is, “associated with biomarkers of low-grade inflammation and changes in inflammation markers that could initiate and or worsen neuroinflammation and contribute to neurodegeneration.”
SOURCE:
Hanzhang Wu, PhD, of Tianjin University of Traditional Medicine in Tianjin, China, led the study, which was published online in the International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity.
LIMITATIONS:
Screen behaviors were assessed using self-report measures, which is subject to recall bias. Also, there may have been variables confounding the findings for which investigators did not account.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China, the Tianjin Major Public Health Science and Technology Project, the National Health Commission of China, the Food Science and Technology Foundation of Chinese Institute of Food Science and Technology, the China Cohort Consortium, and the Chinese Nutrition Society Nutrition Research Foundation–DSM Research Fund, China. There were no disclosures reported.
Eve Bender has no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
whereas a limited amount of daily computer use that is not work-related is linked to a lower risk for dementia.
METHODOLOGY:
- Investigators analyzed data on 473,184 people aged 39-72 years from the UK Biobank who were enrolled from 2006 to 2010 and followed until a diagnosis of dementia, PD, depression, death, or study end (2018 for Wales residents; 2021 for residents of England and Scotland).
- Participants reported on the number of hours they spent outside of work exercising, watching television, and using the computer.
- MRI was conducted to determine participants’ brain volume.
TAKEAWAY:
- During the study, 6096 people developed dementia, 3000 developed PD, 23,600 developed depression, 1200 developed dementia and depression, and 486 developed PD and depression.
- Compared with those who watched TV for under 1 hour per day, those who reported watching 4 or more hours per day had a 28% higher risk for dementia (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.28; 95% CI, 1.17-1.39), a 35% higher risk for depression, (aHR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.29-1.40) and a 16% greater risk for PD (aHR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.03-1.29).
- However, moderate computer use outside of work seemed somewhat protective. Participants who used the computer for 30-60 minutes per day had lower risks for dementia (aHR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.64-0.72), PD, (aHR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.79-0.93), and depression (aHR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.83-0.88) compared with those who reported the lowest levels of computer usage.
- Replacing 30 minutes per day of computer time with an equal amount of structured exercise was associated with decreased risk for dementia (aHR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.85-0.95) and PD (aHR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.78-0.90).
IN PRACTICE:
The association between extended periods of TV use and higher risk for PD and dementia could be explained by a lack of activity, the authors note. They add that sedentary behavior is, “associated with biomarkers of low-grade inflammation and changes in inflammation markers that could initiate and or worsen neuroinflammation and contribute to neurodegeneration.”
SOURCE:
Hanzhang Wu, PhD, of Tianjin University of Traditional Medicine in Tianjin, China, led the study, which was published online in the International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity.
LIMITATIONS:
Screen behaviors were assessed using self-report measures, which is subject to recall bias. Also, there may have been variables confounding the findings for which investigators did not account.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China, the Tianjin Major Public Health Science and Technology Project, the National Health Commission of China, the Food Science and Technology Foundation of Chinese Institute of Food Science and Technology, the China Cohort Consortium, and the Chinese Nutrition Society Nutrition Research Foundation–DSM Research Fund, China. There were no disclosures reported.
Eve Bender has no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Food insecurity a dementia risk factor?
TOPLINE:
Food insecurity among older adults is associated with increased dementia risk, poorer memory function, and faster memory decline, new research indicates.
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers analyzed data on 7,012 adults (mean age, 67 years; 59% women) from the U.S. Health and Retirement Study.
- Food security status was assessed in 2013 using a validated survey, with cognitive outcomes evaluated between 2014 and 2018.
- Analyses were adjusted for demographics, socioeconomics, and health factors.
TAKEAWAY:
- About 18% of adults were food insecure, with 10% reporting low food security and 8% very low food security. About 11% of those aged 65+ in 2013 were food insecure.
- The odds of dementia were 38% higher (odds ratio, 1.38; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.15-1.67) in adults with low food security and 37% higher (OR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.11-1.59) in those with very low food security, compared with food-secure adults.
- Translated to years of excess cognitive aging, food insecurity was associated with increased dementia risk equivalent to roughly 1.3 excess years of aging.
- Low and very low food security were also associated with lower memory levels and faster age-related memory decline.
IN PRACTICE:
“Our study contributes to a limited literature by capitalizing on a large and diverse sample, validated exposure and outcome measures, and longitudinal data to robustly evaluate these associations, providing evidence in support of the connection between food insecurity in older adulthood and subsequent brain health,” the authors wrote. “Our findings highlight the need to improve food security in older adults and that doing so may protect individuals from cognitive decline and dementia.”
SOURCE:
The study, with first author Haobing Qian, PhD, with the University of California, San Francisco, was published online in JAMA Network Open.
LIMITATIONS:
Residual confounding cannot be ruled out. Food insecurity was not assessed prior to 2013. The researchers lacked information on clinical dementia diagnoses.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health. The authors reported no relevant conflicts of interest.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
Food insecurity among older adults is associated with increased dementia risk, poorer memory function, and faster memory decline, new research indicates.
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers analyzed data on 7,012 adults (mean age, 67 years; 59% women) from the U.S. Health and Retirement Study.
- Food security status was assessed in 2013 using a validated survey, with cognitive outcomes evaluated between 2014 and 2018.
- Analyses were adjusted for demographics, socioeconomics, and health factors.
TAKEAWAY:
- About 18% of adults were food insecure, with 10% reporting low food security and 8% very low food security. About 11% of those aged 65+ in 2013 were food insecure.
- The odds of dementia were 38% higher (odds ratio, 1.38; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.15-1.67) in adults with low food security and 37% higher (OR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.11-1.59) in those with very low food security, compared with food-secure adults.
- Translated to years of excess cognitive aging, food insecurity was associated with increased dementia risk equivalent to roughly 1.3 excess years of aging.
- Low and very low food security were also associated with lower memory levels and faster age-related memory decline.
IN PRACTICE:
“Our study contributes to a limited literature by capitalizing on a large and diverse sample, validated exposure and outcome measures, and longitudinal data to robustly evaluate these associations, providing evidence in support of the connection between food insecurity in older adulthood and subsequent brain health,” the authors wrote. “Our findings highlight the need to improve food security in older adults and that doing so may protect individuals from cognitive decline and dementia.”
SOURCE:
The study, with first author Haobing Qian, PhD, with the University of California, San Francisco, was published online in JAMA Network Open.
LIMITATIONS:
Residual confounding cannot be ruled out. Food insecurity was not assessed prior to 2013. The researchers lacked information on clinical dementia diagnoses.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health. The authors reported no relevant conflicts of interest.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
Food insecurity among older adults is associated with increased dementia risk, poorer memory function, and faster memory decline, new research indicates.
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers analyzed data on 7,012 adults (mean age, 67 years; 59% women) from the U.S. Health and Retirement Study.
- Food security status was assessed in 2013 using a validated survey, with cognitive outcomes evaluated between 2014 and 2018.
- Analyses were adjusted for demographics, socioeconomics, and health factors.
TAKEAWAY:
- About 18% of adults were food insecure, with 10% reporting low food security and 8% very low food security. About 11% of those aged 65+ in 2013 were food insecure.
- The odds of dementia were 38% higher (odds ratio, 1.38; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.15-1.67) in adults with low food security and 37% higher (OR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.11-1.59) in those with very low food security, compared with food-secure adults.
- Translated to years of excess cognitive aging, food insecurity was associated with increased dementia risk equivalent to roughly 1.3 excess years of aging.
- Low and very low food security were also associated with lower memory levels and faster age-related memory decline.
IN PRACTICE:
“Our study contributes to a limited literature by capitalizing on a large and diverse sample, validated exposure and outcome measures, and longitudinal data to robustly evaluate these associations, providing evidence in support of the connection between food insecurity in older adulthood and subsequent brain health,” the authors wrote. “Our findings highlight the need to improve food security in older adults and that doing so may protect individuals from cognitive decline and dementia.”
SOURCE:
The study, with first author Haobing Qian, PhD, with the University of California, San Francisco, was published online in JAMA Network Open.
LIMITATIONS:
Residual confounding cannot be ruled out. Food insecurity was not assessed prior to 2013. The researchers lacked information on clinical dementia diagnoses.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health. The authors reported no relevant conflicts of interest.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
PTSD symptoms in women tied to worse heart, brain health
TOPLINE:
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers conducted a cross-sectional study of 274 women (mean age, 59 years) participating in the MsBrain study of menopause and brain health.
- As part of the study, the women completed the PTSD Checklist–Civilian Version and underwent physical and neuropsychological testing, as well as carotid artery ultrasonography and brain MRI.
- Outcomes of interest were associations of PTSD symptoms with carotid intima media thickness (IMT), brain white matter hyperintensity volume (WMHV), and cognition, assessed in linear regression models.
- Interactions by APOEε4 were assessed; covariates included age, race/ethnicity, education, and CVD risk factors.
TAKEAWAY:
- Higher PTSD symptoms were associated with greater carotid IMT (P = .03); associations of PTSD symptoms with neurocognitive outcomes varied significantly by APOEε4 status.
- Among APOEε4 carriers, PTSD symptoms were associated with greater whole-brain WMHV (P = .009), periventricular WMHV (P = .02), deep WMHV (P = .01), and frontal WMHV (P = .04) in multivariable models.
- APOEε4 carriers with PTSD symptoms also had poorer cognition, specifically attention and working memory (P = .02), semantic fluency (P = .01), perceptual speed (P = .002) and processing speed (P = .002), in multivariable models.
IN PRACTICE:
“This study sheds important insight on the implications of PTSD symptoms to women’s cardiovascular and neurocognitive health. Our findings indicate that the APOEε4 genotype may identify a group of women with PTSD symptoms at particular risk for poor neurocognitive health,” the authors wrote.
SOURCE:
The study, with first author Rebecca Thurston, PhD, of the department of psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh, was published online in JAMA Network Open.
LIMITATIONS:
No diagnostic clinical interviews were conducted, and PTSD treatment was not assessed. All participants identified as cisgender, and most were non-Hispanic Black or White. The study was observational and cross-sectional, precluding assertions about directionality or causality.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health, the University of Pittsburgh Clinical and Translational Science Institute, and the University of Pittsburgh Small Molecule Biomarker Core. Dr. Thurston reported receiving personal fees from Astellas Pharma, Bayer, Hello Therapeutics, Vira Health, and Happify Health outside the submitted work.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers conducted a cross-sectional study of 274 women (mean age, 59 years) participating in the MsBrain study of menopause and brain health.
- As part of the study, the women completed the PTSD Checklist–Civilian Version and underwent physical and neuropsychological testing, as well as carotid artery ultrasonography and brain MRI.
- Outcomes of interest were associations of PTSD symptoms with carotid intima media thickness (IMT), brain white matter hyperintensity volume (WMHV), and cognition, assessed in linear regression models.
- Interactions by APOEε4 were assessed; covariates included age, race/ethnicity, education, and CVD risk factors.
TAKEAWAY:
- Higher PTSD symptoms were associated with greater carotid IMT (P = .03); associations of PTSD symptoms with neurocognitive outcomes varied significantly by APOEε4 status.
- Among APOEε4 carriers, PTSD symptoms were associated with greater whole-brain WMHV (P = .009), periventricular WMHV (P = .02), deep WMHV (P = .01), and frontal WMHV (P = .04) in multivariable models.
- APOEε4 carriers with PTSD symptoms also had poorer cognition, specifically attention and working memory (P = .02), semantic fluency (P = .01), perceptual speed (P = .002) and processing speed (P = .002), in multivariable models.
IN PRACTICE:
“This study sheds important insight on the implications of PTSD symptoms to women’s cardiovascular and neurocognitive health. Our findings indicate that the APOEε4 genotype may identify a group of women with PTSD symptoms at particular risk for poor neurocognitive health,” the authors wrote.
SOURCE:
The study, with first author Rebecca Thurston, PhD, of the department of psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh, was published online in JAMA Network Open.
LIMITATIONS:
No diagnostic clinical interviews were conducted, and PTSD treatment was not assessed. All participants identified as cisgender, and most were non-Hispanic Black or White. The study was observational and cross-sectional, precluding assertions about directionality or causality.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health, the University of Pittsburgh Clinical and Translational Science Institute, and the University of Pittsburgh Small Molecule Biomarker Core. Dr. Thurston reported receiving personal fees from Astellas Pharma, Bayer, Hello Therapeutics, Vira Health, and Happify Health outside the submitted work.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers conducted a cross-sectional study of 274 women (mean age, 59 years) participating in the MsBrain study of menopause and brain health.
- As part of the study, the women completed the PTSD Checklist–Civilian Version and underwent physical and neuropsychological testing, as well as carotid artery ultrasonography and brain MRI.
- Outcomes of interest were associations of PTSD symptoms with carotid intima media thickness (IMT), brain white matter hyperintensity volume (WMHV), and cognition, assessed in linear regression models.
- Interactions by APOEε4 were assessed; covariates included age, race/ethnicity, education, and CVD risk factors.
TAKEAWAY:
- Higher PTSD symptoms were associated with greater carotid IMT (P = .03); associations of PTSD symptoms with neurocognitive outcomes varied significantly by APOEε4 status.
- Among APOEε4 carriers, PTSD symptoms were associated with greater whole-brain WMHV (P = .009), periventricular WMHV (P = .02), deep WMHV (P = .01), and frontal WMHV (P = .04) in multivariable models.
- APOEε4 carriers with PTSD symptoms also had poorer cognition, specifically attention and working memory (P = .02), semantic fluency (P = .01), perceptual speed (P = .002) and processing speed (P = .002), in multivariable models.
IN PRACTICE:
“This study sheds important insight on the implications of PTSD symptoms to women’s cardiovascular and neurocognitive health. Our findings indicate that the APOEε4 genotype may identify a group of women with PTSD symptoms at particular risk for poor neurocognitive health,” the authors wrote.
SOURCE:
The study, with first author Rebecca Thurston, PhD, of the department of psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh, was published online in JAMA Network Open.
LIMITATIONS:
No diagnostic clinical interviews were conducted, and PTSD treatment was not assessed. All participants identified as cisgender, and most were non-Hispanic Black or White. The study was observational and cross-sectional, precluding assertions about directionality or causality.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health, the University of Pittsburgh Clinical and Translational Science Institute, and the University of Pittsburgh Small Molecule Biomarker Core. Dr. Thurston reported receiving personal fees from Astellas Pharma, Bayer, Hello Therapeutics, Vira Health, and Happify Health outside the submitted work.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Not all exercise is beneficial: The physical activity paradox explained
In the pursuit of optimal health, regular physical activity (PA) is recommended to protect against dementia, cardiovascular disease (CVD), cancer, and other noncommunicable diseases. A significant body of research suggests the benefits of PA are positively correlated with higher frequency and intensity – with more often deemed better. This research has spawned a focus on increasing step counts and investing in standing desks and other interventions aimed at keeping people active.
But
A study published recently in The Lancet Regional Health – Europe used registry data from more than 7,000 adults in Norway, following them from age 33 to 65 years, to assess PA trajectories and risks for later-life mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia at age 70 or older.
“Incorporating a life-course perspective gives a broader picture of how participants’ occupational histories relate to cognitive impairment later in life,” principal investigator Vegard Skirbekk, PhD, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, New York, said in an interview. Other studies typically have assessed occupational PA at a single time point, often close to the end of an individual’s career, and largely relied on self-report, he said.
Study participants worked in more than 300 different occupations. General physical activities performed on the included jobs required “considerable” use of arms and legs and moving the whole body, such as climbing, lifting, balancing, walking, stooping, and handling of materials.
Dr. Skirbekk and colleagues grouped participants into four PA trajectories over the 44-year study period: stable low, increasing then decreasing, stable intermediate, and stable high.
A total of 902 individuals were diagnosed with dementia and 2,407 with MCI at age 70 years or older. After adjustment, risks for MCI and dementia were 15.5% for those with higher occupational PA scores in the latter part of their working life and 9% for those with lower physical demands. The researchers concluded that “consistently working in an occupation with intermediate or high occupational PA was linked to an increased risk of cognitive impairment.”
The findings support those of the Copenhagen Male Study. Published in 2020, this longitudinal study compared leisure-time and occupational PA among more than 4,000 men in Denmark aged 40-59 at baseline in 1970-1971 and followed them until they turned 60. After adjustment, participants with high occupational PA had a 55% greater risk of developing dementia compared with those doing sedentary work.
Good vs. bad PA
“[T]he WHO [World Health Organization] guide to preventing dementia and disease on the whole mentions physical activity as an important factor. But our study suggests that it must be a ‘good’ form of physical activity, which hard physical work is not,” said Kirsten Nabe-Nielsen, PhD, lead author of this study
Beyond dementia, another recent study adds to a wealth of data on associations between occupational PA and cardiovascular risks. The cross-sectional analysis of U.S. data from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health showed that odds of CVD were higher when participants were “always” performing total occupational activity (odds ratio [OR], 1.99), occupational exertion (OR, 2.15), or occupational standing and walking around (OR, 1.84) compared with “never” engaging in these activities.
The contrasting effects of leisure-time vs. occupational PA constitute the “physical activity paradox” hypothesis. Starting in 2011, multiple studies by Andreas Holtermann, PhD, of the National Research Centre for the Working Environment lend support to the PA paradox theory, as do subsequent studies by others.
Although only “marginally considered” until a few years ago, recent large cohort studies seem to confirm the paradox, Pier Luigi Temporelli, MD wrote in a recent editorial.
In separate interviews, Dr. Skirbekk and lead author Tyler Quinn, PhD, MS, West Virginia University, Morgantown, pointed to the PA paradox as an explanation for their own recent findings, suggesting that the mechanisms that underlie it probably are responsible for the associated deleterious effects of occupational PA on the brain and heart, and even mortality.
“It’s well established that PA in your leisure time can be positive, but in the workplace, the results are quite the opposite,” Dr. Skirbekk said. “The specific mechanisms for why occupational PA is associated with elevated dementia risk are still not well understood and we need more knowledge. But we know that higher occupational physical demands have been linked to smaller hippocampal volume and poorer memory performance.”
Furthermore, he said, individuals working in jobs with high demands, both psychological and physical, combined with low job control perform more poorly on cognitive testing later in life.
“We looked mainly at professions where people have heavy workloads and you have much less autonomy, such as nursing assistants, office cleaners, childcare workers, and other personal care workers,” he said. “You cannot sit. You have somebody relying on you. It’s not all pleasure, and it can be very hard. That’s where we find the associations.”
Lack of autonomy
Specific characteristics indirectly associated with high occupational PA jobs – low cognitive stimuli, lifestyle factors, and socioeconomic influences – as well as factors directly related to high occupational PA, such as long hours, repetitive tasks, low levels of control, and stress, could also adversely affect cognitive trajectories, Dr. Skirbekk explained.
“By contrast, leisure-time physical activities tend to be of much shorter duration; are associated with socialization, play, [and] positive emotions; and [include] the opportunity to take breaks or shift to other types of activities if one prefers,” he said. “It may also be that too little or too much PA could be adversely related to cognitive outcomes – hence moderate activity levels, for example 10,000 steps a day, are still likely beneficial for cognitive functioning.”
Dr. Quinn said most of the CVD risk linked to occupational PA has to do with long periods of exertion such as lifting and carrying objects. While occupational standing and walking all day are also linked to CVD risk, they’re not as risky as lifting and carrying, he said.
Like Dr. Skirbekk, Dr. Quinn noted that individuals can take a break from leisure-time PA when they are tired, but occupational PA doesn’t have that same autonomy to allow for recovery.
“So, in many cases, individuals are not getting the recovery their body needs to actually experience PA benefits, because those benefits come during rest,” Dr. Quinn said.
“We’ve shown that PA at work raises acute cardiovascular responses, which are related to cardiovascular risk. For example, 24-hour and waking heart rate and diastolic blood pressure, as well as nonwork diastolic blood pressure, all were significantly higher on workdays versus non-workdays,” he said.
Dr. Quinn also said that psychological stress at work amplifies risk. “A person who does PA at work and is stressed is likely to be at greater risk than someone who has a physically active job but doesn’t have psychological stress combined with it.”
Research gaps
However, Dr. Skirbekk noted that there are strategies that can reduce the risk for MCI and dementia despite high levels of occupational PA. “It is often difficult to change professions, and even if you do, it won’t immediately affect cognition. But altering one’s lifestyle is likely to have effects on cognitive development across the life cycle.
“Many clinicians say they always advise lifestyle changes, but nothing happens. But it makes sense to emphasize that these changes – stopping smoking, eating well, getting proper sleep, etc. – affect not only cardiovascular risk but also cognition. And I think clinicians should also take a patient’s occupation into account during any evaluation,” Dr. Skirbekk noted.
Dr. Quinn said it isn’t realistic to expect workers to come up with solutions to the PA paradox because many don’t have the autonomy to be able to mitigate their occupational risk.
“I think administrative controls and policy changes eventually will be the levers of change. We’re not quite there yet, but those are the types of things we should do when we’re trying to reduce loads in some way, or reduce the time that people spend doing certain tasks we know are potentially bad,” he said.
However, not everyone agrees that occupational PA doesn’t confer the same benefits of leisure-time PA, at least with respect to cardiovascular risk. For example, the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology (PURE) study, which includes a cohort of 130,000 people from 17 high-income, middle-income, and low-income countries, concluded that both higher recreational and nonrecreational PA were associated with a lower risk for mortality and CVD events.
What additional research is needed to clarify the effects of occupational and leisure-time activity and to address conflicting findings?
“Even studies coming out now regarding the effects of occupational PA have mainly used older data,” Dr. Skirbekk noted. “Labor markets and job demands have changed over time. There are different types of tasks and skills required now than there were 20 or 40 years ago. And of course, working from home is a recent phenomenon that’s happened on a large scale and might affect daily routines, sleep patterns, and also cognition. We need a better understanding of what the consequences might be.”
Health inequity issue
More research is also necessary to understand the social determinants of cognitive decline, impairment, and dementia, he said. “Many of the studies we see today are based on self-report of what someone has done in the past, which is particularly problematic for individuals who are impaired or who give interviews with others, which can induce biases.”
Dr. Quinn suggests that PA guidelines may need to differentiate between occupational and leisure-time PA to better reflect current research findings.
Meanwhile, Dr. Skirbekk and Dr. Quinn both point to the toll that occupational PA takes on the brain and body in lower-income workers as an important health equity issue.
“Our national guidelines for PA include occupational activity,” said Dr. Quinn. “But it’s clear that a lot of people who are getting a lot of occupational PA, particularly socioeconomic and racial/ethnic minorities, are not benefiting from it.”
Dr. Holtermann, who has arguably done the most research to date on the PA paradox, noted in a recent editorial that the majority of workers with high occupational PA have a low socioeconomic position and therefore “improving our understanding of the underlying mechanisms behind the PA health paradox and identifying new intervention targets along those pathways will be an important step to reduce socioeconomic health inequalities across the globe.”
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
In the pursuit of optimal health, regular physical activity (PA) is recommended to protect against dementia, cardiovascular disease (CVD), cancer, and other noncommunicable diseases. A significant body of research suggests the benefits of PA are positively correlated with higher frequency and intensity – with more often deemed better. This research has spawned a focus on increasing step counts and investing in standing desks and other interventions aimed at keeping people active.
But
A study published recently in The Lancet Regional Health – Europe used registry data from more than 7,000 adults in Norway, following them from age 33 to 65 years, to assess PA trajectories and risks for later-life mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia at age 70 or older.
“Incorporating a life-course perspective gives a broader picture of how participants’ occupational histories relate to cognitive impairment later in life,” principal investigator Vegard Skirbekk, PhD, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, New York, said in an interview. Other studies typically have assessed occupational PA at a single time point, often close to the end of an individual’s career, and largely relied on self-report, he said.
Study participants worked in more than 300 different occupations. General physical activities performed on the included jobs required “considerable” use of arms and legs and moving the whole body, such as climbing, lifting, balancing, walking, stooping, and handling of materials.
Dr. Skirbekk and colleagues grouped participants into four PA trajectories over the 44-year study period: stable low, increasing then decreasing, stable intermediate, and stable high.
A total of 902 individuals were diagnosed with dementia and 2,407 with MCI at age 70 years or older. After adjustment, risks for MCI and dementia were 15.5% for those with higher occupational PA scores in the latter part of their working life and 9% for those with lower physical demands. The researchers concluded that “consistently working in an occupation with intermediate or high occupational PA was linked to an increased risk of cognitive impairment.”
The findings support those of the Copenhagen Male Study. Published in 2020, this longitudinal study compared leisure-time and occupational PA among more than 4,000 men in Denmark aged 40-59 at baseline in 1970-1971 and followed them until they turned 60. After adjustment, participants with high occupational PA had a 55% greater risk of developing dementia compared with those doing sedentary work.
Good vs. bad PA
“[T]he WHO [World Health Organization] guide to preventing dementia and disease on the whole mentions physical activity as an important factor. But our study suggests that it must be a ‘good’ form of physical activity, which hard physical work is not,” said Kirsten Nabe-Nielsen, PhD, lead author of this study
Beyond dementia, another recent study adds to a wealth of data on associations between occupational PA and cardiovascular risks. The cross-sectional analysis of U.S. data from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health showed that odds of CVD were higher when participants were “always” performing total occupational activity (odds ratio [OR], 1.99), occupational exertion (OR, 2.15), or occupational standing and walking around (OR, 1.84) compared with “never” engaging in these activities.
The contrasting effects of leisure-time vs. occupational PA constitute the “physical activity paradox” hypothesis. Starting in 2011, multiple studies by Andreas Holtermann, PhD, of the National Research Centre for the Working Environment lend support to the PA paradox theory, as do subsequent studies by others.
Although only “marginally considered” until a few years ago, recent large cohort studies seem to confirm the paradox, Pier Luigi Temporelli, MD wrote in a recent editorial.
In separate interviews, Dr. Skirbekk and lead author Tyler Quinn, PhD, MS, West Virginia University, Morgantown, pointed to the PA paradox as an explanation for their own recent findings, suggesting that the mechanisms that underlie it probably are responsible for the associated deleterious effects of occupational PA on the brain and heart, and even mortality.
“It’s well established that PA in your leisure time can be positive, but in the workplace, the results are quite the opposite,” Dr. Skirbekk said. “The specific mechanisms for why occupational PA is associated with elevated dementia risk are still not well understood and we need more knowledge. But we know that higher occupational physical demands have been linked to smaller hippocampal volume and poorer memory performance.”
Furthermore, he said, individuals working in jobs with high demands, both psychological and physical, combined with low job control perform more poorly on cognitive testing later in life.
“We looked mainly at professions where people have heavy workloads and you have much less autonomy, such as nursing assistants, office cleaners, childcare workers, and other personal care workers,” he said. “You cannot sit. You have somebody relying on you. It’s not all pleasure, and it can be very hard. That’s where we find the associations.”
Lack of autonomy
Specific characteristics indirectly associated with high occupational PA jobs – low cognitive stimuli, lifestyle factors, and socioeconomic influences – as well as factors directly related to high occupational PA, such as long hours, repetitive tasks, low levels of control, and stress, could also adversely affect cognitive trajectories, Dr. Skirbekk explained.
“By contrast, leisure-time physical activities tend to be of much shorter duration; are associated with socialization, play, [and] positive emotions; and [include] the opportunity to take breaks or shift to other types of activities if one prefers,” he said. “It may also be that too little or too much PA could be adversely related to cognitive outcomes – hence moderate activity levels, for example 10,000 steps a day, are still likely beneficial for cognitive functioning.”
Dr. Quinn said most of the CVD risk linked to occupational PA has to do with long periods of exertion such as lifting and carrying objects. While occupational standing and walking all day are also linked to CVD risk, they’re not as risky as lifting and carrying, he said.
Like Dr. Skirbekk, Dr. Quinn noted that individuals can take a break from leisure-time PA when they are tired, but occupational PA doesn’t have that same autonomy to allow for recovery.
“So, in many cases, individuals are not getting the recovery their body needs to actually experience PA benefits, because those benefits come during rest,” Dr. Quinn said.
“We’ve shown that PA at work raises acute cardiovascular responses, which are related to cardiovascular risk. For example, 24-hour and waking heart rate and diastolic blood pressure, as well as nonwork diastolic blood pressure, all were significantly higher on workdays versus non-workdays,” he said.
Dr. Quinn also said that psychological stress at work amplifies risk. “A person who does PA at work and is stressed is likely to be at greater risk than someone who has a physically active job but doesn’t have psychological stress combined with it.”
Research gaps
However, Dr. Skirbekk noted that there are strategies that can reduce the risk for MCI and dementia despite high levels of occupational PA. “It is often difficult to change professions, and even if you do, it won’t immediately affect cognition. But altering one’s lifestyle is likely to have effects on cognitive development across the life cycle.
“Many clinicians say they always advise lifestyle changes, but nothing happens. But it makes sense to emphasize that these changes – stopping smoking, eating well, getting proper sleep, etc. – affect not only cardiovascular risk but also cognition. And I think clinicians should also take a patient’s occupation into account during any evaluation,” Dr. Skirbekk noted.
Dr. Quinn said it isn’t realistic to expect workers to come up with solutions to the PA paradox because many don’t have the autonomy to be able to mitigate their occupational risk.
“I think administrative controls and policy changes eventually will be the levers of change. We’re not quite there yet, but those are the types of things we should do when we’re trying to reduce loads in some way, or reduce the time that people spend doing certain tasks we know are potentially bad,” he said.
However, not everyone agrees that occupational PA doesn’t confer the same benefits of leisure-time PA, at least with respect to cardiovascular risk. For example, the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology (PURE) study, which includes a cohort of 130,000 people from 17 high-income, middle-income, and low-income countries, concluded that both higher recreational and nonrecreational PA were associated with a lower risk for mortality and CVD events.
What additional research is needed to clarify the effects of occupational and leisure-time activity and to address conflicting findings?
“Even studies coming out now regarding the effects of occupational PA have mainly used older data,” Dr. Skirbekk noted. “Labor markets and job demands have changed over time. There are different types of tasks and skills required now than there were 20 or 40 years ago. And of course, working from home is a recent phenomenon that’s happened on a large scale and might affect daily routines, sleep patterns, and also cognition. We need a better understanding of what the consequences might be.”
Health inequity issue
More research is also necessary to understand the social determinants of cognitive decline, impairment, and dementia, he said. “Many of the studies we see today are based on self-report of what someone has done in the past, which is particularly problematic for individuals who are impaired or who give interviews with others, which can induce biases.”
Dr. Quinn suggests that PA guidelines may need to differentiate between occupational and leisure-time PA to better reflect current research findings.
Meanwhile, Dr. Skirbekk and Dr. Quinn both point to the toll that occupational PA takes on the brain and body in lower-income workers as an important health equity issue.
“Our national guidelines for PA include occupational activity,” said Dr. Quinn. “But it’s clear that a lot of people who are getting a lot of occupational PA, particularly socioeconomic and racial/ethnic minorities, are not benefiting from it.”
Dr. Holtermann, who has arguably done the most research to date on the PA paradox, noted in a recent editorial that the majority of workers with high occupational PA have a low socioeconomic position and therefore “improving our understanding of the underlying mechanisms behind the PA health paradox and identifying new intervention targets along those pathways will be an important step to reduce socioeconomic health inequalities across the globe.”
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
In the pursuit of optimal health, regular physical activity (PA) is recommended to protect against dementia, cardiovascular disease (CVD), cancer, and other noncommunicable diseases. A significant body of research suggests the benefits of PA are positively correlated with higher frequency and intensity – with more often deemed better. This research has spawned a focus on increasing step counts and investing in standing desks and other interventions aimed at keeping people active.
But
A study published recently in The Lancet Regional Health – Europe used registry data from more than 7,000 adults in Norway, following them from age 33 to 65 years, to assess PA trajectories and risks for later-life mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia at age 70 or older.
“Incorporating a life-course perspective gives a broader picture of how participants’ occupational histories relate to cognitive impairment later in life,” principal investigator Vegard Skirbekk, PhD, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, New York, said in an interview. Other studies typically have assessed occupational PA at a single time point, often close to the end of an individual’s career, and largely relied on self-report, he said.
Study participants worked in more than 300 different occupations. General physical activities performed on the included jobs required “considerable” use of arms and legs and moving the whole body, such as climbing, lifting, balancing, walking, stooping, and handling of materials.
Dr. Skirbekk and colleagues grouped participants into four PA trajectories over the 44-year study period: stable low, increasing then decreasing, stable intermediate, and stable high.
A total of 902 individuals were diagnosed with dementia and 2,407 with MCI at age 70 years or older. After adjustment, risks for MCI and dementia were 15.5% for those with higher occupational PA scores in the latter part of their working life and 9% for those with lower physical demands. The researchers concluded that “consistently working in an occupation with intermediate or high occupational PA was linked to an increased risk of cognitive impairment.”
The findings support those of the Copenhagen Male Study. Published in 2020, this longitudinal study compared leisure-time and occupational PA among more than 4,000 men in Denmark aged 40-59 at baseline in 1970-1971 and followed them until they turned 60. After adjustment, participants with high occupational PA had a 55% greater risk of developing dementia compared with those doing sedentary work.
Good vs. bad PA
“[T]he WHO [World Health Organization] guide to preventing dementia and disease on the whole mentions physical activity as an important factor. But our study suggests that it must be a ‘good’ form of physical activity, which hard physical work is not,” said Kirsten Nabe-Nielsen, PhD, lead author of this study
Beyond dementia, another recent study adds to a wealth of data on associations between occupational PA and cardiovascular risks. The cross-sectional analysis of U.S. data from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health showed that odds of CVD were higher when participants were “always” performing total occupational activity (odds ratio [OR], 1.99), occupational exertion (OR, 2.15), or occupational standing and walking around (OR, 1.84) compared with “never” engaging in these activities.
The contrasting effects of leisure-time vs. occupational PA constitute the “physical activity paradox” hypothesis. Starting in 2011, multiple studies by Andreas Holtermann, PhD, of the National Research Centre for the Working Environment lend support to the PA paradox theory, as do subsequent studies by others.
Although only “marginally considered” until a few years ago, recent large cohort studies seem to confirm the paradox, Pier Luigi Temporelli, MD wrote in a recent editorial.
In separate interviews, Dr. Skirbekk and lead author Tyler Quinn, PhD, MS, West Virginia University, Morgantown, pointed to the PA paradox as an explanation for their own recent findings, suggesting that the mechanisms that underlie it probably are responsible for the associated deleterious effects of occupational PA on the brain and heart, and even mortality.
“It’s well established that PA in your leisure time can be positive, but in the workplace, the results are quite the opposite,” Dr. Skirbekk said. “The specific mechanisms for why occupational PA is associated with elevated dementia risk are still not well understood and we need more knowledge. But we know that higher occupational physical demands have been linked to smaller hippocampal volume and poorer memory performance.”
Furthermore, he said, individuals working in jobs with high demands, both psychological and physical, combined with low job control perform more poorly on cognitive testing later in life.
“We looked mainly at professions where people have heavy workloads and you have much less autonomy, such as nursing assistants, office cleaners, childcare workers, and other personal care workers,” he said. “You cannot sit. You have somebody relying on you. It’s not all pleasure, and it can be very hard. That’s where we find the associations.”
Lack of autonomy
Specific characteristics indirectly associated with high occupational PA jobs – low cognitive stimuli, lifestyle factors, and socioeconomic influences – as well as factors directly related to high occupational PA, such as long hours, repetitive tasks, low levels of control, and stress, could also adversely affect cognitive trajectories, Dr. Skirbekk explained.
“By contrast, leisure-time physical activities tend to be of much shorter duration; are associated with socialization, play, [and] positive emotions; and [include] the opportunity to take breaks or shift to other types of activities if one prefers,” he said. “It may also be that too little or too much PA could be adversely related to cognitive outcomes – hence moderate activity levels, for example 10,000 steps a day, are still likely beneficial for cognitive functioning.”
Dr. Quinn said most of the CVD risk linked to occupational PA has to do with long periods of exertion such as lifting and carrying objects. While occupational standing and walking all day are also linked to CVD risk, they’re not as risky as lifting and carrying, he said.
Like Dr. Skirbekk, Dr. Quinn noted that individuals can take a break from leisure-time PA when they are tired, but occupational PA doesn’t have that same autonomy to allow for recovery.
“So, in many cases, individuals are not getting the recovery their body needs to actually experience PA benefits, because those benefits come during rest,” Dr. Quinn said.
“We’ve shown that PA at work raises acute cardiovascular responses, which are related to cardiovascular risk. For example, 24-hour and waking heart rate and diastolic blood pressure, as well as nonwork diastolic blood pressure, all were significantly higher on workdays versus non-workdays,” he said.
Dr. Quinn also said that psychological stress at work amplifies risk. “A person who does PA at work and is stressed is likely to be at greater risk than someone who has a physically active job but doesn’t have psychological stress combined with it.”
Research gaps
However, Dr. Skirbekk noted that there are strategies that can reduce the risk for MCI and dementia despite high levels of occupational PA. “It is often difficult to change professions, and even if you do, it won’t immediately affect cognition. But altering one’s lifestyle is likely to have effects on cognitive development across the life cycle.
“Many clinicians say they always advise lifestyle changes, but nothing happens. But it makes sense to emphasize that these changes – stopping smoking, eating well, getting proper sleep, etc. – affect not only cardiovascular risk but also cognition. And I think clinicians should also take a patient’s occupation into account during any evaluation,” Dr. Skirbekk noted.
Dr. Quinn said it isn’t realistic to expect workers to come up with solutions to the PA paradox because many don’t have the autonomy to be able to mitigate their occupational risk.
“I think administrative controls and policy changes eventually will be the levers of change. We’re not quite there yet, but those are the types of things we should do when we’re trying to reduce loads in some way, or reduce the time that people spend doing certain tasks we know are potentially bad,” he said.
However, not everyone agrees that occupational PA doesn’t confer the same benefits of leisure-time PA, at least with respect to cardiovascular risk. For example, the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology (PURE) study, which includes a cohort of 130,000 people from 17 high-income, middle-income, and low-income countries, concluded that both higher recreational and nonrecreational PA were associated with a lower risk for mortality and CVD events.
What additional research is needed to clarify the effects of occupational and leisure-time activity and to address conflicting findings?
“Even studies coming out now regarding the effects of occupational PA have mainly used older data,” Dr. Skirbekk noted. “Labor markets and job demands have changed over time. There are different types of tasks and skills required now than there were 20 or 40 years ago. And of course, working from home is a recent phenomenon that’s happened on a large scale and might affect daily routines, sleep patterns, and also cognition. We need a better understanding of what the consequences might be.”
Health inequity issue
More research is also necessary to understand the social determinants of cognitive decline, impairment, and dementia, he said. “Many of the studies we see today are based on self-report of what someone has done in the past, which is particularly problematic for individuals who are impaired or who give interviews with others, which can induce biases.”
Dr. Quinn suggests that PA guidelines may need to differentiate between occupational and leisure-time PA to better reflect current research findings.
Meanwhile, Dr. Skirbekk and Dr. Quinn both point to the toll that occupational PA takes on the brain and body in lower-income workers as an important health equity issue.
“Our national guidelines for PA include occupational activity,” said Dr. Quinn. “But it’s clear that a lot of people who are getting a lot of occupational PA, particularly socioeconomic and racial/ethnic minorities, are not benefiting from it.”
Dr. Holtermann, who has arguably done the most research to date on the PA paradox, noted in a recent editorial that the majority of workers with high occupational PA have a low socioeconomic position and therefore “improving our understanding of the underlying mechanisms behind the PA health paradox and identifying new intervention targets along those pathways will be an important step to reduce socioeconomic health inequalities across the globe.”
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
The Lancet Regional Health – Europe