-
1.
Sleep, Stress, and Symptoms Among People With Heart Failure During the COVID-19 Pandemic.
O'Connell, M, Jeon, S, Conley, S, Linsky, S, Redeker, NS
The Journal of cardiovascular nursing. 202301;38(2):E55-E60
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
COVID-19 pandemic raised concerns about the effects of stress on mental health and sleep deficiency. Cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) has been shown to improve sleep quality and insomnia severity, as well as anxiety and depression, and may be protective during times of stress, including the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim of this study was to examine changes in sleep, sleep-related cognitions, stress, anxiety, and depression among people with heart failure (HF). This study was a randomised controlled trial of the effects of CBT-I compared with HF self-management education (attention-control condition), the “HeartSleep Study.” Results showed that improvements in insomnia severity, sleep quality, latency, and efficiency, sleep-related cognitions and stress, anxiety, and depression after participation in CBT-I or an HF self-management class were sustained during the pandemic. Authors conclude that their findings confirm the clinical benefits of CBT-I for people with HF and comorbidities and also suggest the potential benefits of HF self-management education.
Abstract
BACKGROUND The COVID-19 pandemic raised concerns about the effects of stress on sleep and mental health, particularly among people with chronic conditions, including people with heart failure (HF). OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to examine changes in sleep, sleep-related cognitions, stress, anxiety, and depression among people with HF who participated in a randomized controlled trial of cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia before the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS Participants self-reported sleep characteristics, symptoms, mood, and stress at baseline, 6 months after cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia or HF self-management education (attention control), and during the pandemic. RESULTS The sample included 112 participants (mean age, 63 ± 12.9 years; 47% women; 13% Black; 68% New York Heart Association class II or III). Statistically significant improvements in sleep, stress, mood, and symptoms that occurred 6 months post treatment were sustained during the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS Improving sleep and symptoms among people with HF may improve coping during stressful events, and cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia may be protective.
-
2.
Sleep disruption and activation of cellular inflammation mediate heightened pain sensitivity: a randomized clinical trial.
Irwin, MR, Olmstead, R, Bjurstrom, MF, Finan, PH, Smith, MT
Pain. 2023;164(5):1128-1137
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
Sleep disturbance is associated with elevated levels of inflammation. Experimental studies have found that even a modest amount of sleep loss activates inflammatory processes. Experimental sleep disruption also induces alterations in sleep architecture including loss of slow wave or N3 sleep and loss of rapid eye movement sleep. The aim of this study was to clarify whether changes in the amount of N3 sleep and cellular inflammation mediate thermal pain sensitivity (i.e., heat pain threshold) in response to experimental sleep disruption. This study was a secondary analysis (assessor-blind) of a randomised controlled trial. The enrolled participants were randomised to 1 of 2 groups: 2 nights of undisturbed sleep (US) and 2 nights of sleep disruption or forced awakening (FA). Participants underwent 2 consecutive nights of US (or FA), followed by a 2-week washout interval in their home environment, and then completed 2 consecutive nights of the opposing sleep condition FA (or US). Results showed that in healthy adults, experimental disruption of sleep due to the administration of FA induced a significant decrease in heat pain threshold, as compared with responses after US. Experimental manipulation of sleep with FA also led to disturbance in sleep continuity and changes in sleep architecture, including loss of N3 sleep. Moreover, in the morning after FA, there was a robust activation of cellular inflammation Authors conclude that the differential loss of N3 sleep and increases in cellular inflammation may be important drivers of pain sensitivity in response to sleep disruption.
Abstract
Sleep loss heightens pain sensitivity, but the pathways underlying this association are not known. Given that experimental sleep disruption induces increases in cellular inflammation as well as selective loss of slow wave, N3 sleep, this study examined whether these mechanisms contribute to pain sensitivity following sleep loss in healthy adults. This assessor-blinded, cross-over sleep condition, single-site, randomized clinical trial enrolled 95 healthy adults (mean [SD] age, 27.8 [6.4]; female, 44 [53.7%]). The 2 sleep conditions were 2 nights of undisturbed sleep (US) and 2 nights of sleep disruption or forced awakening (FA, 8 pseudorandomly distributed awakenings and 200 minutes wake time during the 8-hour sleep opportunity), administered in a cross-over design after 2 weeks of washout and in a random order (FA-US; US-FA). Primary outcome was heat pain threshold (hPTH). Sleep architecture was assessed by polysomnography, and morning levels of cellular inflammation were evaluated by Toll-like receptor-4 stimulated monocyte intracellular proinflammatory cytokine production. As compared with US, FA was associated with decreases in the amount of slow wave or N3 sleep ( P < 0.001), increases in Toll-like receptor-4 stimulated production of interleukin-6 and tumor necrosis factor-α ( P = 0.03), and decreases in hPTH ( P = 0.02). A comprehensive causal mediation analysis found that FA had an indirect effect on hPTH by decreases in N3 sleep and subsequent increases in inflammation (estimate=-0.15; 95% confidence interval, -0.30 to -0.03; P < 0.05) with the proportion mediated 34.9%. Differential loss of slow wave, N3 sleep, and increases in cellular inflammation are important drivers of pain sensitivity after sleep disruption.Clinical Trials Registration: NCT01794689.
-
3.
Sleep-Opt-In: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Study to Improve Sleep and Glycemic Variability in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes.
Martyn-Nemeth, P, Duffecy, J, Quinn, L, Steffen, A, Baron, K, Chapagai, S, Burke, L, Reutrakul, S
The science of diabetes self-management and care. 2023;49(1):11-22
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
Insufficient sleep (insufficient total sleep time) and irregular sleep timing (variability in the occurrence of sleep within a 24-hour period) are increasingly recognized as important contributors to glycaemic control and variability in type 1 diabetes (T1D). The aims of this study were to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of a sleep intervention (Sleep-Opt-In) targeted for adults with type 1 diabetes with short or irregular sleep and to examine the effects of Sleep-Opt-In on sleep duration and regularity, glucose indices, and patient-reported outcomes. This study was a randomised controlled parallel trial design. Participants (n=14) were randomly assigned to either the Sleep-Opt-In intervention or a Healthy Living attention control group. Results showed that: - Sleep-Opt-In was feasible and acceptable to the target population. - participants with objectively confirmed short or irregular sleep, sleep irregularity improved by 25 minutes on average, whereas sleep duration improved only negligibly (8 minutes). - the control group experienced an increase in sleep duration but no change in sleep regularity. Authors conclude that Sleep-Opt-In is feasible, acceptable, and promising for further evaluation to improve sleep duration or regularity, glucose parameters and important patient reported outcomes of diabetes distress, daytime sleepiness, fatigue and depressive mood in the T1D population.
Abstract
PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of a technology-assisted behavioral sleep intervention (Sleep-Opt-In) and to examine the effects of Sleep-Opt-In on sleep duration and regularity, glucose indices, and patient-reported outcomes. Short sleep duration and irregular sleep schedules are associated with reduced glycemic control and greater glycemic variability. METHODS A randomized controlled parallel-arm pilot study was employed. Adults with type 1 diabetes (n = 14) were recruited from the Midwest and randomized 3:2 to the sleep-optimization (Sleep-Opt-In) or Healthy Living attention control group. Sleep-Opt-In was an 8-week, remotely delivered intervention consisting of digital lessons, sleep tracker, and weekly coaching phone calls by a trained sleep coach. Assessments of sleep (actigraphy), glucose (A1C, continuous glucose monitoring), and patient-reported outcomes (questionnaires for daytime sleepiness, fatigue, diabetes distress, and depressive mood) were completed at baseline and at completion of the intervention. RESULTS Sleep-Opt-In was feasible and acceptable. Those in Sleep-Opt-In with objectively confirmed short or irregular sleep demonstrated an improvement in sleep regularity (25 minutes), reduced glycemic variability (3.2%), and improved time in range (6.9%) compared to the Healthy Living attention control group. Patient-reported outcomes improved only for the Sleep-Opt-In group. Fatigue and depressive mood improved compared to the control. CONCLUSIONS Sleep-Opt-In is feasible, acceptable, and promising for further evaluation as a means to improve sleep duration or regularity in the population of people with type 1 diabetes.
-
4.
Cardiometabolic Risk Factors and Incident Cardiovascular Disease Events in Women vs Men With Type 1 Diabetes.
Braffett, BH, Bebu, I, El Ghormli, L, Cowie, CC, Sivitz, WI, Pop-Busui, R, Larkin, ME, Gubitosi-Klug, RA, Nathan, DM, Lachin, JM, et al
JAMA network open. 2022;5(9):e2230710
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
In the general population, women have a lower absolute risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) compared with men. However, among individuals with type 1 or type 2 diabetes, the relative risk of CVD is similar or higher in women compared with men. The aim of this study was to assess sex differences in achieving recommended CVD risk management targets and associations with CVD events. This is a cohort study which included a total of 1441 (men n= 736) participants with type 1 diabetes. Results show that the prevalence and mean levels of most cardiometabolic risk factors (except for pulse rate and haemoglobin A1c) were consistent with a less atherogenic profile among women compared with men. Furthermore, achieving treatment targets for blood pressure, lipids, and glucose was associated with significantly decreased risk of CVD in both women and men. Authors conclude that their findings argue for a recalibration of CVD risk factor stratification in revised clinical care guidelines and therapeutic recommendations by sex for individuals with type 1 diabetes.
Abstract
IMPORTANCE The lower risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) among women compared with men in the general population may be diminished among those with diabetes. OBJECTIVE To evaluate cardiometabolic risk factors and their management in association with CVD events in women vs men with type 1 diabetes enrolled in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (DCCT/EDIC) study. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This cohort study used data obtained during the combined DCCT (randomized clinical trial, conducted 1983-1993) and EDIC (observational study, conducted 1994 to present) studies through April 30, 2018 (mean [SD] follow-up, 28.8 [5.8] years), at 27 clinical centers in the US and Canada. Data analyses were performed between July 2021 and April 2022. EXPOSURE During the DCCT phase, patients were randomized to intensive vs conventional diabetes therapy. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Cardiometabolic risk factors and CVD events were assessed via detailed medical history and focused physical examinations. Blood and urine samples were assayed centrally. CVD events were adjudicated by a review committee. Linear mixed models and Cox proportional hazards models evaluated sex differences in cardiometabolic risk factors and CVD risk over follow-up. RESULTS A total of 1441 participants with type 1 diabetes (mean [SD] age at DCCT baseline, 26.8 [7.1] years; 761 [52.8%] men; 1390 [96.5%] non-Hispanic White) were included. Over the duration of the study, compared with men, women had significantly lower body mass index (BMI, calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared; β = -0.43 [SE, 0.16]; P = .006), waist circumference (β = -10.56 cm [SE, 0.52 cm]; P < .001), blood pressure (systolic: β = -5.77 mm Hg [SE, 0.35 mm Hg]; P < .001; diastolic: β = -3.23 mm Hg [SE, 0.26 mm Hg]; P < .001), and triglyceride levels (β = -10.10 mg/dL [SE, 1.98 mg/dL]; P < .001); higher HDL cholesterol levels (β = 9.36 mg/dL [SE, 0.57 mg/dL]; P < .001); and similar LDL cholesterol levels (β = -0.76 mg/dL [SE, 1.22 mg/dL]; P = .53). Women, compared with men, achieved recommended targets more frequently for blood pressure (ie, <130/80 mm Hg: 90.0% vs 77.4%; P < .001) and triglycerides (ie, <150 mg/dL: 97.3% vs 90.5%; P < .001). However, sex-specific HDL cholesterol targets (ie, ≥50 mg/dL for women, ≥40 mg/dL for men) were achieved less often (74.3% vs 86.6%; P < .001) and cardioprotective medications were used less frequently in women than men (ie, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin II receptor blocker: 29.6% [95% CI, 25.7%-33.9%] vs 40.0% [95% CI, 36.1%-44.0%]; P = .001; lipid-lowering medication: 25.3% [95% CI, 22.1%-28.7%] vs 39.6% [95% CI, 36.1%-43.2%]; P < .001). Women also had significantly higher pulse rates (mean [SD], 75.2 [6.8] beats per minute vs 71.8 [6.9] beats per minute; P < .001) and hemoglobin A1c levels (mean [SD], 8.3% [1.0%] vs 8.1% [1.0%]; P = .01) and achieved targets for tighter glycemic control less often than men (ie, hemoglobin A1c <7%: 11.2% [95% CI, 9.3%-13.3%] vs 14.0% [95% CI, 12.0%-16.3%]; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE These findings suggest that despite a more favorable cardiometabolic risk factor profile, women with type 1 diabetes did not have a significantly lower CVD event burden than men, suggesting a greater clinical impact of cardiometabolic risk factors in women vs men with diabetes. These findings call for conscientious optimization of the control of CVD risk factors in women with type 1 diabetes.
-
5.
The Impact of COVID-19 Stay-At-Home Orders on Health Behaviors in Adults.
Flanagan, EW, Beyl, RA, Fearnbach, SN, Altazan, AD, Martin, CK, Redman, LM
Obesity (Silver Spring, Md.). 2021;29(2):438-445
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
In response to the global outbreak of COVID-19, a wave of quarantine and stay-at-home mandates were issued to attenuate the rapid worldwide spread. The aim of this study was to quantify changes in habitual dietary behaviours, physical activity, sleep, sedentary behaviours, and mental health before and during the initial peak of the COVID-19 pandemic. This study is based on an anonymous survey via paid advertisements on the social media platform Facebook. A total of 7,753 completed the first COVID-19 question and were thus included in the analysis. Results indicate that: - declines in healthful eating behaviours were coincident with reductions in physical activity. These negative behaviours were characteristic of individuals reporting weight gain in response to the pandemic outbreak. - anxiety scores nearly doubled in response to the pandemic and 20% of the sample reported that symptoms were severe enough to interfere with daily routines. - home confinement led to shifts in daily work and household responsibilities which resulted in mental health declines alongside some positive and many negative changes to health behaviours. Authors conclude that with increased cases of weight gain and significant declines to mental health, COVID-19 may impact clinical practice for years to come.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Stay-at-home orders in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic have forced abrupt changes to daily routines. This study assessed lifestyle changes across different BMI classifications in response to the global pandemic. METHODS The online survey targeting adults was distributed in April 2020 and collected information on dietary behaviors, physical activity, and mental health. All questions were presented as "before" and "since" the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS In total, 7,753 participants were included; 32.2% of the sample were individuals with normal weight, 32.1% had overweight, and 34.0% had obesity. During the pandemic, overall scores for healthy eating increased (P < 0.001), owing to less eating out and increased cooking (P < 0.001). Sedentary leisure behaviors increased, while time spent in physical activity (absolute time and intensity adjusted) declined (P < 0.001). Anxiety scores increased 8.78 ± 0.21 during the pandemic, and the magnitude of increase was significantly greater in people with obesity (P ≤ 0.01). Weight gain was reported in 27.5% of the total sample compared with 33.4% in participants with obesity. CONCLUSIONS The COVID-19 pandemic has produced significant health effects, well beyond the virus itself. Government mandates together with fear of contracting the virus have significantly impacted lifestyle behaviors alongside declines in mental health. These deleterious impacts have disproportionally affected individuals with obesity.
-
6.
Effectiveness of Mindfulness Meditation vs Headache Education for Adults With Migraine: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Wells, RE, O'Connell, N, Pierce, CR, Estave, P, Penzien, DB, Loder, E, Zeidan, F, Houle, TT
JAMA internal medicine. 2021;181(3):317-328
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
Mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR), a standardized mind-body treatment that teaches momentary awareness with decreased sensory percept judgment, is associated with improvements in many chronic pain conditions. Mindfulness may be particularly helpful for migraine, as it diminishes affective responses to stress, the most common migraine trigger. This study is a double-blinded, randomized clinical trial of MBSR vs headache education for adults with migraine. The study enrolled 96 participants out of which 89 participants attended at least 1 class and completed at least 1 headache log (MBSR, 45; headache education, 44) across 7 cohorts. Participants were randomly assigned to one of the two arms. Results indicate that participants in both groups demonstrated a reduction of migraine days per month from baseline at 12 weeks. Furthermore, both groups sustained reductions in frequency of migraine and headache without group differences. Compared with headache education, MBSR participants had improvements in headache-related disability, quality of life, depression scores, self-efficacy, pain catastrophizing, and decreased experimentally induced pain intensity and unpleasantness out to 36 weeks. Authors conclude that mindfulness may help treat the total burden of migraine. However, a larger, more definitive study is needed to understand the impact of mindfulness on migraine.
Abstract
Importance: Migraine is the second leading cause of disability worldwide. Most patients with migraine discontinue medications due to inefficacy or adverse effects. Mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) may provide benefit. Objective: To determine if MBSR improves migraine outcomes and affective/cognitive processes compared with headache education. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial of MBSR vs headache education included 89 adults who experienced between 4 and 20 migraine days per month. There was blinding of participants (to active vs comparator group assignments) and principal investigators/data analysts (to group assignment). Interventions: Participants underwent MBSR (standardized training in mindfulness/yoga) or headache education (migraine information) delivered in groups that met for 2 hours each week for 8 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was change in migraine day frequency (baseline to 12 weeks). Secondary outcomes were changes in disability, quality of life, self-efficacy, pain catastrophizing, depression scores, and experimentally induced pain intensity and unpleasantness (baseline to 12, 24, and 36 weeks). Results: Most participants were female (n = 82, 92%), with a mean (SD) age of 43.9 (13.0) years, and had a mean (SD) of 7.3 (2.7) migraine days per month and high disability (Headache Impact Test-6: 63.5 [5.7]), attended class (median attendance, 7 of 8 classes), and followed up through 36 weeks (33 of 45 [73%] of the MBSR group and 32 of 44 [73%] of the headache education group). Participants in both groups had fewer migraine days at 12 weeks (MBSR: -1.6 migraine days per month; 95% CI, -0.7 to -2.5; headache education: -2.0 migraine days per month; 95% CI, -1.1 to -2.9), without group differences (P = .50). Compared with those who participated in headache education, those who participated in MBSR had improvements from baseline at all follow-up time points (reported in terms of point estimates of effect differences between groups) on measures of disability (5.92; 95% CI, 2.8-9.0; P < .001), quality of life (5.1; 95% CI, 1.2-8.9; P = .01), self-efficacy (8.2; 95% CI, 0.3-16.1; P = .04), pain catastrophizing (5.8; 95% CI, 2.9-8.8; P < .001), depression scores (1.6; 95% CI, 0.4-2.7; P = .008), and decreased experimentally induced pain intensity and unpleasantness (MBSR group: 36.3% [95% CI, 12.3% to 60.3%] decrease in intensity and 30.4% [95% CI, 9.9% to 49.4%] decrease in unpleasantness; headache education group: 13.5% [95% CI, -9.9% to 36.8%] increase in intensity and an 11.2% [95% CI, -8.9% to 31.2%] increase in unpleasantness; P = .004 for intensity and .005 for unpleasantness, at 36 weeks). One reported adverse event was deemed unrelated to study protocol. Conclusions and Relevance: Mindfulness-based stress reduction did not improve migraine frequency more than headache education, as both groups had similar decreases; however, MBSR improved disability, quality of life, self-efficacy, pain catastrophizing, and depression out to 36 weeks, with decreased experimentally induced pain suggesting a potential shift in pain appraisal. In conclusion, MBSR may help treat total migraine burden, but a larger, more definitive study is needed to further investigate these results. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02695498.
-
7.
Digital cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia promotes later health resilience during the coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic.
Cheng, P, Casement, MD, Kalmbach, DA, Castelan, AC, Drake, CL
Sleep. 2021;44(4)
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
The 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has had health consequences that extend well-beyond symptoms of the virus. Mental health problems are already being observed in the context of COVID-19 and have also been documented during previous epidemics. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of prior digital cognitive-behavioural therapy for insomnia (dCBT-I) versus sleep education on health resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study is a follow up study based on a previous randomised controlled trial [SPREAD trial] for which the enrolled participants were divided into two groups: 358 in the dCBT-I condition and 300 in the control condition. For this follow-up study 208 participants (dCBT-I: n = 102; control: n = 106) out of the total 658 participants were enrolled. Results indicate that 67.3% of the sample reported direct impact from the coronavirus, and 26.4% reported living alone during the shelter-in-place orders. Furthermore, those who received dCBT-I reported less insomnia, stress, depression, and better global physical health compared to those who received a sleep education control. Authors conclude that future research should examine the mechanisms by which insomnia treatment may enhance resilience, and the role of dCBT-I in mitigating the adverse health consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVES Stressful life events contribute to insomnia, psychosocial functioning, and illness. Though individuals with a history of insomnia may be especially vulnerable during stressful life events, risk may be mitigated by prior intervention. This study evaluated the effect of prior digital cognitive-behavioral therapy for insomnia (dCBT-I) versus sleep education on health resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS COVID impact, insomnia, general- and COVID-related stress, depression, and global health were assessed in April 2020 in adults with a history of insomnia who completed a randomized controlled trial of dCBT-I (n = 102) versus sleep education control (n = 106) in 2016-2017. Regression analyses were used to evaluate the effect of intervention conditions on subsequent stress and health during the pandemic. RESULTS Insomnia symptoms were significantly associated with COVID-19 related disruptions, and those who previously received dCBT-I reported less insomnia symptoms, less general stress and COVID-related cognitive intrusions, less depression, and better global health than those who received sleep education. Moreover, the odds for resurgent insomnia was 51% lower in the dCBT-I versus control condition. Similarly, odds of moderate to severe depression during COVID-19 was 57% lower in the dCBT-I condition. CONCLUSIONS Those who received dCBT-I had increased health resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic in adults with a history of insomnia and ongoing mild to moderate mental health symptoms. These data provide evidence that dCBT-I is a powerful tool to promote mental and physical health during stressors, including the COVID-19 pandemic. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NCT02988375.
-
8.
Prevalence of Depression Symptoms in US Adults Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic.
Ettman, CK, Abdalla, SM, Cohen, GH, Sampson, L, Vivier, PM, Galea, S
JAMA network open. 2020;3(9):e2019686
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an event that can cause physical, emotional, and psychological harm. Thus, the COVID-19 pandemic can itself be considered a traumatic event. The aim of this study was to (a) assess the burden of depression symptoms in the US during COVID-19 using the same measures deployed in representative national surveys before COVID-19 began, and (b) understand the factors associated with depression symptoms during and before COVID-19. This study is a population-representative survey study of US adults. A total of 1441 participants were included in the final sample out of which 619 participants were aged between 18 and 39 years, 723 were men, and 933 were non-Hispanic White. Results showed that: - prevalence of depression symptoms in the US increased more than 3-fold during the COVID-19 pandemic, from 8.5% before COVID-19 to 27.8% during COVID-19. - there was a shift in depression symptoms, with fewer people with no symptoms and more people with more symptoms during COVID-19 than before COVID-19. - lower income groups were at greater risk of depression symptoms than higher income groups. Authors conclude that the potential for the mental health consequences of COVID-19 to be large in scale, to recognize that these effects can be long-lasting, and to consider preventative action to help mitigate its effects.
Abstract
Importance: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and the policies to contain it have been a near ubiquitous exposure in the US with unknown effects on depression symptoms. Objective: To estimate the prevalence of and risk factors associated with depression symptoms among US adults during vs before the COVID-19 pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: This nationally representative survey study used 2 population-based surveys of US adults aged 18 or older. During COVID-19, estimates were derived from the COVID-19 and Life Stressors Impact on Mental Health and Well-being study, conducted from March 31, 2020, to April 13, 2020. Before COVID-19 estimates were derived from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, conducted from 2017 to 2018. Data were analyzed from April 15 to 20, 2020. Exposures: The COVID-19 pandemic and outcomes associated with the measures to mitigate it. Main Outcomes and Measures: Depression symptoms, defined using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 cutoff of 10 or higher. Categories of depression symptoms were defined as none (score, 0-4), mild (score, 5-9), moderate (score, 10-14), moderately severe (score, 15-19), and severe (score, ≥20). Results: A total of 1470 participants completed the COVID-19 and Life Stressors Impact on Mental Health and Well-being survey (completion rate, 64.3%), and after removing those with missing data, the final during-COVID-19 sample included 1441 participants (619 participants [43.0%] aged 18-39 years; 723 [50.2%] men; 933 [64.7%] non-Hispanic White). The pre-COVID-19 sample included 5065 participants (1704 participants [37.8%] aged 18-39 years; 2588 [51.4%] women; 1790 [62.9%] non-Hispanic White). Depression symptom prevalence was higher in every category during COVID-19 compared with before (mild: 24.6% [95% CI, 21.8%-27.7%] vs 16.2% [95% CI, 15.1%-17.4%]; moderate: 14.8% [95% CI, 12.6%-17.4%] vs 5.7% [95% CI, 4.8%-6.9%]; moderately severe: 7.9% [95% CI, 6.3%-9.8%] vs 2.1% [95% CI, 1.6%-2.8%]; severe: 5.1% [95% CI, 3.8%-6.9%] vs 0.7% [95% CI, 0.5%-0.9%]). Higher risk of depression symptoms during COVID-19 was associated with having lower income (odds ratio, 2.37 [95% CI, 1.26-4.43]), having less than $5000 in savings (odds ratio, 1.52 [95% CI, 1.02-2.26]), and exposure to more stressors (odds ratio, 3.05 [95% CI, 1.95-4.77]). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that prevalence of depression symptoms in the US was more than 3-fold higher during COVID-19 compared with before the COVID-19 pandemic. Individuals with lower social resources, lower economic resources, and greater exposure to stressors (eg, job loss) reported a greater burden of depression symptoms. Post-COVID-19 plans should account for the probable increase in mental illness to come, particularly among at-risk populations.
-
9.
A Large Randomized Trial: Effects of Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR) for Breast Cancer (BC) Survivors on Salivary Cortisol and IL-6.
Lengacher, CA, Reich, RR, Paterson, CL, Shelton, M, Shivers, S, Ramesar, S, Pleasant, ML, Budhrani-Shani, P, Groer, M, Post-White, J, et al
Biological research for nursing. 2019;21(1):39-49
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
Breast cancer survivors (BCS) often experience physiological and psychological stressors related to their diagnosis and treatment, and a disruption of cortisol function can affect cancer risk and progression. Increased levels of the stress hormone cortisol and interleukin-6 (IL-6), a pro-inflammatory immune mediator, have been associated with acute and chronic stress levels. Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR) is a clinical stress-reducing program, which has been found to decrease psychological and physical symptoms associated with stress. The purpose of this randomised study, involving 299 BCS, was to evaluate the efficacy of MBSR in reducing cortisol and IL-6 levels, compared to a usual-care control treatment. Statistically significant reductions in cortisol levels were seen after the delivery of the MBSR program at both time points (week 1 and 6), and at week 6 only for IL-6. There was no significant difference in change in cortisol or IL6 levels over time between the MBSR and the usual-care groups. An association was observed between levels of IL-6 and psychological and physical symptoms and quality of life, but not for cortisol. The authors conclude that MBSR can alleviate the stress response in the short term for breast cancer survivors.
Abstract
Breast cancer survivors (BCS) often experience psychological and physiological symptoms after cancer treatment. Mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR), a complementary and alternative therapy, has reduced subjective measures of stress, anxiety, and fatigue among BCS. Little is known, however, about how MBSR affects objective markers of stress, specifically the stress hormone cortisol and the pro-inflammatory cytokine interleukin-6 (IL-6). In the present study, BCS ( N = 322) were randomly assigned to a 6-week MBSR program for BC or usual-care control. Measurements of cortisol, IL-6, symptoms, and quality of life were obtained at orientation and 6 weeks. Cortisol and IL-6 were also measured prior to and after the MBSR(BC) class Weeks 1 and 6. The mean age of participants was 56.6 years and 69.4% were White non-Hispanic. Most had Stage I (33.8%) or II (35.7%) BC, and 35.7% had received chemotherapy and radiation. Cortisol levels were reduced immediately following MBSR(BC) class compared to before the class Weeks 1 and 6 (Wilcoxon-signed rank test; p < .01, d = .52-.56). IL-6 was significantly reduced from pre- to postclass at Week 6 (Wilcoxon-signed rank test; p < .01, d = .21). No differences were observed between the MBSR(BC) and control groups from baseline to Week 6 using linear mixed models. Significant relationships with small effect sizes were observed between IL-6 and both symptoms and quality of life in both groups. Results support the use of MBSR(BC) to reduce salivary cortisol and IL-6 levels in the short term in BCS.
-
10.
The Sleep-Immune Crosstalk in Health and Disease.
Besedovsky, L, Lange, T, Haack, M
Physiological reviews. 2019;99(3):1325-1380
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
The interaction between sleep and immunity is an established phenomena. This thorough review article summarises sleep changes in response to both infectious and non-infectious immune system challenges and describes the role of sleep in supporting the immune system. Details are provided of how sleep affects the innate immune system (first line, rapid defence against infection) as well as the adaptive immune system (second line, delayed defence against infection), using a feedback system which promotes host defence. Sleep is associated with reduced infection risk and can improve infection outcome and vaccination responses. Sleep deprivation is also associated with chronic, low-grade inflammation. Nutrition Practitioners wishing to support immunity can focus on sleep as a simple lifestyle measure to enhance resilience.
Abstract
Sleep and immunity are bidirectionally linked. Immune system activation alters sleep, and sleep in turn affects the innate and adaptive arm of our body's defense system. Stimulation of the immune system by microbial challenges triggers an inflammatory response, which, depending on its magnitude and time course, can induce an increase in sleep duration and intensity, but also a disruption of sleep. Enhancement of sleep during an infection is assumed to feedback to the immune system to promote host defense. Indeed, sleep affects various immune parameters, is associated with a reduced infection risk, and can improve infection outcome and vaccination responses. The induction of a hormonal constellation that supports immune functions is one likely mechanism underlying the immune-supporting effects of sleep. In the absence of an infectious challenge, sleep appears to promote inflammatory homeostasis through effects on several inflammatory mediators, such as cytokines. This notion is supported by findings that prolonged sleep deficiency (e.g., short sleep duration, sleep disturbance) can lead to chronic, systemic low-grade inflammation and is associated with various diseases that have an inflammatory component, like diabetes, atherosclerosis, and neurodegeneration. Here, we review available data on this regulatory sleep-immune crosstalk, point out methodological challenges, and suggest questions open for future research.