Constantine G. Lyketsos, MD

Older adults have been hit hard by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Mortality data from Oxford COVID-19 Evidence Service indicates a risk of mortality of 3.6% for people in their 60s, which increases to 8.0% and 14.8% for people in their 70s and over 80s.

 An age-related mortality study from China showed that patients of COVID-19 above aged 55 years had 3 times increased mortality. Older individuals are much more likely to develop COVID-19 related complications.

 The increased mortality reflects the underlying biological, social, and psychological vulnerabilities faced by the older population. Elderly individuals are also disproportionately affected by social distancing policies and other restrictions to stop the spread of the virus, resulting in increased loneliness, social isolation, and loss of freedom and support networks.

Over the course of the pandemic, we have seen considerable media coverage about the risk of COVID-19 to older people. Unfortunately, much of this discourse has negatively fueled an already existing ageist sentiment. Ageism, which some define as stereotyping, prejudice, or discrimination toward people on the basis of age, is a serious international concern with important health implications.

 Multiple studies have indicated that ageism toward older adults is highly prevalent across countries and continues to grow with global population aging.

 Negative attitudes toward older adults pose significant risks to the health and well-being of older individuals, such as higher mortality risk, poor functional health, slower recovery from illness, and poor mental health.

Negative attitudes toward this population are particularly prevalent on social media. A Twitter analysis of 18,128 tweets between March 12 and March 21, 2020, showed that about one‐quarter of all tweets could be considered ageist, either because they included jokes or ridicule aimed at older adults or because their content downplayed the relevance of COVID‐19 and/or implied their lives were less valuable.

 Ageist attitudes are nothing new. A previous study of Facebook posts indicated that 74% excoriated older individuals, 27% infantilized them, and 37% advocated banning them from public activities, such as shopping.

 Various social media discourses have surfaced about prejudiced representation and denigration of older people in society. For example, COVID-19 has been characterized with the hashtag #BoomerRemover, which has been trending on social media platforms, often accompanied with ageist disparaging and devaluing memes.

Public discourse during the pandemic has increasingly portrayed those over the age of 70 as helpless, frail, and unable to contribute to society. These views are being spread by social media, the press, and public announcements by government officials throughout the world. There has been considerable media coverage and online discussions about potential for rationing of care of elderly people as they are more expendable than persons in other age groups. Some of the coverage seems to suggest that the deaths of older people somehow are not as important as the younger population.

There have been numerous examples of flagrant discrimination against older individuals during COVID-19. Earlier in its course, COVID-19 was believed primarily to affect elderly people. Many young people did not follow adequate precautions, and strong public health warnings were not issued. Even after COVID-19 outbreaks in many nursing homes, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines did not identify residents in long-term care as a high priority for testing.

 Treatment resources and personal protective equipment have been consistently directed toward the younger population.

 In a press briefing in March, World Health Organization Director-General Tedros Ghebreyesus took unnamed nations to task for failing to treat the death of older adults as a “serious issue” and exhibiting signs of “moral decay.”

One of the disturbing social consequences of COVID-19 includes a significant increase in the number of elder abuse cases, paralleling the rise of ageism. The CDC defines elder abuse as an “intentional act or failure to act by a caregiver or another person in a relationship involving an expectation of trust that causes or creates a serious risk of harm to an older adult.”

 Elder abuse was a huge public health problem globally even before COVID-19. It is estimated that in the United States, approximately 1 in 10 individuals over the age of 60 suffers physical, verbal or sexual abuse, or financial exploitation.

Elder abuse is significantly underreported. Only 1 in 24 cases may be reported.

 In almost 60% of elder abuse and neglect incidents, the perpetrator is a family member.

 Social isolation is a significant risk for elder abuse. Other risk factors include cognitive impairment, physical frailty, and dependence on others for care. Nursing home residents are also particularly vulnerable to elder abuse.

 All of these risk factors have been compounded by COVID-19.

To reiterate, since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been a massive increase in the reports of elder abuse. Reports range from incidents of family violence, neglect, and financial scams. The Federal Trade Commission and the American Bar Association as well various state departments have issued warnings to the public.

 In Europe, there have been distressing reports of older people abandoned in care homes in Spain.

 In Italy, where 23% of the population is aged 65 years or older, some hospitals have used chronological age-based cutoffs to ration ventilators.

Mortality data from the Oxford COVID-19 Evidence Service indicates a risk of mortality of 3.6% for people in their 60s, which increases to 8.0% and 14.8% for people in their 70s and 80s.

Not only do pervasive ageist attitudes and stereotypes contribute to negative health outcomes, but ageism among health care professionals can also result in discriminatory practices that place older people at risk.

 Studies have found widespread negative attitudes toward older people and old age among physicians, medical students, and nurses.

 Such attitudes can lead to practical consequences for older patients. For example, assumptions regarding functional and cognitive decline can lead to more limited provision of medical information, withholding certain treatment options, and exclusion from clinical trials.

 Ageist attitudes have also been found among mental health practitioners and trainees (such as assuming that depression symptoms are normal among elderly adults), which in turn may restrict access to treatments and contribute to functional decline.

Unfortunately, many well-intentioned efforts to combat the effects of COVID-19 have also resulted in marginalization of elderly adults. For example, recent shift towards telemedicine excludes roughly half of the adults over age 65 in the United States who lack access to broadband services.

Elder abuse and ageism are extremely hard problems to combat. There are no clear ways to reduce ageism and change attitudes toward aging. Combined interventions with education and intergenerational contact seem to show the largest effects on attitudes.

Adult Protection Services (APS) run by local or state health departments are usually responsible for investigating cases of elder abuse. However, few financial resources, insufficient access to information needed to resolve elder abuse cases, inadequate administrative systems, and lack of cross‐training with other disciplines in the aging field serving clients with mental health disabilities—these have hindered the role of APS workers in intervening in abusive situations.

Two important federal laws address the issue of elder abuse: the Older Americans Act (OAA) and the Elder Justice Act (EJA). However, lack of funding and relaxed enforcement have diluted their effectiveness. The EJA has received less than 10% of the funding that was authorized, especially with respect to achieving its main goal of dedicated funding for APS.

 Denial of elder abuse and lack of funding continues to be a significant problem in the enforcement of existing laws. Urgent policy changes are needed to strengthen the protections for the elderly during COVID-19.

is a Professor in the Department of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins University SOM.

Department of Psychiatry, Johns Hopkins University SOM.

is the Elizabeth Plank Althouse Professor and Chairman of the Department of Psychiatry, Bayview Campus, Johns Hopkins University SOM.

1. Oxford COVID-19 Evidence Service (2020). Global COVID-19 case fatality rates. Accessed September 25, 2020. 

https://www.cebm.net/oxford-covid-19-evidence-service/

2. Liu K, Chen Y, Lin R, Han K. Clinical features of COVID-19 in elderly patients: A comparison with young and middle-aged patients. 

3. Wu Z, McGoogan JM. Characteristics of and important lessons from the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in China: summary of a report of 72 314 cases from the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention. 

. 2020;323(13):1239-1242. Accessed September 18, 2020. 

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2762130

4. Butler RN. Ageism. In: Maddox GL, ed. 

. New York, Springer Publishing; 2000:38–9.

5. North MS, Fiske ST. Modern attitudes toward older adults in the aging world: a cross-cultural meta-analysis. 

6. Chang ES, Kannoth S, Levy S, Wang SY, Lee JE, Levy BR. Global reach of ageism on older persons’ health: A systematic review. 

. 2020;15(1):e0220857. Accessed September 18, 2020. 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0220857

7. Jimenez‐Sotomayor MR, Gomez‐Moreno C, Soto‐Perez‐de‐Celis E. Coronavirus, Ageism, and Twitter: An Evaluation of Tweets about Older Adults and COVID‐19. 

8. Levy BR, Chung PH, Bedford T, Navrazhina K. Facebook as a site for negative age stereotypes. 

9. Ayalon L. There is nothing new under the sun: ageism and intergenerational tension in the age of the COVID-19 outbreak. 

. 2020;1‐4. Published online April 14, 2020.

10. Ayalon L, Chasteen A, Diehl M, et al. Aging in Times of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Avoiding Ageism and Fostering Intergenerational Solidarity. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2020. Published online April 16, 2020.

11. Overview of Testing for SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19). CDC. Updated September 18, 2020. Accessed September 25, 2020. 

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/testing-overview.html

12. Mahr J. Short staffing. PPE shortages. Few inspections. Why calls are growing for Illinois nursing home regulators to step up efforts on COVID-19. 

 May 13, 2020. Accessed September 18, 2020. 

https://www.chicagotribune.com/coronavirus/ct-coronavirus-illinois-nursing-homes-regulators-pritzker-20200513-3bdofjnaivhadg2yt7kcf2psm4-story.html

13. Carbonaro G. ‘Every life matters’: WHO chief warns against COVID-19 age discrimination. 

 March 11, 2020. Accessed September 18, 2020. 

https://newseu.cgtn.com/news/2020-03-11/-Every-life-matters-WHO-warns-against-COVID-19-age-discrimination-OKDSHuH0gU/index.html

14. Elder Abuse. CDC. Accessed September 18, 2020. 

https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/elderabuse/index.html

15. Acierno R, Hernandez MA, Amstadter AB, et al. Prevalence and correlates of emotional, physical, sexual, and financial abuse and potential neglect in the United States: the National Elder Mistreatment Study. 

16. Lifespan of Greater Rochester Inc, Weill Cornell Medical Center of Cornell University, New York City Department for the Aging. Under the Radar: New York State Elder Abuse Prevalence Study. May 2011. Accessed September 18, 2020. 

https://ocfs.ny.gov/main/reports/under%20the%20radar%2005%2012%2011%20final%20report.pdf

17. Amstadter AB, Cisler JM, McCauley JL, Hernandez MA, Muzzy W, Acierno R. Do incident and perpetrator characteristics of elder mistreatment differ by gender of the victim? Results from the National Elder Mistreatment Study. 

18. Armitage R, Nellums LB. COVID-19 and the consequences of isolating the elderly. 

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanpub/article/PIIS2468-2667(20)30061-X/fulltext

19. Tressler C. Coronavirus: Scammers follow the headlines. Federal Trade Commission Consumer Information. February 10, 2020. Accessed September 18, 2020. 

https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/blog/2020/02/coronavirus-scammers-follow-headlines

20. Minder R, Peltier E. A deluged system leaves some elderly to die, rocking Spain’s self-image. 

. Updated March 29, 2020. Accessed September 18, 2020. 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/25/world/europe/Spain-coronavirus-nursing-homes.html

21. Burnes D, Sheppard C, Henderson CR Jr, et al. Interventions to Reduce Ageism Against Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. 

. 2019;109(8):e1‐e9. Accessed September 18, 2020. 

https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/full/10.2105/AJPH.2019.305123

22. Chrisler JC, Barney A, Palatino B. Ageism can be hazardous to women’s health: ageism, sexism, and stereotypes of older women in the healthcare system. 

23. Briggs R, Robinson S, O’Neill D. Ageism and clinical research. 

24. Bodner E, Palgi Y, Wyman MF. Ageism in mental health assessment and treatment of older adults. In: Ayalon L, Tesch-Römer C, eds. International Perspectives on Aging. Cham, Switzerland, Springer Nature; 2018;19:241–262.

25. Blancato B. It’s time to make the Elder Justice Act more effective. 

 August 14, 2019. Accessed September 18, 2020. 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/nextavenue/2019/08/14/its-time-to-make-the-elder-justice-act-more-effective/#6b87f7e45605

Articles

The pandemic hit everyone hard, but what implications and consequences has it had for the older generations? 

Elder Abuse and Ageism During COVID-19

Alzheimer dementia (AD) represents a profound global health concern. By the year 2050, the prevalence of AD in the United States is expected to reach 15 million. At present, there are 4.5 million cases in the United States,

 which equals an estimated cost of $100 billion each year in medical and family expenses.

 Clinically, AD is characterized by the progressive deterioration of patients' cognitive and functional abilities over several years from the initial onset of symptoms.

Neuropsychiatric symptoms are highly prevalent in this patient population and often represent the greatest source of distress to both the patient and his or her caregivers. Depression is one of the most common of these symptoms and often presents differently from major depressive episodes in younger persons. Although the treatment of depression in AD remains challenging, both pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic approaches can offer relief to patients and caregivers. This article highlights the significance of depression of Alzheimer disease (dAD) as a diagnostic entity, elucidates the issues surrounding its recognition, and ultimately offers some practical treatment strategies to physicians dealing with these complex cases.


Neuropsychiatric symptoms in AD are a heterogeneous group, representing a spectrum of expressions including depression, agitation, hallucinations, delusions, insomnia, and others. Two recent population-based studies examined the epidemiology of these symptoms in AD. In the Cache County Study on Memory in Aging, 53% of AD patients exhibited at least one of the previously mentioned symptoms during the previous month, as defined by the Neuropsychiatric Inventory, with depression occurring in about 20%.

 Similar results were seen in the cardiovascular health study, with depression being the most prevalent symptom at 32.3%.

 Comparable studies in the United Kingdom reported similar findings.

Additional analyses of the Cache County data found that despite the broad spectrum of neuropsychiatric symptoms, participants could be classified into 3 groups of symptom constellations: those with a monosymptomatic disturbance (19%; mostly delusions), those with a primarily psychotic syndrome (13%), and those with a primarily affective syndrome (28%).

 Studies from clinical settings reported that an estimated 30% to 50% of AD patients had depression. Neuropsy chiatric symptoms are reported to affect as many as 90% of AD patients over the course of their illness, with depression being among the most prevalent. These data confirm the overarching need for improved interventions in this area.

Depression can often be the first symptom in AD. Some evidence indicates that it is most common in mild to moderate illness but has a symptom constellation differing from that of depression in younger patients. For this reason, the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) sponsored a workgroup in 2002 to develop a set of criteria that would crystallize the cur rent consensus in the field.

 These criteria were predicated on the understanding that al though dAD has some similarities to major depressive disorder (MDD), it represents a unique clinical entity. Because of this qualitative distinction, existing criteria for the assessment of MDD consistently tend to underestimate the prevalence of dAD. Key differences in these criteria include: (1) dAD requires only 3 symptoms versus the 5 for MDD; (2) dAD symptoms can fluctuate more than those of MDD; (3) dAD includes symptoms of irritability and social isolation/withdrawal; and (4) dAD places greater emphasis on anhedonia (a decrease in positive affect or pleasure in response to social contact and usual activities). Generally speaking, patients with dAD tend to be more anxious, agitated, delusional, or inattentive but have less guilt and self-deprecation and are rarely suicidal. The hope among investigators is that the diagnostic criteria developed by the NIMH can more accurately capture these phenomena.


A commonly encountered belief among caregivers of patients with dementia is that receiving the diagnosis of Alz heimer disease will inevitably result in depression. This is the reason that families frequently protect their loved ones from hearing the details of their condition. However, there does not appear to be a clear association between a patient's insight into the disease and the risk of a mood disorder. In fact, many patients in whom an affective syndrome ultimately develops have little or no insight into their cognitive condition. In addition, dAD can occur at any stage in the disease process, including in advanced illness, where insight is almost universally absent.

Research is beginning to shed light on some of the proposed biologic foundations of dAD. Several pathologic studies

 consistently showed a relationship between depression in dementia and a loss of noradrenergic neurons in the locus caeruleus. A fluorodeoxy glucose positron emission tomography (PET) study found hypometabolism in the right superior frontal gyrus in patients with dAD as opposed to those without.

 A previous PET study also demonstrated frontal lobe hypometabolism that was most prominent on the left side in depressed patients with dementia.

 In addition, a recent autopsy study dem onstrated the consistent finding of Lewy bodies in the amygdala of dAD patients.

 The further elucidation of these underlying mechanisms may help to guide future treatment efforts.


One major challenge for clinicians is the limited capacity of AD patients to accurately convey their mood state. Both impaired language and executive functioning may contribute to a patient's inability to fully integrate and convey the subjective experience of depression despite profound sadness. In that regard, much of the diagnosis relies on the caregivers' observations, since they have frequent contact with the patient.

Experience teaches that it is best to interview informants separately to allow for the greatest opportunity to be candid. A careful history must accurately assess the time course and pattern of any symptoms, and the use of rating scales can aid the clinician in assessing symptom severity. The Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia (CSDD) is particularly useful because it integrates the patient and caregiver interviews to reach a composite rating.

Careful at tention in this often medically complex population to comorbid physical factors that may mimic or complicate the diagnosis of dAD is of equal importance (

). Delirium should be considered when the changes are acute. Issues such as medication toxicity (especially from anticholinergic agents), infections, metabolic abnormalities, pain, con stipation, and other primary medical problems are common.


Once an accurate diagnosis is made, treatment requires a pragmatic ap proach. In all cases, specific nonbiologic interventions should be made first. Nonpharmacologic treatment approaches offer an advantage over medication therapies because of their safety and are often a first-line treatment in more mildly depressed patients or in cases in which the caregiver is depressed.

 In more severe cases, or in situations in which patients fail to respond to these efforts, biologic treatments take precedence. Unfortunately, many good treatment plans fail or yield only partial benefit. These cases require a persistent effort that continually con siders alternative approaches.


Several fundamental principles guide effective caregiver interventions; these are briefly outlined in 

. An es sential first step in interventions is to focus on education about dementia and depression. In many circumstances, this includes helping caregivers make needed changes in the patient's environment (providing adequate structure, increasing physical comfort, and reducing overstimulation) or their own ap proach (having reasonable expectations, remaining calm and reassuring, not rushing the patient). The importance of developing a predictable daily rou tine that incorporates pleasur able activities for the patient should be paramount. In addition, caregivers vary in their aptitude to problem-solve when difficult situations arise. Working with them systematically as problems pre sent can help them cultivate this skill. It is essential to convey a sense of hope, allow an opportunity to "vent,&334; and praise their successes. It is also important to help caregivers recognize when the level of care a patient requires ex ceeds their abilities and may necessitate a change in living arrangements. Another key support is the clinician's 24-hour availability in case of crisis.

Additional resources, such as a local Alzheimer Association support group (go to 

 for listings) and reading material, including The 36-Hour Day


There are few studies of behavioral interventions in AD. One controlled study examined 2 interventions-one targeted to the patient, which focused on the provision of pleasant activities, and one that was caregiver-oriented and taught problem-solving skills.

 Both were more effective than usual care or a "wait list" control group in reducing depression in AD patients. In another controlled trial, an exercise training program combined with caregiver training also demonstrated an improvement in depression ratings.

 Often, interventions such as these are best implemented in the context of adult day treatment or in a senior citizens' center. Helping caregivers acquire information about local programs through a local chapter of the Alzheimer Association or the local department of aging can go a long way in establishing the most appropriate setting for clinical benefit.


When depression is severe or a CSDD score is above 12,19 when the patient is suicidal or violent, or when the patient is not eating or drinking, antidepressant therapy is likely required.

 Currently, there is no FDA-approved treatment for dAD; however, 

 summarizes the results of existing controlled trials of antidepressant medications in AD. It should be noted that most of these studies used DSM-IV diagnostic criteria, because the NIMH criteria for dAD were not in existence at the time.

As discussed, routine diagnostic criteria do not likely capture an accurate picture of the condition and could overlook aspects of treatment response. Other challenges in the interpretation of this literature are inconsistencies in efficacy findings, limited replication studies, and several negative studies that indicated no superiority of the drug over placebo. As a function of these limitations, these data cumulatively serve as a general guide to the treatment of dAD, but do not yet offer any definitive man agement recommendations.

At this point, the initial approach is to begin with an SSRI. The evidence seems to indicate a similar efficacy be tween tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) and SSRIs, with the latter being better tolerated with fewer cognitive side ef fects. Common side effects of SSRIs are largely related to their serotonergic activity and include GI distress, tremor, headache, restlessness, and insomnia. No controlled studies exist that examine the effects of newer antidepressant categories (serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, bupropion, or mirtazapine) in dAD. The best safety and efficacy data exist for sertraline and citalopram (with the latter arguably extrapolated to escitalopram based on their pharmacologic similarity), which make them a reasonable starting point in treatment.

These clinical trials seem to indicate that antidepressant dosing in dementia should be similar to that in younger patients. This is a key distinction from the standard lower dosing of other neuroleptic agents in this population. Titration to the maximal target dose over 4 weeks is ideal; however, slower schedules are appropriate as clinically indicated. If no response is seen after that time, a change is likely warranted or consideration may be given to augmentation with an antipsychotic or anticonvulsant. If partial benefit is seen after 4 weeks, full benefit may require up to 12 weeks of treatment. Scales such as the CSDD can be useful in monitoring this response.

If there is still inadequate response at 12 weeks, consider a medication change following a 2-week taper. Reasonable second-line agents include nor adrenergic drugs such as venlafaxine, mirtazapine, secondary amine TCAs, or a monoamine oxidase inhibitor. This choice theoretically relates to the previously described finding of the loss of noradrenergic neurons in the locus cae ruleus. If mood is im proved but agitation remains, a subsequent step can include adding an anticonvulsant such as divalproex. In our experience, initial dosages of 250 mg bid or 500 mg qhs are often required, with a titration to a serum level of 50 to 100 µg/mL; how ever, clinical re sponse is often seen at lower levels. This initial dosing may be somewhat higher then standard geriatric dosing.

For treatment-refractory patients, consideration should be given to electroconvulsive therapy, especially when patient safety is at risk because of suicidality, violence, or poor self-care. The concern for increased postictal delirium can be minimized by careful patient selection and in many cases, treatment has also been demonstrated to result in improved cognitive functioning in dementia.


Depression is a very frequent neuropsychiatric symptom in AD and is responsible for significant morbidity and caregiver burden. The symptom constellation of dAD differs from that of major depressive episodes, frequently including irritability, agitation, delusions, anxiety, and anhedonia. This syndrome has only recently been identified and provisional diagnostic criteria for dAD should help in understanding causes and treatments. Successful management requires the thoughtful integration of pharmacologic and non pharmacologic treatment strategies. The desire to maximize the quality of life for those dealing with this devastating disease fuels this effort.

Dr Kozauer is a neuropsychiatry postdoctoral fellow in the division of geriatric and neuropsychiatry, Dr Rosenberg is assistant professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences in the division of geriatric and neuropsychiatry, and Dr Lyketsos is professor and chair of the department of psychiatry at The Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore, Md. Dr Kozauer and Dr Rosenberg report that they have no conflicts of interest concerning the subject matter of this article. Dr Lyketsos receives grant support from NIMH, NIA, Associated Jewish Federation of Baltimore, Forest Labora tor ies, GlaxoSmithKline, Eisai, Pfizer, Astra-Zeneca, Eli Lilly, Ortho-McNeil, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Novartis. He is a consultant/advisor for Astra-Zeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Eisai, Novartis, Forest Laboratories, and Supernus Pharmaceuticals. He has received speaking honoraria from Pfizer, Forest Laboratories, and GlaxoSmithKline.

 Hebert LE, Scherr PA, Bienias JL, et al. Alzheimer disease in the US population: prevalence estimates using the 2000 census. Arch Neurol. 2003;60:1119-1122.


 Schumock GT. Economic considerations in the treatment and management of Alzheimer's disease. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 1998;55(suppl 2):S17-S21.


 Lyketsos CG, Steinberg M, Tschanz JT, et al. Mental and behavioral disturbances in dementia: findings from the Cache County Study on Memory in Aging. Am J Psy chiatry. 2000;157:708-714.


 Lyketsos CG, Lopez O, Jones B, et al. Prevalence of neuropsychiatric symptoms in dementia and mild cognitive impairment: results from the cardiovascular health study. JAMA. 2002;288:1475-1483.


 Burns A, Jacoby R, Levy R. Psychiatric phenomena in Alzheimer’s disease, III: disorders of mood. Br J Psy chiatry. 1990;157:81-86, 92-94.


 Lyketsos CG, Sheppard JM, Steinberg M, et al. Neuro psychiatric disturbance in Alzheimer’s disease clusters into three groups: the Cache County study. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2001;16:1043-1053.


 Olin JT, Schneider LS, Katz IR, et al. Provisional diagnostic criteria for depression of Alzheimer disease. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2002;10:125-128.


 Forstl H, Burns A, Luthert P, et al. Clinical and neuropathological correlates of depression in Alzheimer’s disease. Psychol Med. 1992;22:877-884.


 Zubenko GS, Moossy J, Martinez AJ, et al. Neuropatho logic and neurochemical correlates of psychosis in pri mary dementia. Arch Neurol. 1991;48: 619-624.


 Zweig RM, Ross CA, Hedreen JC, et al. The neuro pathology of aminergic nuclei in Alzheimer's disease. Ann Neurol. 1988;24:233-242.


 Lee DY, Choo IH, Jhoo JH, et al. Frontal dysfunction underlies depressive syndrome in Alzheimer disease: a FDG-PET study. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2006;14:625-628.


 Hirono N, Mori E, Ishii K, et al. Frontal lobe hypo metabolism and depression in Alzheimer's disease. Neurology. 1998;50:380-383.


 Lopez OL, Becker JT, Sweet RA, et al. Lewy bodies in the amygdala increase risk for major depression in subjects with Alzheimer disease. Neurology. 2006;67: 660-665.


 Alexopoulos GS, Abrams RC, Young RC, Shamoian CA. Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia. Biol Psy chiatry. 1988;23:271-284.


 Lyketsos CG, Olin J. Depression in Alzheimer's disease: overview and treatment. Biol Psychiatry. 2002;52:243-252.


 Mace NL, Rabins PV. The 36-Hour Day: A Family Guide to Caring for Persons with Alzheimer Disease, Related Dementing Illnesses, and Memory Loss in Later Life. 3rd ed. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press; 1999.


 Teri L, Logsdon RG, Uomoto J, McCurry SM. Be havioral treatment of depression in dementia patients: a controlled clinical trial. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 1997;52:P159-P166.


 Teri L, Gibbons LE, McCurry SM, et al. Exercise plus behavioral management in patients with Alzheimer disease: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2003;290: 2015-2022.


 Lyketsos CG, Steele C, Baker L, et al. Major and minor depression in Alzheimer's disease: prevalence and impact. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci. 1997;9: 556-561.


 Rao V, Lyketsos CG. The benefits and risks of ECT for patients with primary dementia who also suffer from depression. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2000;15:729-735.


 Rabins PV, Lyketsos CG, Steele CD. Practical Demen tia Care. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2006.


 Reifler BV, Teri L, Raskind M, et al. Double-blind trial of imipramine in Alzheimer's disease patients with and without depression. Am J Psychiatry. 1989;146:45-49.


 Petracca G, Teson A, Chemerinski E, et al. A double-blind placebo-controlled study of clomipramine in depressed patients with Alzheimer’s disease. J Neuro psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 1996;8:270-275.


 Roth M, Mountjoy CQ, Amrein R. Moclobemide in elderly patients with cognitive decline and depression: an international double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Br J Psychiatry. 1996;168:149-157.


 Nyth AL, Gottfries CG, Lyby K, et al. A controlled multicenter clinical study of citalopram and placebo in elderly depressed patients with and without concomitant dementia. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1992;86:138-145.


 Nyth AL, Gottfries CG. The clinical efficacy of citalopram in treatment of emotional disturbances in de men tia disorders. A Nordic multicentre study. Br J Psychiatry. 1990;157:894-901.


 Magai C, Kennedy G, Cohen CI, Gomberg D. A controlled clinical trial of sertraline in the treatment of depression in nursing home patients with late-stage Alzheimer’s disease. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2000;8:66-74.


 Lyketsos CG, DelCampo L, Steinberg M, et al. Treating depression in Alzheimer disease: efficacy and safety of sertraline therapy, and the benefits of depression re duction: the DIADS. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2003;60:737-746.


 Petracca GM, Chemerinski E, Starkstein SE. A double-blind, placebo-controlled study of fluoxetine in depressed patients with Alzheimer’s disease. Int Psychogeriatr. 2001;13:233-240.


 Taragano FE, Lyketsos CG, Mangone CA, et al. A double-blind, randomized, fixed-dose trial of fluoxetine vs. amitriptyline in the treatment of major depression com plication Alzheimer’s disease. Psychosomatics. 1997;38:246-252.


 Katona CL, Hunter BN, Bray J. A double-blind comparison of the efficacy and safety of paroxetine and imipramine in the treatment of depression with dementia. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 1998;13:100-108.


 Rosenberg PB, Lyketsos CG. Depression in Alzheimer disease. In: Charney DS, Evans D, eds. The Physician’s Guide to Depression and Bipolar Disorders. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2006:303-332.

Alzheimer dementia (AD) represents a profound global health concern. By the year 2050, the prevalence of AD in the United States is expected to reach 15 million. At present, there are 4.5 million cases in the United States, which equals an estimated cost of $100 billion each year in medical and family expenses.

Depression in Patients With Alzheimer Dementia

The recent approval of psychosomatic medicine (PM) as the newest psychiatric subspecialty by the American Board of Medical Specialties

 was predicated, in significant part, on the public health significance of the field and on the existence of a well-developed body of knowledge to support its validity and activities. The continued growth of the evidence base is crucial to the future of the field and to improving the care of the patients who are its focus, thus leading to a reduction of the public health burden associated with their condition. In this article, we present a brief overview of the existing evidence base of PM in the context of its public health significance; we also provide some suggestions for its future development. 

Examples of the evidence Because the PM evidence base is rich and varied, it cannot be fully covered in an article of this length. Nevertheless, the following examples serve to illustrate the current status and depth of the research. Psychiatric comorbidity is very common in patients with medical conditions, with a prevalence ranging from 20% to 67%. Patients in the general hospital have a higher rate of psychiatric disorders than community samples or patients in ambulatory primary care. Compared with community samples, depressive disorders in hospitalized medical patients are more than twice as common, major depression 2 to 3 times as common, substance abuse 2 to 3 times as common, and somatization disorder more than 10 times as common. Delirium occurs in 18% of hospitalized patients, a rate much higher than one would expect in the community. Similarly increased rates are seen in primary care and long-term care.

Psychiatric comorbidity has serious effects on physically ill patients and is often a risk factor for their medical conditions. It is well established that depression is both a risk factor and a poor prognostic factor in coronary artery disease. Psychiatric illness worsens cardiac morbidity and mortality in patients with a history of myocardial infarction, diminishes glycemic control in patients with diabetes, and decreases return to functioning in patients who have had a stroke. Mood and anxiety disorders compound the disability associated with stroke. In the context of neurodegenerative disease (eg, Parkinson or Alzheimer disease), depression, psychosis, and behavioral disturbances are significant predictors of functional decline, institutionalization, and caregiver burden.

Hospitalized patients with delirium are significantly less likely to improve in function than patients without delirium. Delirium is associated with worse outcomes after surgery, even after controlling for severity of physical illness.

 Dialysis patients with psychiatric conditions experience more difficulties in adjusting to dialysis, such as placement of the shunt, dependence on a machine, multiple needle-sticks, and accepting the reality of blood circulating outside their bodies. Psychopathology adversely affects patients during the long wait for an organ transplant. After organ transplantation, relatively minor disruptions in compliance with immunosuppressant medication such as may be associated with depression, may result in graft rejection and death.

In addition, depression and other psychiatric disorders significantly impact quality of life and the ability of patients to adhere to treatment regiregimens. For example, psychiatric disorders are linked to nonadherence with antiretroviral therapy, adversely affecting the survival of patients with HIV infection. Psychiatric disorders worsen the prognosis and quality of life of patients with cancer. Psychiatric disorders are also linked to nonadherence to safe sex practices and to the use of sterile needles in HIV-infected injection drug users, leading to major public health implications.

With regard to clinical services, failure to identify, evaluate, diagnose, treat, or achieve symptom resolution of psychiatric morbidity in medical care settings results in significant adverse outcomes. Depression, dementia, and delirium,

 common psychiatric disorders found in hospitalized medical patients, are associated with higher medical care use, both in the hospital (more than 30% longer duration of hospitalization) and after discharge.

Although it is the treatment of choice, fewer than 1 in 5 patients with agitated delirium receive neuroleptic treatment in the hospital. When delirium is unrecognized and untreated in the hospital, patients are needlessly placed in nursing homes instead of being sent home.

Physically ill patients with depression whose condition is not diagnosed and who therefore do not start treatment while hospitalized have only an 11% chance of receiving treatment for depression in the next year. Untreated depression is associated with a higher need for medical services after hospital discharge and with higher morbidity and mortality in coronary disease, hypertension, diabetes, and stroke.

Based on existing research findings, the presence of co-occurring physical and psychiatric disorders can be explained by an adverse bidirectional interaction.

 This model proposes that the seemingly disparate medical and psychiatric disease states are, in fact, integrally related in their causation and pathophysiology and, ultimately, should be treated together. Underlying risk factors, including genetic vulnerability, childhood adversity, maladaptive attachment, and adverse life events are associated with depression and biobehavioral risk of chronic disease. A recent editorial summarizing findings of a conference on depression in medical illness called for more research "to understand this bidirectional relationship and identify possible common pathogenic, mechanistic pathways that link depression and serious medical illness."

Results of PM research in the context of cardiovascular disease (CVD) can be used as a model to illustrate developments in the broader PM research agenda as they relate to understanding mechanisms linking psychiatric morbidity to poorer medical outcomes, as well as the effect of treating psychiatric morbidity on medical outcomes. This model also provides an illustration of the challenges and the future directions in this line of investigation for PM research concerning other physical conditions.

A confluence of evidence suggests that major depression is a risk factor for CVD and poorer cardiac outcomes in patients with CVD. Even minimal elevation in depressive symptoms increases the risk of subsequent cardiac events and mortality. What are the mechanisms underlying this? There has been a great deal of research to find physiologic pathways that explain this link. One plausible mechanism points to dysregulation of the autonomic nervous system as playing a critical role. Decreased activity of the parasympathetic nervous system and increased activity of the sympathetic nervous system are associated with risk of myocardial ischemia, ventricular tachycardia, ventricular fibrillation, and sudden cardiac death in patients with CVD.

Patients with depression are more likely to exhibit autonomic dysfunction as evidenced by increased catecholamine levels, increased heart rate, decreased heart rate variability, baroreflex dysfunction, and higher variability in ventricular repolarization. Additional mechanisms to explain the relationship between depression and CVD include alterations in platelet function, immune system parameters, and behavioral risk factors. Although a number of physiologic parameters have been identified, a conclusive underlying mechanism remains elusive.

If depression adversely affects CVD outcomes, what is the benefit of treating depression to CVD outcomes? Some evidence suggests that treating depression in patients with CVD results in improved cardiac autonomic function. The use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and psychological therapies has proved safe and effective in the treatment of depression in patients who have CVD.

The Sertraline Antidepressant Heart Attack Trial (SADHART)

 was a landmark trial because it combined psychiatric, cardiovascular, and physiologic data. Its findings demonstrated a trend for an association between treatment with sertraline and decreased incidence of severe cardiac events. It should be noted, however, that patients treated with sertraline demonstrated decreased platelet and endothelial activation markers. This suggests that the benefit of sertraline may be achieved through its antiplatelet effects rather than through its effects on depression. 

The Enhancing Recovery in Coronary Heart Disease (ENRICHD)

 trial, which used a tailored cognitive-behavioral intervention, did not show a relationship between psychotherapeutic treatment and recurrent cardiac events or all-cause mortality in the overall sample, although post hoc analyses demonstrated cardiac benefits among white males. However, a significant proportion of the participants across study arms were taking antidepressant medications, which may have significantly decreased the risk of nonfatal reinfarction or death. Further research is needed to identify the most effective treatments that improve both depression and cardiovascular outcomes by targeting their shared pathophysiology. Once identified, research examining the dissemination of these interventions will be warranted.

PM is now involved with a wide and ever-expanding spectrum of investigations looking at the relationship between physical and psychiatric illness. Important contributions have occurred in HIV/AIDS; cancer; transplantation; cardiac, neurologic, pulmonary, renal, and GI disease; and obstetrics-gynecology. In each of these areas, first-generation studies have identified the extent and nature of psychiatric morbidity associated with the most common diseases or hospitalization. More sophisticated second-generation cross-sectional, epidemiologic studies have established the prevalence rates of a broader range of psychiatric disorders in several medical conditions, as well as less common or newly proposed psychiatric syndromes, such as Alzheimer-associated affective disorder. 

In some cases, a new body of research has extended our knowledge about genetic, neurochemical, and behavioral factors contributing to the development of psychiatric disorders among complex medically ill populations. This work has shown that many different mechanisms are involved. Examples include the relationship between the location of brain lesion after stroke and poststroke major depression, or between childhood sexual abuse and the later development of chronic pain syndromes. This has led to more rational intervention studies focused on reducing the rate of occurrence of these disorders, including successful programs that reduce postcardiotomy delirium and other forms of ICU delirium.

The future research agenda for PM will continue to revolve around these themes. The 

 displays examples of the sorts of studies that are anticipated in the next few decades. They are grouped by type of study, with specific examples provided within each group. For brevity, the examples are focused on specific psychiatric or medical conditions, even though similar studies might be envisioned involving a range of psychiatric and medical conditions. As is evident, PM research will slowly move away from descriptive studies and focus increasingly on studies of mechanisms while continuing with key treatment studies, until mechanism studies lead to the development of "designer" therapies informed by better mechanistic understanding. There will, by necessity, beincreasing application of newer research methods from genetics, brain imaging, animal models, pharmacology, psychology, epidemiology, and clinical trials. 

The major challenge for the field will be the funding of its research. This is especially true given the funding limitations faced by the NIH in the next few years. Increasingly, the field will have to connect with a broader spectrum of research funding through closer relationships with the pharmaceutical industry and investor philanthropy. A critical component of the ability to grow and sustain funding will be the ability of PM to work closely with the NIH, especially within the context of the NIH Roadmap for Medical Research that calls for clinical and translation research in areas of high significance to public health and that crosses traditional basic and clinical disciplines. Already, the Academy of Psychosomatic Medicine, the American Psychosomatic Society, and the American Psychiatric Association are working closely to articulate a systematic work plan for PM research and research capacity in the next decade and are seeking NIH funding to support the development of this work. In all, the next decade promises to be highly exciting for the PM research field.

Dr Lyketsos is a professor in the department of neuropsychiatry and the Memory Group at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine in Baltimore. Dr Alter is associate professor and director of policy and community outreach in the department of psychiatry at the Georgetown University Medical Center in Washington, DC.

 The authors have indicated that they have no conflicts of interest.

 Gitlin DF, Levenson JL, Lyketsos CG. Psychosomatic medicine: a new psychiatric subspecialty. Acad Psychiatry. 2004;28:4-11.


 Lyketsos, CG, Levenson JL, with the Academy of Psychosomatic Medicine (APM) Task Force for Subspecialization. Proposal for Recognition of "Psychosomatic Medicine" as a Psychiatric Subspecialty. Bethesda, Md: Academy of Psychosomatic Medicine; July 2001.


 Katon WJ. Clinical and health services relationships between major depression, depressive symptoms, and general medical illness. Biol Psychiatry. 2003;54:216-226.


 Evans DL, Charney DS. Mood disorders and medical illness: a major public health problem. Biol Psychiatry. 2003;54:177-180.


 Glassman AH, O'Connor CM, Califf RM, et al. Sertraline treatment of major depression in patients with acute MI or unstable angina. JAMA. 2002;288:701-709. 


 Berkman LF, Blumenthal J, Burg M, et al, for the Enhancing Recovery in Coronary Heart Disease Patients Investigators (ENRICHD). Effects of treating depression and low perceived social support on clinical events after myocardial infarction: the Enhancing Recovery in Coronary Heart Disease Patients (ENRICHD) randomized trial. JAMA. 2003;289:3106-3116. 

A discussion of the current evidence base of psychosomatic medicine in the context of its public health significance and suggestions for the future development of the field.

Author | Constantine G. Lyketsos, MD

Articles

New content coming soon, please check back later.