Cognition in older age bipolar disorder: An analysis of archival data across the globe.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive deficits in bipolar disorder (BD) impact functioning and are main contributors to disability in older age BD (OABD). We investigated the difference between OABD and age-comparable healthy comparison (HC) participants and, among those with BD, the associations between age, global cognitive performance, symptom severity and functioning using a large, cross-sectional, archival dataset harmonized from 7 international OABD studies. METHODS: Data from the Global Aging and Geriatric Experiments in Bipolar Disorder (GAGE-BD) database, spanning various standardized measures of cognition, functioning and clinical characteristics, were analyzed. The sample included 662 euthymic to mildly symptomatic participants aged minimum 50years (509 BD, 153 HC), able to undergo extensive cognitive testing. Linear mixed models estimated associations between diagnosis and global cognitive performance (g-score, harmonized across studies), and within OABD between g-score and severity of mania and depressive symptoms, duration of illness and lithium use and of global functioning. RESULTS: After adjustment for study cohort, age, gender and employment status, there was no significant difference in g-score between OABD and HC, while a significant interaction emerged between employment status and diagnostic group (better global cognition associated with working) in BD. Within OABD, better g-scores were associated with fewer manic symptoms, higher education and better functioning. LIMITATIONS: Cross-sectional design and loss of granularity due to harmonization. CONCLUSION: More research is needed to understand heterogenous longitudinal patterns of cognitive change in BD and understand whether particular cognitive domains might be affected in OABD in order to develop new therapeutic efforts for cognitive dysfunction OABD.

Facilitators and barriers to using a DeskCycle as a sedentary behavior intervention in the work environment.

BACKGROUND: Sedentary behavior is a public health threat with extensive health burden on society. High levels of sedentary behavior have been associated with cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, obesity, and cancer. Individuals working in desk-related occupations are more likely to be sedentary for most of the day. Health researchers have responded by implementing and promoting interventions and wellness programs in work environments to reduce this behavior. This study examined the feasibility and experience of using the DeskCycle to reduce sedentary behavior among female workers in an academic office environment. METHODS: This was an intervention study where participants used the DeskCycle in two consecutive eight-week phases and uploaded DeskCycle use data daily. A questionnaire was administered after week 2 and week 8 (pre-post) of DeskCycle use in each phase to assess dimensions of feasibility, including an open-ended question for user experience. RESULTS: The participants (N = 78) had an average age of 44.4 (±11.3) years and were primarily non-Hispanic White (88.5%). DeskCycle daily use varied from Phase I: 84% to 64.9% (weeks 1-7), and 49.4% in week 8, to Phase II: 73.5% to 52.2% (week 1-7), and 40.2% in week 8. In Phase I, 96.6% (week 2) and 87% (week 8) agreed that the DeskCycle decreased sedentary behavior, and in Phase II, 74.3% (week 2) and 76.9% (week 8) agreed. The analysis of open-ended responses found challenges with the desk set up, cycling interfering with typing, and thinking critically, as barriers to DeskCycle use, while enjoying cycling and cycling improving mood were reported as facilitators. CONCLUSIONS: Using a DeskCycle in an academic office environment to reduce sedentary behavior is feasible in female office workers. Consideration should be given to the type of tasks performed while cycling.

The Effectiveness of the DeskCycle in Reducing Sedentary Behavior Among Female Office Workers.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of the DeskCycle in reducing sedentary behavior among female office workers at an educational institution. METHODS: This was a randomized control trial with a crossover design (N = 80). The intervention was conducted in two 8-week phases and included the DeskCycle and an informational handout with benefits and suggestions about the frequency of use. The primary outcome was weekly average nonsedentary time. Secondary outcomes included weight and mood. RESULTS: DeskCycle users reported significantly higher weekly average nonsedentary time compared with nonusers (phase I: 402.3 ± 72.4 vs 169.3 ± 17.5, P < 0.00; phase II: 282 ± 45 vs 216 ± 23, P = 0.00). There were no significant differences in weight or mood. CONCLUSIONS: The DeskCycle is effective in reducing sedentary behavior, suggesting workers in sedentary office occupations could integrate it into their workday, where possible, to prevent negative health outcomes.