Shandera-Ochsner, Anne

Abstract INTRODUCTION Multicomponent non‐pharmacological interventions, such as the HABIT Healthy Action to Benefit Independence & Thinking® program, have shown promise for improving emotional well‐being, functioning, and self‐efficacy in both people with mild cognitive impairment (pwMCI) and their care partners. However, limited research has examined whether outcomes differ based on type of care partner who co‐enrolls with the pwMCI. METHODS We analyzed data from 875 pwMCI−care partner dyads who completed the HABIT program. Multivariate linear mixed‐effects regression models evaluated changes from baseline in outcomes by care partner type (spouse vs. non‐spouse) at post‐intervention, 6‐months, and 12‐ months. RESULTS At post‐intervention, pwMCI with spousal care partners demonstrated significant improvements across all outcomes from baseline, whereas those with non‐spousal partners improved in five out of seven outcomes. Across subsequent follow‐ups, pwMCI with spousal care partners showed sustained mean reductions in anxiety (post‐intervention: −2.0; 12‐month: −0.9) and increased compliance (post‐intervention: 5.7; 12‐month: 0.9). Everyday functioning in memory (post‐intervention: −0.9; 12‐months: 1.8) and executive functioning (post‐intervention: −0.7; 12‐months: 4.8) improved at post‐intervention but declined thereafter. Spousal care partners reported reduced anxiety (−1.2) and depression (−1.3) at post‐intervention, but by 12‐months they experienced increased burden, anxiety, and depression relative to baseline. Non‐spousal pwMCI–care partner dyads did not show significant change at 6 or 12‐months. DISCUSSION The HABIT intervention may have more favorable outcomes for pwMCI and care partners in spousal compared to non‐spousal dyads. These findings highlight the potential impact of care partner characteristics on both immediate and long‐term response to behavioral interventions for MCI. Highlights At post‐intervention, people with mild cognitive impairment (pwMCI) with spousal care partners showed significant improvements across all outcomes, while those with non‐spousal partners improved in five of seven outcomes. Gains attenuated over time for both spousal and non‐spousal dyads Spousal care partners reported reduced anxiety and depression at post‐intervention, but by 12 months they experienced increased burden, anxiety, and depression relative to baseline. Non‐spousal pwMCI–care partner dyads did not show significant change at 6 or 12 months.

Background: In Alzheimer’s disease and related disorders (ADRD) research, common outcome measures include cognitive and functional impairment, as well as persons with mild cognitive impairment (pwMCI) and care partner self-reported mood and quality of life. Studies commonly analyze these measures separately, which potentially leads to issues of multiple comparisons and/or multicollinearity among measures while ignoring the latent constructs they may be measuring. Objective: This study sought to examine the latent factor structure of a battery of 12-13 measures of domains mentioned above, used in a multicomponent behavioral intervention (The HABIT® program) for pwMCI and their partners. Methods: Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) involved 214 pwMCI-partner pairs. Subsequent Confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) used 730 pairs in both pre- and post-intervention conditions. Results: EFA generated a three-factor model. Factors could be characterized as partner adjustment (29.9%), pwMCI adjustment (18.1%), and pwMCI impairment (12.8%). The subsequent CFA confirmed our findings, and the goodness-of-fit for this model was adequate in both the pre- (CFI = 0.937; RMSEA = 0.057, p = 0.089) and post-intervention (CFI = 0.942; RMSEA = 0.051, p = 0.430) groups. Conclusion: Results demonstrated a stable factor structure across cohorts and intervention conditions suggesting that three broad factors may provide a straightforward and meaningful model to assess intervention outcome, at least during the MCI phase of ADRD.

There is currently limited and mixed evidence for the cognitive benefits of Computerized Cognitive Training (CCT) and yoga in persons with Mild Cognitive Impairment (pwMCI). The objective of this study was to investigate the benefit of computerized cognitive training (CCT) vs. physical (yoga) intervention on cognitive abilities. Participants in this study were part of the larger Mayo Clinic’s Healthy Action to Benefit Independence and Thinking (HABIT) program comparative effectiveness trial. The HABIT program is designed for pwMCI and their care partner and consists of five behavioral interventions: CCT, Memory Support System-Calendar (MSS-Calendar), wellness education, support groups, and yoga. The subtractive study design randomly withheld one of the interventions for a total of five study arms. Longitudinal mixed-effects regression models were used to investigate the hypothesis that CCT and yoga has a greater positive impact on psychomotor and basic attention abilities at 12 months post-intervention as compared to the other HABIT interventions. Findings showed CCT had a positive impact compared to yoga on the Cogstate psychomotor/attention composite at 12 months post-intervention (ES = 0.54; unadjusted p value = 0.007, adjusted p value = 0.021). The impact of yoga or combining CCT with yoga did not show statistically significant improvement. Continued CCT practice at home showed further benefit on psychomotor/attention at 12 months post-intervention. There was no significant benefit of CCT or yoga on Cogstate learning/working memory composite.