Search

IntroductionGrowing evidence suggests that adverse experiences have long-term effects on executive functioning and underlying neural circuits. Previous work has identified functional abnormalities during inhibitory control in frontal brain regions in individuals exposed to adversities. However, these findings were mostly limited to specific adversity types such as maltreatment and prenatal substance abuse.MethodsWe used data from a longitudinal birth cohort study (n = 121, 70 females) to investigate the association between adversities and brain responses during inhibitory control. At the age of 33 years, all participants completed a stop-signal task during fMRI and an Adult Self-Report scale. We collected seven prenatal and postnatal adversity measures across development and performed a principal component analysis to capture common variations across those adversities, which resulted in a three-factor solution. Multiple regression analysis was performed to identify links between adversities and brain responses during inhibitory control using the identified adversity factors to show the common effect and single adversity measures to show the specific contribution of each adversity. To find neural correlates of current psychopathology during inhibitory control, we performed additional regression analyses using Adult Self-Report subscales.ResultsThe first adversity factor reflecting prenatal maternal smoking and postnatal psychosocial adversities was related to higher activation during inhibitory control in bilateral inferior frontal gyri, insula, anterior cingulate cortex, and middle temporal gyri. Similar results were found for the specific contribution of the adversities linked to the first adversity factor. In contrast, we did not identify any significant association between brain responses during inhibitory control and the second adversity factor reflecting prenatal maternal stress and obstetric risk or the third adversity factor reflecting lower maternal sensitivity. Higher current depressive symptoms were associated with higher activation in the bilateral insula and anterior cingulate cortex during inhibitory control.ConclusionOur findings extended previous work and showed that early adverse experiences have a long-term effect on the neural circuitry of inhibitory control in adulthood. Furthermore, the overlap between neural correlates of adversity and depressive symptomatology suggests that adverse experiences might increase vulnerability via neural alterations, which needs to be investigated by future longitudinal research.

Abstract The coronavirus pandemic has brought about dramatic restrictions to real-life social interactions and a shift towards more online social encounters. Positive social interactions have been highlighted as an important protective factor, with previous studies suggesting an involvement of the amygdala in the relationship between social embeddedness and well-being. The present study investigated the effect of the quality of real-life and online social interactions on mood, and explored whether this association is affected by an individual’s amygdala activity. Sixty-two participants of a longitudinal study took part in a one-week ecological momentary assessment (EMA) during the first lockdown, reporting their momentary well-being and their engagement in real-life and online social interactions eight times per day (N ~ 3000 observations). Amygdala activity was assessed before the pandemic during an emotion-processing task. Mixed models were calculated to estimate the association between social interactions and well-being, including two-way interactions to test for the moderating effect of amygdala activity. We found a positive relationship between real-life interactions and momentary well-being. In contrast, online interactions had no effect on well-being. Moreover, positive real-life social interactions augmented this social affective benefit, especially in individuals with higher amygdala being more sensitive to the interaction quality. Our findings demonstrate a mood-lifting effect of positive real-life social interactions during the pandemic, which was dependent on amygdala activity before the pandemic. As no corresponding effect was found between online social interactions and well-being, it can be concluded that increased online social interactions may not compensate for the absence of real-life social interactions.

IntroductionMultidimensional pediatric-psychosomatic inpatient treatment should be considered a highly relevant concept in the German healthcare system. This treatment concept has been successfully integrated to support youth with mental disorders and patients with chronic somatic conditions. Studies on treatment impact and empirical evidence of pediatric-psychosomatic inpatient therapies are rare, despite their clinical significance. Therefore, the study aims to provide initial indications of what constitutes to enhanced treatment effectiveness by comparing two different pediatric-psychosomatic inpatient treatment concepts. The clinics are comparable regarding the treated disorders, which include: dissociative, mood, and somatoform disorders, and psychological factors associated with chronic somatic conditions. Multidimensional treatment in both clinics include components of individual and family therapy, along with group-, art-, music-, creative-, and physio-therapy. Both clinics differed regarding their treatment philosophy in which; Clinic A practiced psychodynamic behavioral elements more strongly, while Clinic B rooted itself more strongly with psychoanalysis and family-dynamic practices.MethodEach clinic recruited 25 patients for the study. They completed two questionnaires both at admission and discharge, which measured general behavioral and emotional problems (YSR); and, respectively, difficulties in emotion perception and processing (TAS-26). The effectiveness of the treatment was examined by conducting one-sample t-test and effect sizes for each clinic. To obtain information on differentiating treatment effects, mixed ANOVAs were calculated. For estimating its influence, the treatment duration was taken into account as a covariate calculating an ANCOVA.ResultsIn both settings, treatment effects can be observed regarding internalizing problems. For alexithymia, no effects were seen in Clinic B, while in Clinic A, there was a significant reduction. When comparing both clinics, the ANOVAs showed significant interaction effects displaying advantages for Clinic A in the reduction of internalizing, total behavioral problems and alexithymia. Taking into account the treatment duration as a covariate, those effects level out. Significant differences between the clinics were no longer statistically detectable.DiscussionThe present study provides substantial preliminary indications on the effectiveness of multidimensional pediatric-psychosomatic inpatient therapy, which seems suitable for alleviating the general symptom burden and problems by identifying and processing emotions. Furthermore, the results indicate that an extended treatment duration may contribute to more pronounced effects.

Abstract Social integration is a major resilience factor for staying healthy. However, the COVID-19-pandemic led to unprecedented restrictions in social life. The consequences of these social lockdowns on momentary well-being are yet not fully understood. We investigated the affective benefit from social interactions in a longitudinal birth cohort. We used two real-time, real-life ecological momentary assessments once before and once during the initial lockdown of the pandemic (N = 70 participants; n~6800 observations) capturing the protective role of social interactions on well-being. Moreover, we used a multimethod approach to analyze ecological assessment data with individual risk and resilience factors, which are promising moderators in the relationship of social behavior, stress reactivity, and affective states (i.e., amygdala volume, neuroticism, polygenic risk for schizophrenia). Social contacts were linked to higher positive affect both during normal times and during the COVID-19-pandemic (beta coefficient = 0.1035), highlighting the beneficial role of social embedding. Interestingly, this relationship was differentially moderated by individual risk and resilience factors. In detail, participants with a larger left amygdala volume (beta coefficient = −0.0793) and higher neuroticism (beta coefficient = −0.0958) exhibited an affective benefit from more social interactions prior to the pandemic. This pattern changed during the pandemic with participants with smaller amygdala volumes and lower neurotic traits showing an affective gain during the pandemic. Moreover, participants with low genetic risk for schizophrenia showed an affective benefit (beta coefficient = −0.0528) from social interactions irrespective of the time point. Our results highlight the protective role of social integration on momentary well-being. Thereby, we offer new insights into how this relationship is differently affected by a person’s neurobiology, personality, and genes under adverse circumstances.

Childhood adversity is associated with brain morphology and poor psychological outcomes, and evidence of protective factors counteracting childhood adversity effects on neurobiology is scarce. We examined the interplay of childhood adversity with protective factors in relation to brain morphology in two independent longitudinal cohorts, the Generation R Study (N = 3008) and the Mannheim Study of Children at Risk (MARS) (N = 179). Cumulative exposure to 12 adverse events was assessed across childhood until age 9 years in Generation R and 11 years in MARS. Protective factors (temperament, cognition, self-esteem, maternal sensitivity, friendship quality) were assessed at various time-points during childhood. Global brain volumes and volumes of amygdala, hippocampus, and the anterior cingulate, medial orbitofrontal and rostral middle frontal cortices were assessed with anatomical scans at 10 years in Generation R and at 25 years in MARS. Childhood adversity was related to smaller cortical grey matter, cerebral white matter, and cerebellar volumes in children. Also, no buffering effects of protective factors on the association between adversity and the brain outcomes survived multiple testing correction. We found no robust evidence for an interaction between protective factors and childhood adversity on broad brain structural measures. Small interaction effects observed in one cohort only warrant further investigation.