Non-specific symptoms as clues to changes in emotional well-being

Background: Somatic symptoms are a common reason for visits to the family physician. The aim of this study was to examine the relation between non-specific symptoms and changes in emotional well-being and the degree to which the physician considers the possibility of mental distress when faced with such patients. Methods: Patients who complained of two or more symptoms including headache, dizziness, fatigue or weakness, palpitations and sleep disorders over one year were identified from the medical records of a random sample of 45 primary care physicians. A control group matched for gender and age was selected from the same population. Emotional well-being was assessed using the MOS-SF 36 in both groups. Results: The study group and the control group each contained 110 patients. Completed MOS questionnaires were obtained from 92 patients, 48 patients with somatic symptoms and 44 controls. Sixty percent of the patients with somatic symptoms experienced decreased emotional well being compared to 25% in the control group (p =0.00005). Symptoms of dizziness, fatigue and sleep disturbances were significantly linked with mental health impairments. Primary care physicians identified only 6 of 29 patients (21%) whose responses revealed functional limitations due to emotional problems as suffering from an emotional disorder and only 6 of 23 patients (26%) with a lack of emotional well being were diagnosed with an emotional disorder. Conclusions: Non-specific somatic symptoms may be clues to changes in emotional well-being. Improved recognition and recording of mental distress among patients who complain of these symptoms may enable better follow up and treatment

Post-Disaster Reproductive Health Outcomes

We examined methodological issues in studies of disaster-related effects on reproductive health outcomes and fertility among women of reproductive age and infants in the United States (US). We conducted a systematic literature review of 1,635 articles and reports published in peer-reviewed journals or by the government from January 1981 through December 2010. We classified the studies using three exposure types: (1) physical exposure to toxicants; (2) psychological trauma; and (3) general exposure to disaster. Fifteen articles met our inclusion criteria concerning research focus and design. Overall studies pertained to eight different disasters, with most (n = 6) focused on the World Trade Center attack. Only one study examined pregnancy loss, i.e., occurrence of spontaneous abortions post-disaster. Most studies focused on associations between disaster and adverse birth outcomes, but two studies pertained only to post-disaster fertility while another two examined it in addition to adverse birth outcomes. In most studies disaster-affected populations were assumed to have experienced psychological trauma, but exposure to trauma was measured in only four studies. Furthermore, effects of both physical exposure to toxicants and psychological trauma on disaster-affected populations were examined in only one study. Effects on birth outcomes were not consistently demonstrated, and study methodologies varied widely. Even so, these studies suggest an association between disasters and reproductive health and highlight the need for further studies to clarify associations. We postulate that post-disaster surveillance among pregnant women could improve our understanding of effects of disaster on the reproductive health of US pregnant women

The Role of Applied Epidemiology Methods in the Disaster Management Cycle

Disaster epidemiology (i.e., applied epidemiology in disaster settings) presents a source of reliable and actionable information for decision-makers and stakeholders in the disaster management cycle. However, epidemiological methods have yet to be routinely integrated into disaster response and fully communicated to response leaders. We present a framework consisting of rapid needs assessments, health surveillance, tracking and registries, and epidemiological investigations, including risk factor and health outcome studies and evaluation of interventions, which can be practiced throughout the cycle. Applying each method can result in actionable information for planners and decision-makers responsible for preparedness, response, and recovery. Disaster epidemiology, once integrated into the disaster management cycle, can provide the evidence base to inform and enhance response capability within the public health infrastructure