Health-related quality of life and mental health problems after a disaster: Are chronically ill survivors more vulnerable to health problems?

Studies have shown that the chronically ill are at higher risk for reduced health-related quality of life (HRQL) and for mental health problems. A combination with traumatic events might increase this risk. This longitudinal study among 1216 survivors of a disaster examines whether chronically ill survivors had a different course of HRQL and mental health problems compared to survivors without chronic diseases. HRQL and mental health problems were measured 3 weeks, 18 months and 4 years post-disaster. Data on pre-disaster chronic diseases was obtained from the electronic medical records of general practitioners. Random coefficient analyses showed significant interaction effects for social functioning, bodily pain and emotional role limitations at T2 only. Chronically ill survivors did not consistently have a different course of general health, physical role limitations, and mental health problems. In conclusion, chronic diseases were not an important risk factor for impaired HRQL and mental health problems among survivors

Selective attrition and bias in a longitudinal health survey among survivors of a disaster

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the response mechanisms among survivors of disasters. We studied the selective attrition and possible bias in a longitudinal study among survivors of a fireworks disaster. METHODS: Survivors completed a questionnaire three weeks (wave 1), 18 months (wave 2) and four years post-disaster (wave 3). Demographic characteristics, disaster-related factors and health problems at wave 1 were compared between respondents and non-respondents at the follow-up surveys. Possible bias as a result of selective response was examined by comparing prevalence estimates resulting from multiple imputation and from complete case analysis. Analysis were stratified according to ethnic background (native Dutch and immigrant survivors). RESULTS: Among both native Dutch and immigrant survivors, female survivors and survivors in the age categories 25–44 and 45–64 years old were more likely to respond to the follow-up surveys. In general, disasters exposure did not differ between respondents and non-respondents at follow-up. Response at follow-up differed between native Dutch and non-western immigrant survivors. For example, native Dutch who responded only to wave 1 reported more depressive feelings at wave 1 (59.7%; 95% CI 51.2–68.2) than Dutch survivors who responded to all three waves (45.4%; 95% CI 41.6–49.2, p < 0.05). Immigrants who responded only to wave 1 had fewer health problems three weeks post-disaster such as depressive feelings (M = 69.3%; 95% CI 60.9–77.6) and intrusions and avoidance reactions (82.7%; 95% CI 75.8–89.5) than immigrants who responded to all three waves (respectively 89.9%; 95% CI 83.4–96.9 and 96.3%; 95% CI 92.3–100, p < .01). Among Dutch survivors, the imputed prevalence estimates of wave 3 health problems tended to be higher than the complete case estimates. The imputed prevalence estimates of wave 3 health problems among immigrants were either unaffected or somewhat lower than the complete case estimates. CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that despite selective response, the complete case prevalence estimates were only somewhat biased. Future studies, both among survivors of disasters and among the general population, should not only examine selective response, but should also investigate whether selective response has biased the complete case prevalence estimates of health problems by using statistical techniques such as multiple imputation

Are physical symptoms among survivors of a disaster presented to the general practitioner? A comparison between self-reports and GP data

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Most studies examining medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) have been performed in primary or secondary care and have examined symptoms for which patients sought medical attention. Disasters are often described as precipitating factors for MUS. However, health consequences of disasters are typically measured by means of questionnaires, and it is not known whether these self-reported physical symptoms are presented to the GP. It is also not known if the self-reported symptoms are related to a medical disorder or if they remain medically unexplained. In the present study, three research questions were addressed. Firstly, were self-reported symptoms among survivors presented to the GP? Secondly, were the symptoms presented to the GP associated with a high level of functional impairment and distress? Thirdly, what was the GP's clinical judgment of the presented symptoms, i.e. were the symptoms related to a medical diagnosis or could they be labeled MUS?</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Survivors of a man-made disaster (N = 887) completed a questionnaire 3 weeks (T1) and 18 months (T2) post-disaster. This longitudinal health survey was combined with an ongoing surveillance program of health problems registered by GPs.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The majority of self-reported symptoms was not presented to the GP and survivors were most likely to present persistent symptoms to the GP. For example, survivors with stomachache at both T1 and T2 were more likely to report stomachache to their GP (28%) than survivors with stomachache at only T1 (6%) or only T2 (13%). Presentation of individual symptoms to the GP was not consistently associated with functional impairment and distress. 56 – 91% of symptoms were labeled as MUS after clinical examination.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>These results indicate that the majority of self-reported symptoms among survivors of a disaster are not presented to the GP and that the decision to consult with a GP for an individual symptom is not dependent on the level of impairment and distress. Also, self-reported physical symptoms such as headache, back pain and shortness of breath are likely to remain medically unexplained after the clinical judgment of a GP.</p

Use of mental health services among disaster survivors: predisposing factors

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Given the high prevalence of mental health problems after disasters it is important to study health services utilization. This study examines predictors for mental health services (MHS) utilization among survivors of a man-made disaster in the Netherlands (May 2000).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Electronic records of survivors (n = 339; over 18 years and older) registered in a mental health service (MHS) were linked with general practice based electronic medical records (EMRs) of survivors and data obtained in surveys. EMR data were available from 16 months pre-disaster until 3 years post-disaster. Symptoms and diagnoses in the EMRs were coded according to the International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC). Surveys were carried out 2–3 weeks and 18 months post-disaster, and included validated questionnaires on psychological distress, post-traumatic stress reactions and social functioning. Demographic and disaster-related variables were available. Predisposing factors for MHS utilization 0–18 months and 18–36 months post-disaster were examined using multiple logistic regression models.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>In multiple logistic models, adjusting for demographic and disaster related variables, MHS utilization was predicted by demographic variables (young age, immigrant, public health insurance, unemployment), disaster-related exposure (relocation and injuries), self-reported psychological problems and pre- and post-disaster physician diagnosed health problems (chronic diseases, musculoskeletal problems). After controlling for all health variables, disaster intrusions and avoidance reactions (OR:2.86; CI:1.48–5.53), hostility (OR:2.04; CI:1.28–3.25), pre-disaster chronic diseases (OR:1.82; CI:1.25–2.65), injuries as a result of the disaster (OR:1.80;CI:1.13–2.86), social functioning problems (OR:1.61;CI:1.05–2.44) and younger age (OR:0.98;CI:0.96–0.99) predicted MHS utilization within 18 months post-disaster. Furthermore, disaster intrusions and avoidance reactions (OR:2.29;CI:1.04–5.07) and hostility (OR:3.77;CI:1.51–9.40) predicted MHS utilization following 18 months post-disaster.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>This study showed that several demographic and disaster-related variables and self-reported and physician diagnosed health problems predicted post-disaster MHS-use. The most important factors to predict post-disaster MHS utilization were disaster intrusions and avoidance reactions and symptoms of hostility (which can be identified as symptoms of PTSD) and pre-disaster chronic diseases.</p

Rapid Health and Needs assessments after disasters: a systematic review

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Publichealth care providers, stakeholders and policy makers request a rapid insight into health status and needs of the affected population after disasters. To our knowledge, there is no standardized rapid assessment tool for European countries. The aim of this article is to describe existing tools used internationally and analyze them for the development of a workable rapid assessment.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A review was conducted, including original studies concerning a rapid health and/or needs assessment. The studies used were published between 1980 and 2009. The electronic databasesof Medline, Embase, SciSearch and Psychinfo were used.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Thirty-three studies were included for this review. The majority of the studies was of US origin and in most cases related to natural disasters, especially concerning the weather. In eighteen studies an assessment was conducted using a structured questionnaire, eleven studies used registries and four used both methods. Questionnaires were primarily used to asses the health needs, while data records were used to assess the health status of disaster victims.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Methods most commonly used were face to face interviews and data extracted from existing registries. Ideally, a rapid assessment tool is needed which does not add to the burden of disaster victims. In this perspective, the use of existing medical registries in combination with a brief questionnaire in the aftermath of disasters is the most promising. Since there is an increasing need for such a tool this approach needs further examination.</p

Disaster-related posttraumatic stress disorder and physical health

Objective: To examine the relationship between posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and self-reported as well as physicianrecorded physical health in a sample of survivors (n 896) of a man-made disaster, using a longitudinal design that included predisaster health data. Most studies on the relationship between PTSD and physical health are cross-sectional and use self-reported physical health outcomes. Methods: A surveillance using the electronic medical records of survivors’ family practitioners (FPs), 1 year predisaster until 4 years postdisaster, was combined with a survey, 3 weeks and 18 months postdisaster. Self-reported PTSD and self-reported physical health were assessed at 18 months postdisaster. FP-recorded physical health problems in the subsequent 2 years were classified according to the International Classification of Primary Care. Multiple regression analyses were used to describe the relationships between PTSD and physical health. Results: After adjusting for demographics, smoking behavior, and predisaster physical health, PTSD was significantly associated with FP-recorded vascular, musculoskeletal, and dermatological problems, and with all self-reported physical health aspects. Prospectively, PTSD signaled an increased risk of new vascular problems (odds ratio 1.92; 1.04–3.55). Conclusions: This study suggests an effect of PTSD in the development of vascular problems. The results imply that clinicians should be alert that disaster survivors with PTSD can suffer from comorbid medical problems as well