medigraphic.com
ISSN 0185-3325 (Print)
Órgano Oficial del Instituto Nacional de Psiquiatría Ramón de la Fuente Muñiz

2007, Number 5

<< Back Next >>

Salud Mental 2007; 30 (5)

Social cost of mental disorders: Disability and work days lost. Results from the Mexican survey of psychiatric epidemiology

Lara MMC, Medina-Mora ME, Borges G, Zambrano J

Language: English
References: 32
Page: 4-11
PDF size: 68.53 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction
When the impact of illness is evaluated by indicators like mortality, mental illness has a less significant impact than other illnesses. As a result, the impact of mental disorders was underestimated until the last two decades of the previous century. This perception began to change as a result of two factors: On the one hand, the study of the Global Burden of Disease reported by Murray and Lopez, and, on the other hand, the definition of mental disorders by the American Psychiatric Association. The common element shared by these two factors is the inclusion of the concept of disability.
Disability is the deterioration of the expected functioning of a subject of a particular age and sex in a social context. It is a part of the social cost of illness.
Objective
To assess the disability burden associated with depression, mania, agoraphobia, social phobia, general anxiety, panic disorder, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) according to the Mexican Psychiatric Survey and to compare results with the disability produced by some chronic non-psychiatric conditions.
Method
This survey is based on a stratified, multistage area, probabilistic sample of adults living in urban areas of Mexico. The instrument used was the third version of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview. We report the 12-month prevalence of psychiatric disorders as defined by DSM-IV criteria. We also evaluated non-psychiatric chronic conditions like diabetes, arthritis, hypertension, backache, and other painful illnesses, identified in general as “chronic conditions”. Indicators of disability were Sheehan’s scale and number of work days lost. This is an easy and fast self reporting scale, which can be used both in the clinic or research. The sub-scales can be added or averaged to obtain a total score. The scale of responses is a horizontal line with numerals from 0 to 10 and five verbal descriptions, with the description “Not at all” corresponding to a value of 0; “Mild” rangimg from 1 to 3; “Moderate” from 4 to 6; “Severe” from 7 to 9; and “Very severe” corresponding to 10.
Results
Close relationships and social life were the areas most deeply affected. The disorders found to produce the highest levels of disability were depression, social phobia, and PTSD. The lowest disability levels were observed in chronic conditions. On the total score of Sheehan’s scale, disorders with the highest level of disability were PTSD (mean 5.35 ± 0.307) and depression (mean 4.72 ± 0.167). Depression and panic attacks were the disorders by which most days were lost on average in the previous year (25.51, CI95: 16.53-34.5; 20, CI95: 3.02-36.97). Days lost were lower in chronic conditions than in the seven mental disorders studied (6.89, CI95: 3.04-10.74). Discussion
This is the first paper to demonstrate the impact of mental disorders in Latin America evaluating the association of disability with common mental disorders.
We have shown that mental disorders, especially depression, are associated with deficits in functioning and result in the loss of work days. We have also shown that persons with common mental disorders have, on average, higher levels of disability than those observed among persons with a wide range of chronic physical conditions. These results are consistent with prior studies in North America and Europe that have found that persons with common mental disorders experience substantial disability in social role functioning.


REFERENCES

  1. AMERICAN PSYCHIATRIC ASSOCIATION: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Third Edition Revised DSM-III-R, Washington,1987.

  2. AMERICAN PSYCHIATRIC ASSOCIATION: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Fourth Edition, Washington, 1994.

  3. ANDREWS G, PETERS L: The psychometric properties of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview. Social Psychiatry Psychiatric Epidemiology, 33(2):80-8, 1998.

  4. BIRD HR, DAVIES M, FISHER P, NARROW WE ET AL.: How specific is specific impairment. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry, 39(9):1182-89, 2000.

  5. CARAVEO AJ, MARTINEZ N, RIVERA E: A model for epidemiological studies on mental health and psychiatric morbidity. Salud Mental, 21:48-57, 1998.

  6. CARAVEO J, GONZALEZ C, RAMOS L: The concurrent validity of the DIS: experience with psychiatric patients in Mexico City. Hispanic J Behavioral Science, 13:63-77, 1991.

  7. COTTLER LB, ROBINS LN, GRANT BF, BLAINE J et al.: The CIDI-core substance abuse and dependence questions: cross-cultural and nosological issues. Br J Psychiatry, 159:653-8, 1991.

  8. DAVIDSON JR, POTTS N, RICHICHI E, KRISHNAN R et al.: Treatment of social phobia with clonazepam and placebo. J Clinical Psychopharmacology, 13:423-8, 1993.

  9. DEMYTTENAERE K, ENZLIN P, DEWÉ W, BOULANGER B et al.: Compliance with antidepressants in a primary care setting 2: the influence of Gender and type of impairment. J Clin Psychiatry, 62(22):34-37, 2001.

  10. FARMER AE, KATZ R, MCGUFFIN P, BEBBINGTON P: A comparison between the Present State Examination and the Composite International Diagnostic Interview. Archives General Psychiatry, 44(12):1064-8, 1987.

  11. INSTITUTO NACIONAL DE ESTADISTICA, GEOGRAFIA E INFORMATICA (INEGI): General Population and Household Census. Mexico, 2000.

  12. JANCA A, ROBINS LN, COTTLER LB, EARLY TS: Clinical observation of assessment using the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI). An analysis of the CIDI Field Trials-Wave II at the St Louis site. Br J Psychiatry, 160:815-8, 1992.

  13. LEON AC, OLFSON M, PORTERA L, FARBER L, SHEEHAN DV: Assessing psychiatric impairment in primary care with the Sheehan Disability Scale. Int J Psychiatry Med, 27(2):93-105, 1997.

  14. LEON AC, PORTERA L, WEISSMAN MM: The social costs of anxiety disorders.Br J Psychiatry, 27:19-22, 1995.

  15. LEON AC, SHEAR MK, PORTERA L, KLERMAN GL: Assessing impairment in patients with panic disorder: The Sheehan Disability Scale. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol, 27:78-82, 1992.

  16. LEPINE JP, GASTPAR M, MENDLEWICZ J, TYLEE A: Depression in the community: the first pan-european study DEPRES (Depression Research in European Society). Int Clin Psychopharmacol, 12(1):19-29, 1997.

  17. MEDINA-MORA ME, GUILHERME BORGES, LARA MUÑOZ C, BENJET C et al.: Prevalence, service use, and demographic correlates of 12-month DSM-IV psychiatric disorders in Mexico: results from the Mexican National Comorbidity Survey. Psychological Medicine, 35:1–11, 2005.

  18. MEDINA-MORA ME, BORGES G, LARA C, BENJET C et al.: La Prevalencia de trastornos mentales y uso de servicios: Resultados de la Encuesta Nacional de Epidemiología Psiquiátrica en México. Salud Mental, 26(4):1-16, 2003.

  19. MURRAY CJL, LOPEZ AD: The Global burden of disease. Harvard University Press,1-98, Cambridge, 1996.

  20. ORMEL J, VON KORFF M, VAN DEN BRINK W, KATON W et al.: Depression, anxiety, and social disability show synchrony of change in primary care patients. American J Public Health, 83(3):385-90, 1993.

  21. REVICKI DA, IRWIN D, REBLANDO J, SIMON GE: The accuracy of self-reported disability days. Medical Care, 32(4):401-4, 1994.

  22. RUBIN HC, RAPAPORT MH, LEVINE B, GLADSJO JK et al.: Quality of well being in panic disorder: the assessment of psychiatric and general disability. J Affective Disorders, 57:217-21, 2000.

  23. SHEEHAN DV, HARNETT-SHEEHAN K, RAJ BA: The measurement of disability. Int Clin Psychopharmacol, 11(3):89-95, 1996.

  24. SHEEHAN DV: The Anxiety Disease. Bantam Books, New York, 1986.

  25. SHERBOURNE CD, WELLS KB, JUDD LL: Functioning and well-being of patients with panic disorder. American J Psychiatry, 153(2):213-8, 1996.

  26. SLADE T, ANDREWS G: DSM-IV and ICD-10 generalized anxiety disorder: discrepant diagnoses and associated disability. Social Psychiatry Psychiatric Epidemiology, 36(1):45-51, 2001.

  27. WACKER HR, BATTEGAY R, MULLEJANS R, SCHLOSSER C: Using the CIDI-C in the general population. En: Stefanis CN, Rabavilas AD, Soldatos CR (edS.) Psychiatry: A World Perspective. Elsevier Science Publishers, 138-143, Amsterdam, 1990.

  28. WELLS KB, STEWART A, HAYS RD, BURNAM MA et al.: The functioning and well-being of depressed patients. Results from the Medical Outcomes Study. JAMA, 262(7):914-9, 1989.

  29. WITTCHEN HU, ROBINS LN, COTTLER LB, SARTORIUS N et al.: Cross-cultural feasibility, reliability and sources of variance of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI). Br J Psychiatry, 159:645-653, 1991.

  30. WITTCHEN HU: Reliability and validity studies of the WHO–Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI): a critical review. J Psychiatry Res, 28:57-84, 1994.

  31. WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION: Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI). Certified version 15. Geneva, 2001.

  32. WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION: ICD-10: International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems. 10th Rev Edition, Geneva, 1992.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com