Socio-demographic factors and psychological distress in Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australian adults aged 18-64 years: analysis of national survey data

Menzies School of Health Research, Charles Darwin University, Casuarina, Darwin, Australia.
BMC Public Health (Impact Factor: 2.32). 02/2012; 12:95. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2458-12-95
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Indigenous Australians are known to be at greater risk of morbidity and mortality from mental health related conditions, but most available data relate to the use of mental health services, and little is known about other aspects of social and emotional wellbeing. Using the first available nationally representative data, we examined the prevalence and patterning of psychological distress among Indigenous Australian adults and compared these with corresponding data from the non-Indigenous population.
The analysis used weighted data on psychological distress, as measured by a modified Kessler Psychological Distress score (K5), and a range of socio-demographic measures for 5,417 Indigenous and 15,432 non-Indigenous adults aged 18-64 years from two nationally representative surveys. Very high psychological distress (VHPD) was defined as a K5 score ≥ 15 (possible range = 5-25).
Indigenous adults were about three times more likely than non-Indigenous adults to be classified with VHPD: 14.5% (95% confidence interval (CI) 12.9-16.0%) versus 5.5% (95% CI 5.0-5.9%). After adjusting for age, most socio-demographic variables were significantly associated with VHPD in both populations, although the relative odds were generally larger among non-Indigenous people. Indigenous people in remote areas had a lower prevalence of VHPD than their non-remote counterparts, and only marital status, main language, and food insecurity were significantly associated with VHPD in remote areas.
Higher absolute levels of VHPD combined with smaller socio-demographic gradients in the Indigenous population suggest the importance of risk factors such as interpersonal racism, marginalization and dispossession, chronic stress and exposure to violence that are experienced by Indigenous Australians with common and/or cross-cutting effects across the socioeconomic spectrum. The lower prevalence of VHPD and lack of association with many socio-demographic variables in remote areas suggests either that the instrument may be less valid for Indigenous people living in remote areas or that living in an Indigenous majority environment (such as exists in most remote communities) may mitigate the risk of psychological distress to some degree.

Download full-text


Available from: Yin Paradies, Jun 23, 2015
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults in the Australian state of Victoria have a higher prevalence of psychological distress than their non-Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander counterparts. We sought to explain this inequality, focussing on the social determinants of health. We used population-based survey data from the 2008 Victorian Population Health Survey; a cross-sectional landline computer-assisted telephone survey of 34,168 randomly selected adults. We defined psychological distress as a score of 22 or more on the Kessler 10 Psychological Distress scale. We used logistic regression to identify socio-demographic characteristics and social capital indicators that were associated with psychological distress. We then created multivariable models to explore the association between psychological distress and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander status that incorporated all significant socioeconomic status (SES) and social capital variables, adjusting for all non-SES socio-demographic characteristics. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Victorians (24.5%) were more than twice as likely than their non-Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander counterparts (11.3%) to have psychological distress (odds ratio (OR) = 2.56, 95% confidence interval; 1.67–3.93). Controlling for SES, negative perceptions of the residential neighbourhood, lack of social support from family, social and civic distrust, and all non-SES socio-demographic variables (age, sex, marital status, household composition, and rurality), rendered the previously statistically significant inequality in the prevalence of psychological distress, between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Victorians and their non-Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander counterparts, insignificant at the p=0.05 level (OR = 1.50; 0.97–2.32). Psychological distress is an important health risk factor for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults that has yet to be widely acknowledged and addressed. Addressing the underlying inequalities in SES and social capital may be the key to addressing the inequality in psychological distress.
    Social Science & Medicine 01/2015; 128C. DOI:10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.01.014 · 2.56 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This review aimed to draw on published literature to identify the prevalence rates of psychiatric disorders in Australia's Indigenous populations, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. A systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) model was conducted using the following electronic databases: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, and Informit Indigenous and Health Collections. Studies were included for analysis if they were empirical quantitative studies reporting prevalence rates for any psychiatric disorder in Indigenous people. Of the 1584 papers extracted by the search strategy, 17 articles met the eligibility criteria and were reviewed in detail. Methodology, sampling strategy and study design varied greatly across these 17 studies. Prevalence rates varied by disorder and are as follows: major depressive disorder (4.3-51%); mood disorders (7.7-43.1%); post-traumatic stress disorder (14.2-55.2%); anxiety disorders (17.2-58.6%); substance dependence (5.9%-66.2%); alcohol dependence (21.4-55.4%); and psychotic disorders (1.68-25%). While the number of studies on community-based Indigenous populations was limited, available evidence suggested that prevalence rates are higher in prison populations compared with community-based studies. It was identified that there is limited evidence on the occurrence of psychiatric disorders for Indigenous people in the general community. More research in this area is essential to provide accurate and reliable estimates and to provide a baseline for evaluating the effectiveness of programs aimed at reducing the high mental health burden experienced by Indigenous Australians. Future research needs to ensure that standardised and validated methods are used to accurately estimate the prevalence of psychiatric disorders among Indigenous Australians. © The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists 2015.
    Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry 02/2015; 49(5). DOI:10.1177/0004867415569802 · 3.77 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The factors driving the disparity in health outcomes between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians include socio-economic factors, racism, and history. The current study focused on exploring Indigenous participants' perspectives of the factors that affect the health behavior of their community members. Participatory action research methodology and a grounded theory approach were utilized. In total, 120 members of two urban West Australian Indigenous communities participated in focus group discussions. There was substantial similarity between the themes that emerged within the discussions held in the two communities. Factors relating to culture, social connections, racism, communication, and personal aspects were particularly salient to health behavior of the participants. Several of the themes including culture, racism, communication, and distrust highlight the tension caused by being a member of a minority cultural group that has been marginalized by the practices and attitudes of the dominant cultural group. Personal choice was sometimes prioritized over health. © The Author(s) 2015.
    Qualitative Health Research 04/2015; DOI:10.1177/1049732315580301 · 2.19 Impact Factor