A mixed-methods study of psychological distress following an environmental catastrophe: the case of the Hazelwood open-cut coalmine fire in Australia

ABSTRACT

Background and Objectives: This study assessed the psychological impacts of six weeks of smoke exposure from the 2014 Hazelwood open-cut coalmine fire in the Latrobe Valley, Victoria, Australia, between two and three years after the incident. Design and Methods: A cross-sectional survey of adults investigated outcomes for the most exposed community, Morwell (n = 3091), compared with a similar, but minimally exposed community, Sale (n = 960). Adopting a mixed-methods research approach, 26 interviews with Morwell residents further examined qualities of the experience. Results: Morwell residents scored significantly higher on the Impact of Event Scale – Revised (difference = 6.53; 95%CI: 5.37, 7.35, p < 0.001) and Kessler 10-item general distress scale (difference = 1.69; 95%CI: 1.05, 2.33, p < 0.001). More than two years after the mine fire, Morwell residents reported moderate levels of distress related to the incident. This impact was also evident in interviews, where intrusive thoughts were the most frequently reported symptom of posttraumatic stress. Furthermore, interviews highlighted the vulnerability of people with pre-existing mental health concerns. Conclusions: The elevated psychological distress apparent within the Morwell community over two years after an extended pollution event highlights the need to improve post-incident recovery responses to such events, particularly for supporting residents that are more vulnerable.

KEYWORDS:

• Posttraumatic stress disorder
• disaster
• bushfires
• smoke exposure
• Hazelwood coalmine fire

Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge the contribution of the broader Hazelwood Health Study team responsible for the collection of the quantitative data as part of the Adult Survey. We would also like to acknowledge the contribution of participants in both the quantitative and qualitative components of this study.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

ORCID

Darryl Maybery http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1038-9374

Rebecca Jones http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6099-0171

Joanna F. Dipnall http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7543-0687

Emily Berger http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5550-807X

Timothy Campbell http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2824-5865

Alexander McFarlane http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3829-9509

Matthew Carroll http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6396-8364

Notes

1 To investigate whether the differences between the mean psychological distress scores of participants from Morwell and Sale found in the main regression analysis might be biased by the skewed distribution of IES-R and K10 scores, a zero-inflated negative binomial regression analysis with the inflation modelled using group membership (Morwell versus Sale) was conducted. Results of this complementary analysis suggest that group differences in mean scores on each of the psychological distress measures were not unduly affected by how scores were distributed across the sample, adding further support for the findings of the main regression analysis (see Supplementary Table 1).

2 Unweighted complete case analyses were performed to obtain indicative effect sizes, as the means, standard deviations, and mean differences for IESR and K10 scores were reasonably consistent with those produced from the imputed weighted survey data. These analyses reinforced the existence of medium effect sizes (Cohen, 1988) for four out of the five measures (see Supplementary Table 2).

Additional information

Funding

This study was supported by the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS; Victoria, Australia) contract reference number for this funding is: C3478. The paper presents the views of the authors and does not represent the views of the Department.