Severity of Psychological Distress among Adults with and without Disabilities

Abstract

The aim of this study is to examine psychological distress and its individual symptoms between adults with and without disabilities, and among adults with disabilities, to examine whether an association exists between severity of distress and health-related factors. Cross-sectional data from the 2007 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System were used for this study. Severity of psychological distress was assessed using the Kessler 6 scale of nonspecific psychological distress. Logistic regression analyses were performed to estimate predicted marginals and prevalence ratios. Nine percent of adults had mild to moderate psychological distress and 3.9% had serious psychological distress. The adjusted mean Kessler 6 total scores and individual item scores were higher for adults with disabilities, as was the average number of days that a mental health condition interfered with activities in the past 30 days. Among adults with disabilities, mild to moderate and serious psychological distress were particularly high among those who were unemployed or unable to work. Those who had either mild to moderate or serious psychological distress were significantly more likely than those with no psychological distress to be physically inactive, to smoke, and to report fair or poor health, life dissatisfaction, and inadequate social support. A dose-response relationship exists between categorical severity of psychological distress and examined health-related factors. These findings may inform the design of targeted public health strategies that aim to eliminate health disparities between people with and without disabilities.

Keywords::

• Psychological distress
• mental health
• disability
• BRFSS
• surveillance

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors thank the state health department Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System coordinators for their participation in data collection for this analysis and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Division of Behavioral Surveillance staff for their valuable assistance in developing the database. The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.