Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-r7xzm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-19T01:00:44.477Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Common mental disorders, subthreshold symptoms and disability: longitudinal study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Dheeraj Rai*
Affiliation:
Academic Unit of Psychiatry, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
Petros Skapinakis
Affiliation:
Academic Unit of Psychiatry, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK Academic Unit of Psychiatry, University of Bristol, UK, and Department of Psychiatry, University of Ioannina School of Medicine, Greece
Nicola Wiles
Affiliation:
Academic Unit of Psychiatry, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
Glyn Lewis
Affiliation:
Academic Unit of Psychiatry, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
Ricardo Araya
Affiliation:
Academic Unit of Psychiatry, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
*
Dr D. Rai, MBBS, MRCPsych, Academic Unit of Psychiatry, University of Bristol, Cotham House, Cotham Hill, Bristol BS6 6JL, UK. Email: dheeraj.rai@bristol.ac.uk
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Summary

In a representative sample of the UK population we found that common mental disorders (as a group and in ICD–10 diagnostic categories) and subthreshold psychiatric symptoms at baseline were both independently associated with new-onset functional disability and significant days lost from work at 18-month follow-up. Subthreshold symptoms contributed to almost half the aggregate burden of functional disability and over 32 million days lost from work in the year preceding the study. Leaving these symptoms unaccounted for in surveys may lead to gross underestimation of disability related to psychiatric morbidity.

Type
Short Report
Copyright
Copyright © Royal College of Psychiatrists, 2010 

The association between psychiatric morbidity and subsequent disability may have been underestimated Reference Broadhead, Blazer, George and Tse1,Reference Mykletun, Overland, Dahl, Krokstad, Bjerkeset and Glozier2 because disability related to subthreshold symptoms is not included in calculations. Previous longitudinal studies on this subject have concentrated mainly on depression and its subthreshold presentations, Reference Broadhead, Blazer, George and Tse1,Reference Judd, Akiskal, Zeller, Paulus, Leon and Maser3 and cross-sectional studies cannot ascertain the direction of causality. Furthermore, disability related to anxiety-based disorders and mixed anxiety/depression is sparsely documented. Reference Das-Munshi, Goldberg, Bebbington, Bhugra, Brugha and Dewey4 We studied the relative contribution of subthreshold psychiatric symptoms and common mental disorders 5 at baseline as predictors of new-onset functional disability and days lost from work at 18 months follow-up in the UK population.

Method

We used data from the longitudinal subset of the 2000 UK Psychiatric Morbidity Survey (details available elsewhere). Reference Singleton and Lewis6 Briefly, 8580 adults representative of the UK population participated in face-to-face interviews at baseline (T 1) in 2000. A representative subsample (n = 2406) was followed up 18 months later (T 2). Ethical approval was granted by the Multi-centre Research Ethics Committee in England.

Psychiatric morbidity was assessed using the revised Clinical Interview Schedule (CIS–R). Reference Lewis, Pelosi, Araya and Dunn7 A CIS–R score of ≥12 indicates the presence of a common mental disorder and algorithms allow identification of ICD–10 diagnoses of depression, anxiety-based disorders (phobias, generalised anxiety disorder, panic disorder and obsessive–compulsive disorder) and mixed anxiety/depression. We defined three main exposure groups: no common mental disorders (CIS–R score <6 and no ICD–10 diagnosis); subthreshold psychiatric symptoms (CIS–R score 6–11 and no ICD–10 diagnosis); and common mental disorders (CIS–R score ≥12 or an ICD–10 diagnosis).

Functional disability was studied using seven domains of activities of daily living Reference Singleton and Lewis6,Reference Brewin, Wing, Mangen, Brugha and MacCarthy8 including personal care, using transport, medical care, household activities, practical activities, dealing with paperwork and managing money (see online supplement). Those employed were asked to report the number of days they had been off sick from work in the past year. We estimated mean days lost from work in each group of psychiatric morbidity. We also added the number of days reported lost in the past year by respondents in each category of psychiatric morbidity and extrapolated them to the UK population using weights.

For regression analyses we studied two outcomes. First, new-onset functional disability (defined as report of new activities of daily living difficulties in any domain at T 2) in a cohort of people with no activities of daily living difficulties at T 1 (n = 1573). Second, 1 or more days, and >14 days lost from work in the past year in a cohort employed at both waves (n = 1317).

Logistic regression was used to estimate the association of psychiatric morbidity and the outcomes, while adjusting for potential confounders (Table 1). Analyses were conducted using svy commands in Stata I/C v.10.1 (Windows). Probability weights were used to account for the stratified sampling and non-response. Reference Singleton and Lewis6 Population attributable-risk fractions were calculated using the aflogit procedure.

Table 1 Relationship between baseline psychiatric morbidity and new-onset functional disability and > 14 days off work at 18-month follow-up: weighted logistic regression analyses and population attributable fractions

Onset of functional disability at T 2 (in cohort with no functional disability at T 1, n = 1573) > 14 days off work in past year at T 2 (in cohort employed at both waves, n = 1317)
Crude OR (95% CI) Adjusted ORa (95% CI) PAF, %b Crude OR (95% CI) Adjusted ORa (95% CI) PAF, %b
No common mental disorders 1 1 1 1
Subthreshold symptoms 1.7 (1.1–2.7)* 2.2 (1.3–3.6)** 11.1 2.3 (1.3–4.2)** 1.9 (1.1–3.5)* 14.4
Common mental disorders 2.1 (1.3–3.3)** 2.5 (1.5–4.3)** 12.7 3.6 (2.1–6.3)** 2.9 (1.6–5.2)** 25.6
    Mixed anxiety/depression 1.7 (1.0–3.0) 2.2 (1.1–4.3)* 4.4 3.7 (2.0–6.8)** 2.9 (1.5–5.6)** 14.4
    ICD–10 anxiety-based disorder 2.7 (1.5–4.8)** 2.9 (1.5–5.6)** 5.3 2.7 (1.2–6.1)* 2.3 (0.9–5.5) 4.1
    ICD–10 depression 2.9 (1.3–6.6)* 3.3 (1.3–8.1)* 3.0 5.3 (2.2–12.7)** 4.6 (1.7–11.9)** 7.1
23.8c 40.00c

Results

Among people with no functional disability at baseline (n = 1573), 15.2% had subthreshold symptoms and 11.9% a common mental disorder. In total, 60% of those with common mental disorders had mixed anxiety/depression, 28.6% had an ICD–10 anxiety-based disorder and 11.4% a depressive episode.

During follow-up, 14.8% of participants with common mental disorders at baseline developed a new functional disability, compared with 12.6% of those with subthreshold symptoms and 7.7% of those with no common mental disorder (Fig. DS1). A graded relationship was also observed in mean days lost from work; those with no common mental disorders at baseline missed 4.1 days (s.d. = 1.9), those with subthreshold symptoms 7.6 days (s.d. = 2.5) and those with a common mental disorder 13.2 days (s.d. = 4.0). An estimated 148.3 million days were lost from work in the year preceding T 2 when extrapolating results to the UK population. These comprised: no common mental disorders 70.3 million days (95% CI 37.3–103.0), subthreshold symptoms 32.4 million days (95% CI 21.6–43.2), mixed anxiety/depression 25.3 million days (95% CI 16.0–34.5), ICD–10 anxiety-based disorders 10.9 million days (95% CI 3.3–18.5) and ICD–10 depression 9.4 million days (95% CI 1.1–17.7).

Individuals with baseline subthreshold symptoms or common mental disorders were both twice as likely to report a new-onset functional disability at T 2 compared with those with no common mental disorders (Table 1). A non-linear relationship was observed between subthreshold symptoms and work days lost. There was no association between subthreshold symptoms and single-day work absences (adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 1.1, 95% CI 0.8–1.7) but these individuals were two times more likely to report absences lasting over 14 days (Table 1.) Common mental disorders, by contrast, were associated with over a twofold increase in odds for both these outcomes (adjusted OR for 1 day lost 2.2, 95% CI 1.5–3.1; for 14-days lost OR = 2.9, 95% CI 1.6–5.2.) Population attributable-risk fractions for subthreshold symptoms explained a much greater proportion of new-onset functional disability (11.1%) than ICD–10 depression (3.0%) or anxiety-based disorders (5.3%).

Discussion

We found that both subthreshold symptoms and common mental disorders pose a substantial risk of functional disability and absence from work, even after accounting for potential confounders. Almost half the aggregate burden of new-onset functional disability in the population as a result of psychiatric morbidity could be attributed to subthreshold symptoms. Almost two-thirds of the future disability attributable to psychiatric symptoms in the population may be missed if analyses are restricted to individuals with anxiety and depressive disorders.

Our results add to previous findings that disability rises in increments with increasing psychiatric symptom load, Reference Broadhead, Blazer, George and Tse1,Reference Judd, Akiskal, Zeller, Paulus, Leon and Maser3 not just for depression but for the entire spectrum of common mental disorders. We found that the largest proportion of disability even in the common mental disorders group was contributed by mixed anxiety/depression that is itself often considered a subthreshold category. Reference Das-Munshi, Goldberg, Bebbington, Bhugra, Brugha and Dewey4 We highlight that the aggregate costs of psychiatric symptoms to society may be grossly underestimated when studying specific psychiatric diagnoses in isolation.

The use of a structured psychiatric interview, a large representative sample and prospective design are strengths of this study. Limitations include attrition in the two waves leading to an overall 56% response rate, although we accounted for non-response using probability weights. Data collection at two time points, with little knowledge of the intervening period may have led to some random misclassification. Finally, our broad definition of functional disability may overestimate disability; and the possibility of recall bias of reported work days lost cannot be excluded.

The importance of subthreshold symptoms should not be underestimated. However, this should not be interpreted as if we suggest the creation of a new diagnostic category. Since subthreshold symptoms are likely to be on the same continuum as common mental disorders Reference Judd, Akiskal, Zeller, Paulus, Leon and Maser3,Reference Cuijpers, de and van10 rather than distinct disorders, adding dimensional approaches to supplement categorical diagnostic systems may help improve their recognition. Reference Helzer, Kraemer and Krueger11 Development of strategies to identify and manage these problems may reduce future disability associated with them, generating significant societal savings.

Acknowledgements

We thank the Office of National Statistics for initial design work, fieldwork and data preparation.

Footnotes

Data collection was funded by the Department of Health and the Scottish Executive Health Department.

Declaration of interest

None.

References

1 Broadhead, WE, Blazer, DG, George, LK, Tse, CK. Depression, disability days, and days lost from work in a prospective epidemiologic survey. JAMA 1990; 264: 2524–8.Google Scholar
2 Mykletun, A, Overland, S, Dahl, AA, Krokstad, S, Bjerkeset, O, Glozier, N, et al. A population-based cohort study of the effect of common mental disorders on disability pension awards. Am J Psychiatry 2006; 163: 1412–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3 Judd, LL, Akiskal, HS, Zeller, PJ, Paulus, M, Leon, AC, Maser, JD, et al. Psychosocial disability during the long-term course of unipolar major depressive disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2000; 57: 375–80.Google Scholar
4 Das-Munshi, J, Goldberg, D, Bebbington, PE, Bhugra, DK, Brugha, TS, Dewey, ME, et al. Public health significance of mixed anxiety and depression: beyond current classification. Br J Psychiatry 2008; 192: 171–7.Google Scholar
5 World Health Organization. The ICD–10 Classification of Mental and Behavioural Disorders: Clinical Descriptions and Diagnostic Guidelines. WHO, 1992.Google Scholar
6 Singleton, N, Lewis, G. Better or Worse: A Longitudinal Study of the Mental Health of Adults Living in Private Households in Great Britain. TSO (The Stationery Office), 2003.Google ScholarPubMed
7 Lewis, G, Pelosi, AJ, Araya, R, Dunn, G. Measuring psychiatric disorder in the community: a standardized assessment for use by lay interviewers. Psychol Med 1992; 22: 465–86.Google Scholar
8 Brewin, CR, Wing, JK, Mangen, SP, Brugha, TS, MacCarthy, B. Principles and practice of measuring needs in the long-term mentally ill: the MRC needs for care assessment. Psychol Med 1987; 17: 971–81.Google Scholar
9 Saunders, JB, Aasland, OG, Babor, TF, de la Fuente, JR, Grant, M. Development of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT): WHO collaborative project on early detection of persons with harmful alcohol consumption – II. Addiction 1993; 88: 791804.Google Scholar
10 Cuijpers, P, de, GR, van, DS. Minor depression: risk profiles, functional disability, health care use and risk of developing major depression. J Affect Disord 2004; 79: 71–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11 Helzer, JE, Kraemer, HC, Krueger, RF. The feasibility and need for dimensional psychiatric diagnoses. Psychol Med 2006; 36: 1671–80.Google Scholar
Figure 0

Table 1 Relationship between baseline psychiatric morbidity and new-onset functional disability and > 14 days off work at 18-month follow-up: weighted logistic regression analyses and population attributable fractions

Supplementary material: PDF

Rai et al. supplementary material

Supplementary Material

Download Rai et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 37.5 KB
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.