Dataset Information

Cumulative Disadvantage and Disparities in Depression and Pain Among Veterans With Osteoarthritis: The Role of Perceived Discrimination.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Perceived discrimination is associated with chronic pain and depression and contributes to racial health disparities. In a cohort of older adult veterans with osteoarthritis (OA), our objective was to examine how membership in multiple socially disadvantaged groups (cumulative disadvantage) was associated with perceived discrimination, pain, and depression. We also tested whether perceived discrimination mediated the association of cumulative disadvantage with depression and pain.

Methods

We analyzed baseline data from 270 African American veterans and 247 White veterans enrolled in a randomized controlled trial testing a psychological intervention for chronic pain at 2 Department of Veterans Affairs medical centers. Participants were age ≥50 years and self-reported symptomatic knee OA. Measures included the Everyday Discrimination Scale, the Patient Health Questionnaire Depression Scale, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index pain subscale, and demographic variables. Cumulative disadvantage was defined as the number of socially disadvantaged groups to which each participant belonged (i.e., self-reported female sex, African American race, annual income of <$20,000, and/or unemployed due to disability). We used linear regression models and Sobel's test of mediation to examine hypotheses.

Results

The mean ± SD number of social disadvantages was 1.3 ± 1.0. Cumulative disadvantage was significantly associated with higher perceived discrimination, pain, and depression (P < 0.001 for all). Perceived discrimination significantly mediated the association between cumulative disadvantage and depression symptoms (Z = 3.75, P < 0.001) as well as pain severity (Z = 2.24, P = 0.025).

Conclusion

Perceived discrimination is an important psychosocial stressor that contributes to worsening OA-related mental and physical health outcomes, with greater effects among those from multiple socially disadvantaged groups.

SUBMITTER: McClendon J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7775296 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Importance:Understanding emerging patterns of smoking disparities among disadvantaged populations can guide tobacco control policy. Objective:To estimate disparities in smoking prevalence associated with the number of socioeconomic and health-related disadvantages faced by a population among US adults from 2008 to 2017. Design, Setting, and Participants:Nationally representative cross-sectional annual household-based probability sample of US noninstitutionalized residents. Polytomous regression estimated associations of disadvantage variables, survey year, and their interaction with the following 3 pairwise contrasts: current vs never smoking (estimate of overall disparities), current vs former smoking (unique contribution of disparities in smoking cessation), and former vs never smoking (unique contribution of disparities in smoking initiation). The setting was in-home face-to-face interviews. Participants were respondents in 2008 to 2017 survey years who were aged 25 years or older (N?=?279 559). Exposures:Self-reported past-year unemployment, income below the federal poverty line, absence of high school diploma, disability/limitation interfering with daily functions, serious psychological distress on the Kessler 6-item screen, and at least 60 past-year heavy drinking days, each coded yes or no. These indicators were summed in a cumulative disadvantage index (0, 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 or 6). Main Outcomes and Measures:Self-reported current, former (ever smoked ?100 cigarettes, had since quit, and not currently smoking), and never (<100 cigarettes) smoking. Results:Among 278 048 respondents (mean [SD] age, 51.9 [16.8] years; 55.7% female) with data on smoking history (99.5% of the sample), the mean current smoking prevalence across 2008 to 2017 compared with populations without disadvantages was successively higher among populations with 1 disadvantage (21.4% vs 13.8%; current vs never smoking adjusted odds ratio [OR], 2.34; 95% CI, 2.27-2.43), 2 disadvantages (26.6% vs 13.8%; OR, 3.55; 95% CI, 3.39-3.72), 3 disadvantages (35.1% vs 13.8%; OR, 5.35; 95% CI, 5.05-5.66), 4 disadvantages (45.7% vs 13.8%; OR, 8.59; 95% CI, 7.91-9.34), or 5 or 6 disadvantages (58.2% vs 13.8%; OR, 14.70; 95% CI, 12.30-17.50). In current vs former and former vs never smoking status contrasts, ORs were lower but also showed successively greater associations with increasing cumulative disadvantage. Current (vs never) smoking odds significantly declined each year among populations with 0 (OR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.94-0.96), 1 (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.95-0.97), or 2 (OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.97-0.99) disadvantages but did not change across 2008 to 2017 among those with 3 or more disadvantages. Conclusions and Relevance:Results of this study demonstrate that US disparities in smoking prevalence from 2008 to 2017 were successively larger with each additional disadvantage faced, were expressed in higher smoking initiation odds and lower smoking cessation odds, and widened over time.

Project description:BackgroundPsychiatric comorbidities may complicate depression treatment by being associated with increased role impairments. However, depression symptom severity might account for these associations. Understanding the independent associations of depression severity and comorbidity with impairments could help in treatment planning. This is especially true for depressed Veterans, who have high psychiatric comorbidity rates.Methods2,610 Veterans beginning major depression treatment at the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) were administered a baseline self-report survey that screened for diverse psychiatric comorbidities and assessed depression severity and role impairments. Logistic and generalized linear regression models estimated univariable and multivariable associations of depression severity and comorbidities with impairments. Population attributable risk proportions (PARPs) estimated the relative importance of depression severity and comorbidities in accounting for role impairments.ResultsNearly all patients (97.8%) screened positive for at least one comorbidity and half (49.8%) for 4+ comorbidities. The most common positive screens were for generalized anxiety disorder (80.2%), posttraumatic stress disorder (77.9%), and panic/phobia (77.4%). Depression severity and comorbidities were significantly and additively associated with impairments in multivariable models. Associations were attenuated much less for depression severity than for comorbidities in multivariable versus univariable models. PARPs indicated that 15-60% of role impairments were attributable to depression severity and 5-32% to comorbidities.LimitationsThe screening scales could have over-estimated comorbidity prevalence. The cross-sectional observational design cannot determine either temporal or causal priorities.ConclusionsAlthough positive screens for psychiatric comorbidity are pervasive among depressed VHA patients, depression severity accounts for most of the associations of these comorbidities with role impairments.