Why the study?
The relative contributions of mental and physical conditions to days out of role among adults in Singapore were not previously evaluated.
Cross-Sectional (n=6,606)
Cardiovascular diseases, cancer, and mental health conditions are major contributors to role disability and productivity loss in Singapore.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the current study was to evaluate the relative contributions of mental and physical conditions to days out of role among adults aged 18 years and above in Singapore. METHODS: The Singapore Mental Health Study was a cross-sectional epidemiological survey of a nationally representative sample of residents aged 18 years or older. Diagnosis of mental disorders was established using the Composite International Diagnostic Interview; while chronic physical conditions were established using a checklist. Days out of role were assessed using a WHO Disability Assessment Schedule item. Multivariate regression analyses were used to estimate individual-level and societal-level effects of disorders. RESULTS: Overall, 8.7% of respondents reported at least one day out of role, with a mean of 5.8 days. The most disabling conditions at the individual level were cancer (118.9 additional days), cardiovascular diseases (93.5), and bipolar disorder (71.0). At the societal level, cardiovascular diseases contributed the highest population attributable risk proportion (45%), followed by cancer (39.3%), and hypertension (13.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Mental and physical conditions are linked to significant losses in productivity for society as well as role disability for individuals, underscoring the need to enhance prevention and intervention efforts to increase overall productivity and improve individual functioning.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Abdin et al. (2016) conducted a cross-sectional in Mental and physical conditions (n=6,606). Mental and physical conditions vs. Absence of the condition was evaluated on Days out of role in the past 30 days.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: