Psychological distress demonstrated a synergistic adverse effect with low socioeconomic status, increasing coronary heart disease mortality risk by 33% per distress category in low-SES individuals compared to a non-significant 10% increase in high-SES individuals.
Cohort (n=66,518)
Yes
Does psychological distress combined with low socioeconomic status increase mortality from stroke and coronary heart disease in adults free of cardiovascular disease and cancer?
Low socioeconomic status significantly amplifies the adverse effects of psychological distress on mortality from stroke and coronary heart disease.
Effect estimate: HR 1.33 (95% CI 1.19-1.48)
p-value: p=<0.001
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to test whether lower socioeconomic status (SES) augments the effect of psychological distress on mortality from stroke or coronary heart disease (CHD). METHODS: We prospectively linked data from 66,500 participants 35 years or older in the Health Survey for England, selected using stratified random sampling from 1994 to 2004, and free of cardiovascular disease and cancer at baseline, with mortality records. The median follow-up time was 7.9 years. SES was indexed by occupational class, and psychological distress was assessed using the 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12). RESULTS: After adjustment for demographic and clinical variables, both psychological distress and low SES were associated with increased mortality: the hazard ratios (HR) for one-category increase in low SES (three categories in total) were 1.15 for stroke-death (95% confidence interval CI = 1.00-1.31, p = .043) and 1.24 for CHD-death (95% CI = 1.09-1.41, p = .001); the HR for one-category increase in GHQ-12 (three categories in total) was 1.18 for stroke-death (95% CI = 1.07-1.30, p = .001) and 1.24 for CHD-death (95% CI = 1.13-1.36, p < .001). In stratified analyses, the strongest associations were found in the lowest SES categories: the HR for GHQ-12 toward stroke-death was 1.15 in high-SES participants (95% CI = 0.97-1.37, p = .107) and 1.31 in low-SES ones (95% CI = 1.13-1.51, p < .001); the HR for GHQ-12 toward CHD-death was 1.10 in high-SES participants (95% CI = 0.97-1.25, p = .129) and 1.33 in low-SES ones (95% CI = 1.19-1.48, p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: People in low socioeconomic circumstances are more vulnerable to the adverse effect of psychological distress. This pattern should be taken into account when evaluating the association between psychosocial variables and health outcomes.
Lazzarino et al. (Wed,) conducted a cohort in Free of cardiovascular disease and cancer (n=66,518). Psychological distress (GHQ-12) in low socioeconomic status vs. Psychological distress in high socioeconomic status was evaluated on Coronary heart disease mortality for a one-category increase in GHQ-12 among low-SES participants (HR 1.33, 95% CI 1.19-1.48, p=<0.001). Psychological distress demonstrated a synergistic adverse effect with low socioeconomic status, increasing coronary heart disease mortality risk by 33% per distress category in low-SES individuals compared to a non-significant 10% increase in high-SES individuals.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: