Exploring socio-economic inequalities in mental healthcare utilization in adults with self-reported psychological distress: a survey-registry linked cohort design.

IF 5.9 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY
J J Muwonge, C Dalman, B Burström, B Jablonska, A-C Hollander
{"title":"Exploring socio-economic inequalities in mental healthcare utilization in adults with self-reported psychological distress: a survey-registry linked cohort design.","authors":"J J Muwonge, C Dalman, B Burström, B Jablonska, A-C Hollander","doi":"10.1017/S2045796024000842","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Although individuals with lower socio-economic position (SEP) have a higher prevalence of mental health problems than others, there is no conclusive evidence on whether mental healthcare (MHC) is provided equitably. We investigated inequalities in MHC use among adults in Stockholm County (Sweden), and whether inequalities were moderated by self-reported psychological distress.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>MHC use was examined in 31,433 individuals aged 18-64 years over a 6-month follow-up period, after responding to the General Health Questionnaire-12 (GHQ-12) in 2014 or the Kessler Six (K6) in 2021. Information on their MHC use and SEP indicators, education, and household income, were sourced from administrative registries. Logistic and negative binomial regression analyses were used to estimate inequalities in gained MHC access and frequency of outpatient visits, with psychological distress as a moderating variable.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Individuals with lower education or income levels were more likely to gain access to MHC than those with high SEP, irrespective of distress levels. Education-related differences in gained MHC access diminished with increasing distress, from a 74% higher likelihood when reporting no distress (odds ratio, OR = 1.74 [95% confidence interval, 95% CI: 1.43-2.12]) to 30% when reporting severe distress (OR = 1.30 [0.98-1.72]). Comparable results were found for secondary care but not primary care i.e., lower education predicted reduced access to primary care in moderate-to-severe distress groups (e.g., OR = 0.63 [0.45-0.90]), and for physical but not digital services. Income-related differences in gained MHC access remained stable or increased with distress, especially for secondary care and physical services.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Overall, individuals with lower education and income used MHC services more than their counterparts with higher socio-economic status; however, low-educated individuals faced inequities in primary care and underutilized non-physician services such as visits to psychologists.</p>","PeriodicalId":11787,"journal":{"name":"Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences","volume":"34 ","pages":"e6"},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S2045796024000842","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims: Although individuals with lower socio-economic position (SEP) have a higher prevalence of mental health problems than others, there is no conclusive evidence on whether mental healthcare (MHC) is provided equitably. We investigated inequalities in MHC use among adults in Stockholm County (Sweden), and whether inequalities were moderated by self-reported psychological distress.

Methods: MHC use was examined in 31,433 individuals aged 18-64 years over a 6-month follow-up period, after responding to the General Health Questionnaire-12 (GHQ-12) in 2014 or the Kessler Six (K6) in 2021. Information on their MHC use and SEP indicators, education, and household income, were sourced from administrative registries. Logistic and negative binomial regression analyses were used to estimate inequalities in gained MHC access and frequency of outpatient visits, with psychological distress as a moderating variable.

Results: Individuals with lower education or income levels were more likely to gain access to MHC than those with high SEP, irrespective of distress levels. Education-related differences in gained MHC access diminished with increasing distress, from a 74% higher likelihood when reporting no distress (odds ratio, OR = 1.74 [95% confidence interval, 95% CI: 1.43-2.12]) to 30% when reporting severe distress (OR = 1.30 [0.98-1.72]). Comparable results were found for secondary care but not primary care i.e., lower education predicted reduced access to primary care in moderate-to-severe distress groups (e.g., OR = 0.63 [0.45-0.90]), and for physical but not digital services. Income-related differences in gained MHC access remained stable or increased with distress, especially for secondary care and physical services.

Conclusions: Overall, individuals with lower education and income used MHC services more than their counterparts with higher socio-economic status; however, low-educated individuals faced inequities in primary care and underutilized non-physician services such as visits to psychologists.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
1.20%
发文量
121
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences is a prestigious international, peer-reviewed journal that has been publishing in Open Access format since 2020. Formerly known as Epidemiologia e Psichiatria Sociale and established in 1992 by Michele Tansella, the journal prioritizes highly relevant and innovative research articles and systematic reviews in the areas of public mental health and policy, mental health services and system research, as well as epidemiological and social psychiatry. Join us in advancing knowledge and understanding in these critical fields.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信