4.7 Article

Age patterns in the prevalence of DSM-IV depressive/anxiety disorders with and without physical co-morbidity

Journal

PSYCHOLOGICAL MEDICINE
Volume 38, Issue 11, Pages 1659-1669

Publisher

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S0033291708003413

Keywords

Age; anxiety disorder; co-morbidity; depressive disorder; physical

Funding

  1. US National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) [R01MH070884]
  2. John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation
  3. Pfizer Foundation
  4. US Public Health Service [R13-MH066849, R01-MH069864, R01 DA016558]
  5. Fogarty International Center [FIRCA R01-TW006481]
  6. Pan American Health Organization
  7. Eli Lilly and Company
  8. Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical, Inc.
  9. GlaxoSmithKline
  10. Bristol-Myers Squibb
  11. Ministry of Social Protection
  12. Saldarriaga Concha Foundation
  13. European Commission [QLG5-1999-01042, SANCO 2004123]
  14. Piedmont Region (Italy)
  15. Fondo de Investigacion Sanitaria
  16. Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Spain [FIS 00/0028]
  17. Ministerio de Ciencia y Tecnologia, Spain [SAF 2000-158-CE]
  18. Departament de Salut, Generalitat de Catalunya, Spain
  19. Instituto de Salud Carlos III [CIBER CB06/02/0046, RETICS RD06/0011 REM-TAP]
  20. Israel National Institute for Health Policy
  21. Health Services Research
  22. National Insurance Institute of Israel
  23. Japan Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare [H13-SHOGAI-023, H14-TOKUBETSU-026, H16-KOKORO-013]
  24. Lebanese Ministry of Public Health
  25. WHO (Lebanon)
  26. The National Institute of Psychiatry Ramon de la Fuente (INPRFMDIES 4280)
  27. National Council on Science and Technology [CONACyT-G30544-H]
  28. PanAmerican Health Organization (PAHO)
  29. New Zealand Ministry of Health, Alcohol Advisory Council
  30. Health Research Council
  31. WHO (Geneva)
  32. WHO (Nigeria)
  33. Federal Ministry of Health, Abuja, Nigeria
  34. US NIMH [R01-MH059575, RO1-MH61905, U01-MH60220]
  35. South African Department of Health
  36. University of Michigan
  37. National Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA)
  38. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA)
  39. Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF [044708]
  40. John W. Alden Trust

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. Physical morbidity is a potent risk factor for depression onset and clearly increases with age, yet prior research has often found depressive disorders to decrease with age. This study tests the possibility that the relationship between age and mental disorders differs as a function of physical co-morbidity. Method. Eighteen general population surveys were carried out among household-residing adults as part of the World Mental Health (WMH) surveys initiative (n = 42 697). DSM-IV disorders were assessed using face-to-face interviews with the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI 3.0). The effect of age was estimated for 12-month depressive and/or anxiety disorders with and without physical or pain co-morbidity, and for physical and/or pain conditions without mental co-morbidity. Results. Depressive and anxiety disorders decreased with age, a result that cannot be explained by organic exclusion criteria. No significant difference was found in the relationship between mental disorders and age as a function of physical/pain co-morbidity. The majority of older persons have chronic physical or pain conditions without co-morbid mental disorders; by contrast, the majority of those with mental disorders have physical/pain co-morbidity, particularly among the older age groups. Conclusions. CIDI-diagnosed depressive and anxiety disorders in the general population decrease with age, despite greatly increasing physical morbidity with age. Physical morbidity among persons with mental disorder is the norm, particularly in older populations. Health professionals, including mental health professionals, need to address barriers to the management of physical co-morbidity among those with mental disorders.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available