Predictors for depressive symptoms by four types of disability

Abstract This study aimed to examine the longitudinal relationship between disability and depressive symptoms, by comparing four types of disability in community-dwelling individuals with disabilities in South Korea. A total of 3347 South Koreans with disabilities from the second wave of the Panel S...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sun Wook Jung, Jin-Ha Yoon, Wanhyung Lee
Formato: article
Lenguaje:EN
Publicado: Nature Portfolio 2021
Materias:
R
Q
Acceso en línea:https://doaj.org/article/07ed261654164dc683bc0ba7d2545f6b
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
Descripción
Sumario:Abstract This study aimed to examine the longitudinal relationship between disability and depressive symptoms, by comparing four types of disability in community-dwelling individuals with disabilities in South Korea. A total of 3347 South Koreans with disabilities from the second wave of the Panel Survey of Employment for the Disabled was utilized. Depressive symptomatology was assessed by whether the participant had experienced depressive symptoms for more than two weeks during the past year. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to calculate the odds ratio (OR) for depressive symptoms, and a Cox proportional hazards model to calculate the hazard ratio (HR) for two-year survival analysis. Persons who acquired mental disability from accident or industrial disaster and persons with congenital physical-internal disability were at higher risk for depressive symptoms. Maintaining employment was found to be an effective way to decrease the risk of depressive symptoms in persons with physical-external disability, sensory/speech disability, or mental disability. In contrast, in physical-internal disability, retaining normal ability to work seemed to be the key to reduce the risk of depressive symptoms. Predictors of depressive symptoms were found to differ depending on the type of disability. Such differences should be reflected in clinical and policy-level interventions to address the specific psychiatric needs of persons with different disabilities.