4.6 Article

COMORBIDITY AND DISEASE BURDEN IN THE NATIONAL COMORBIDITY SURVEY REPLICATION (NCS-R)

Journal

DEPRESSION AND ANXIETY
Volume 29, Issue 9, Pages 797-806

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/da.21924

Keywords

bias; burden of illness; confounding factors; cost of illness; epidemiology; global burden of disease; health valuation; visual analog scale (VAS)

Funding

  1. Analysis Group, Inc.
  2. Bristol-Myers Squibb
  3. Eli Lilly Company
  4. EPI-Q
  5. Ortho-McNeil Janssen Scientific Affairs
  6. Pfizer, Inc.
  7. Sanofi-Aventis Gruoupe
  8. Shire US, Inc.
  9. GlaxoSmithKline
  10. Walgreens Co.
  11. National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) [U01-MH60220]
  12. National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)
  13. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA)
  14. Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) [044780]
  15. John W. Alden Trust
  16. Mental Health Burden Study (NIMH) [HHSN271200700030C]
  17. National Institute of Mental Health [R01 MH070884]
  18. John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation
  19. Pfizer Foundation
  20. US Public Health Service [R13-MH066849, R01-MH069864, R01 DA016558]
  21. Fogarty International Center [FIRCA R03-TW006481]
  22. Pan American Health Organization
  23. Eli Lilly and Company
  24. Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical, Inc.

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Disease burden estimates rarely consider comorbidity. Using a recently developed methodology for integrating information about comorbidity into disease burden estimates, we examined the comparative burdens of nine mental and 10 chronic physical disorders in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication (NCS-R). Methods Face-to-face interviews in a national household sample (n = 5,692) assessed associations of disorders with scores on a visual analog scale (VAS) of perceived health. Multiple regression analysis with interactions for comorbidity was used to estimate these associations. Simulation was used to estimate incremental disorder-specific effects adjusting for comorbidity. Results The majority of respondents (74.9%) reported one or more disorders. Of respondents with disorders, 73.898.2% reported having at least one other disorder. The best-fitting model to predict VAS scores included disorder main effects and interactions for number of disorders. Adjustment for comorbidity reduced individual-level disorder-specific burden estimates substantially, but with considerable between-disorder variation (0.070.69 ratios of disorder-specific estimates with and without adjustment for comorbidity). Four of the five most burdensome disorders at the individual level were mental disorders based on bivariate analyses (panic/agoraphobia, bipolar disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, major depression) but only two based on multivariate analyses, adjusting for comorbidity (panic/agoraphobia, major depression). Neurological disorders, chronic pain conditions, and diabetes were the other most burdensome individual-level disorders. Chronic pain conditions, cardiovascular disorders, arthritis, insomnia, and major depression were the most burdensome societal-level disorders. Conclusions Adjustments for comorbidity substantially influence estimates of disease burden, especially those of mental disorders, underlining the importance of including information about comorbidity in studies of 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

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available