Population density and receipt of care for common mental disorders: a cross-sectional analysis of English household data from the 2014 Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey.

OBJECTIVES: People living in less urban areas in the UK may have reduced access to mental healthcare compared with people in urban areas. Although this was not reported in the 2000 Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey (APMS) data, subsequent changes to mental health provision and economic recession may have impacted care inequalities. We re-examined this, hypothesising that those living in less urban areas of England received less antidepressant medication and psychological interventions, compared with those living in urban areas, after adjusting for covariates including common mental disorders (CMDs) and socioeconomic status. DESIGN: National cross-sectional study. SETTING: Households in England. PARTICIPANTS: We analysed data from 7455 participants aged 16 and above from the 2014 English APMS. EXPOSURES: Residence in an urban or less urban area. PRIMARY OUTCOME: Current receipt of any antidepressant medication or any psychological intervention. RESULTS: Participants living in less urban areas were half as likely to be in receipt of any psychological intervention relative to those living in urban areas (adjusted OR (aOR) 0.49; 95% CI 0.30 to 0.79; p=0.004). There was no association between urbanisation and antidepressant receipt (aOR 1.01; 95% CI 0.81 to 1.25; p=0.944). CONCLUSION: People living in less urban areas have a lower likelihood of being in receipt of psychological treatment for CMDs, which may indicate barriers to care access. Our findings differ from the results of a study using a comparable sample conducted 14 years previously. While Improving Access to Psychological Therapies services have increased therapy access nationwide, this may have had more impact in urban areas, potentially widening urban/rural inequalities. Further research is needed to understand how to address such geographical inequalities in access to mental healthcare.

Associations between common mental disorders and menopause: cross-sectional analysis of the 2014 Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey.

We investigated whether women who participated in a household survey in England were more likely to screen positive for possible generalised anxiety disorder and depression during and after menopause. We used logistic regression in secondary cross-sectional analyses of 1413 participants from the 2014 Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey data, adjusting for potential confounders (including age, deprivation score and chronic disease).We found that participants who were post-menopausal were more likely to screen positive for possible depression compared with participants who were pre-menopausal (3.9% v. 1.7%; adjusted odds ratio 3.91, 95% CI 1.23-12.46), but there was no association with perimenopause. We found no evidence of an association between menopausal stage and possible generalised anxiety disorder or symptom score. Clinicians should be aware of the association between menopause and depression, to best support women. Future research could focus on to what extent associations are driven by somatic features, and how this might be modified.

Investigating the association between schizophrenia and distance visual acuity: Mendelian randomisation study.

BACKGROUND: Increased rates of visual impairment are observed in people with schizophrenia. AIMS: We assessed whether genetically predicted poor distance acuity is causally associated with schizophrenia, and whether genetically predicted schizophrenia is causally associated with poorer visual acuity. METHOD: We used bidirectional, two-sample Mendelian randomisation to assess the effect of poor distance acuity on schizophrenia risk, poorer visual acuity on schizophrenia risk and schizophrenia on visual acuity, in European and East Asian ancestry samples ranging from approximately 14 000 to 500 000 participants. Genetic instrumental variables were obtained from the largest available summary statistics: for schizophrenia, from the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium; for visual acuity, from the UK Biobank; and for poor distance acuity, from a meta-analysis of case-control samples. We used the inverse variance-weighted method and sensitivity analyses to test validity of results. RESULTS: We found little evidence that poor distance acuity was causally associated with schizophrenia (odds ratio 1.00, 95% CI 0.91-1.10). Genetically predicted schizophrenia was associated with poorer visual acuity (mean difference in logMAR score: 0.024, 95% CI 0.014-0.033) in European ancestry samples, with a similar but less precise effect that in smaller East Asian ancestry samples (mean difference: 0.186, 95% CI -0.008 to 0.379). CONCLUSIONS: Genetic evidence supports schizophrenia being a causal risk factor for poorer visual acuity, but not the converse. This highlights the importance of visual care for people with psychosis and refutes previous hypotheses that visual impairment is a potential target for prevention of schizophrenia.

Association between visual impairment and psychosis: A longitudinal study and nested case-control study of adults.

BACKGROUND: Theories propose that visual impairment might increase the risk of psychosis, and vice versa. We aimed to investigate the relationship between visual impairment and psychosis in the UK Biobank cohort. STUDY DESIGN: In a nested case control study of ~116,000 adults, we tested whether a Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorder (SSD) diagnosis as exposure was associated with visual impairment. We also tested longitudinally whether poorer visual acuity, and thinner retinal structures on Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) scans in 2009 were associated with psychotic experiences in 2016. We adjusted for age, sex, depression and anxiety symptoms; and socioeconomic variables and vascular risk factors where appropriate. We compared complete case with multiple imputation models, designed to reduce bias potentially introduced by missing data. RESULTS: People with visual impairment had greater odds of SSD than controls in multiply imputed data (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR] 1.42, 95 % Confidence Interval [CI] 1.05-1.93, p = 0.021). We also found evidence that poorer visual acuity was associated with psychotic experiences during follow-up (AOR per 0.1 point worse visual acuity score 1.06, 95 % CI 1.01-1.11, p = 0.020; and 1.04, 95 % CI 1.00-1.08, p = 0.037 in right and left eye respectively). In complete case data (15 % of this cohort) we found no clear association, although confidence intervals included the multiple imputation effect estimates. OCT measures were not associated with psychotic experiences. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight the importance of eye care for people with psychotic illnesses. We could not conclude whether visual impairment is a likely causal risk factor for psychosis.

Associations between sociodemographic characteristics and receipt of professional diagnosis in Common Mental Disorder: Results from the Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey 2014.

BACKGROUND: Many people with Common Mental Disorders (CMDs), especially men, people from older age groups, and ethnic minority backgrounds, receive no treatment. Self-acknowledgement of mental illness symptoms, and a professional diagnosis are usually required to access treatment. To understand barriers, we therefore tested whether these groups were relatively less likely to self-diagnose a CMD, or to receive a professional diagnosis. METHODS: We analysed data from the 2014 English Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey (APMS). We used regression models to examine whether gender, age, and minority ethnic status were associated with professional and self-diagnosis, after controlling for CMD symptoms. RESULTS: 27.3 % of the population reported a professional and self-diagnosis of CMD, 15.9 % a self- diagnosis only, and the remainder no diagnosis. Odds of professional diagnosis were lower for men compared with women (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.54, 95 % confidence intervals [CI] 0.47-0.62). People from White Other (0.49, 0.36-0.67), Black (0.31, 0.18-0.51), and Asian (0.22, 0.15-0.33) groups were less likely than the White British group to receive a professional diagnosis. The least likely age group to have a professional CMD diagnosis (relative to adults aged 16-34) were people aged over 75 (0.52, 0.39-0.69). Patterns were similar for self-diagnosis. LIMITATIONS: Ethnicity categories were heterogeneous. Data are cross-sectional, and selection and response bias are possible. CONCLUSIONS: For every three people who self-diagnose CMD, two have a professional diagnosis. Men, ethnic minority, and older age groups are less likely to receive a diagnosis or self-diagnose after adjustment for presence of symptoms.

Eyes, the window on psychosis?

Much has been written on the theory that congenital blindness might protect against schizophrenia, but proof remains elusive. It has been suggested that visual ability might be associated with schizophrenia in a bell-shaped distribution, with both lifelong absent and perfect vision being protective. Alternatively, ocular aberrations and schizophrenia may share an aetiology. Any neuronal pathology implicated in schizophrenia could affect the retina, since it is an embryological extension of the brain. The retina is more amenable to direct imaging than other parts of the central nervous system and may give unique insights into schizophrenia-associated neuropathology. It is also possible that psychosis causes visual impairment: people with psychotic illnesses are probably not accessing optical care optimally and have higher levels of risk factors for visual loss.

Association Between Childhood Visual Acuity and Late Adolescent Psychotic Experiences: A Prospective Birth Cohort Study.

A cross-sectional association between visual impairment and psychosis exists, but longitudinal evidence from children and young people is limited. We investigated whether childhood visual acuity was associated with subsequent psychotic experiences. Our sample was 6686 individuals from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC). We investigated whether our primary exposures, best corrected visual acuity at ages 7 and 11, were associated with psychotic experiences at ages 17 and 24. We also tested whether the following exposures at ages 7 and 11 were associated with subsequent psychotic experiences: requiring glasses, presence of any visual impairment, and between-eye visual acuity difference; and at age 7: strabismus, measures of binocular vision, history of eye patch, near vision impairment, and abnormal saccadic or pursuit eye movements. Analyses used multilevel models before and after adjusting for confounders. Odds of psychotic experiences increased with each 0.1-point deterioration in visual acuity score at age 11 (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.23; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06-1.42), and at age 7 (AOR 1.18; 95% CI 1.00-1.40). Wearing glasses and visual impairment at age 11 were associated with psychotic experiences (AOR 1.63; 95% CI 1.21-2.19; AOR 1.64; 95% CI 1.23-2.19, respectively). There was no evidence of an association with other visual exposures. Visual acuity impairment in childhood is associated with psychotic experiences in late adolescence. Future research should aim to elucidate the nature of this association.

Associations between psychosis and visual acuity impairment: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Several theories propose that visual acuity impairment is associated with psychosis. Visual impairment could lead to psychosis or the converse, or they may share underlying pathology or risk factors. In the first evidence synthesis in this area for over 25 years, we collated studies measuring the association between visual acuity impairment and psychosis. METHODS: We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and Web of Science databases for studies published from 1992 to 2020, using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale to assess risk of bias. We narratively synthesized findings and meta-analyzed sufficiently homogenous results. RESULTS: We included 40 papers, which reported on 31 studies. Evidence from seven cohort studies was inconsistent, which precluded meta-analysis of this study design. These contradictory results also made it difficult to draw conclusions regarding a temporal association. We found evidence for an association from eight cross-sectional studies treating visual acuity impairment as the exposure and psychosis as the outcome [pooled odds ratio (OR) =1.76, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.34-2.31], and four with the reverse exposure and outcome (OR: 1.85, 95% CI: 1.17-2.92). Seven case-control studies with mixed findings were found, but only two primarily addressed our research question, and these findings were mixed. CONCLUSIONS: Although evidence supports a cross-sectional association between visual acuity impairment and psychosis, further research is needed to clarify the temporal direction, given the mixed findings in cohort studies. Understanding the association may give insights into prevention strategies for people at risk of visual acuity impairment and psychosis.

Association between sensory impairment and suicidal ideation and attempt: a cross-sectional analysis of nationally representative English household data.

OBJECTIVES: Sensory impairments are associated with worse mental health and poorer quality of life, but few studies have investigated whether sensory impairment is associated with suicidal behaviour in a population sample. We investigated whether visual and hearing impairments were associated with suicidal ideation and attempt. DESIGN: National cross-sectional study. SETTING: Households in England. PARTICIPANTS: We analysed data for 7546 household residents in England, aged 16 and over from the 2014 Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey. EXPOSURES: Sensory impairment (either visual or hearing), Dual sensory impairment (visual and hearing), visual impairment, hearing impairment. PRIMARY OUTCOME: Suicidal ideation and suicide attempt in the past year. RESULTS: People with visual or hearing sensory impairments had twice the odds of past-year suicidal ideation (OR 2.06; 95% CI 1.17 to 2.73; p<0.001), and over three times the odds of reporting past-year suicide attempt (OR 3.12; 95% CI 1.57 to 6.20; p=0.001) compared with people without these impairments. Similar results were found for hearing and visual impairments separately and co-occurring. CONCLUSIONS: We found evidence that individuals with sensory impairments are more likely to have thought about or attempted suicide in the past year than individuals without.

Temporal trends in psychotic symptoms: Repeated cross-sectional surveys of the population in England 2000-14.

BACKGROUND: The number of antipsychotic prescriptions dispensed annually in England has increased substantially over the past decade. It is not known whether this is due to changes in prescribing practices, or an increase in the prevalence of psychosis. To our knowledge, no previous studies have investigated temporal trends in prevalence of psychotic symptoms in non-clinical populations. METHODS: We used data from the nationally representative Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Surveys 2000, 2007 and 2014 to (1) test whether the prevalence of psychotic symptoms increased between 2000 and 2014; (2) compare prevalence of psychotic symptoms to the prevalence of being prescribed antipsychotic medication; and (3) identify correlates of experiencing psychotic symptoms. RESULTS: There was a small increase in the prevalence of psychotic symptoms in 2014 compared to 2000 (prevalence in 2000 5.6%, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 5.1% to 6.2%; prevalence in 2014 6.8%, 95% CI 6.1% - 7.6%). This corresponded to an adjusted odds ratio of 1.2 (95% CI 1.02-1.40, p=0.026) for experiencing psychotic symptoms in 2014 compared to 2007. By comparison, antipsychotic medication use doubled over this period (prevalence in 2000 0.6%, 95% CI 0.4%-0.7%; prevalence in 2014 1.2% 95% CI 0.9%-1.5%; aOR 2.22 (1.52-3.25) p<0.001). Correlates of reporting psychotic symptoms included ethnic minority identity, younger age, lower social class, alcohol and cannabis use, and any psychiatric diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: While the rates of antipsychotic prescription doubled between 2000 and 2014, the odds of having psychotic symptoms rose only slightly. The reasons for this warrant further investigation.

Psychotic symptoms and sensory impairment: Findings from the 2014 adult psychiatric morbidity survey.

PURPOSE: Hearing and visual impairment have been associated with psychosis. Mechanisms behind this are poorly understood. We tested whether i) self-reported hearing and visual impairments are associated with psychotic symptoms in the 2014 UK Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey; ii) the odds of having psychotic symptoms vary with self-perceived degree of impairments; and iii) reduced social functioning partially explains these associations. METHODS: We analysed cross-sectional data using logistic regression. Hearing and visual impairment were the exposures, and screening positive on the Psychosis Screening Questionnaire was the outcome. We used structural equation modelling to assess mediation by social functioning, measured by the Social Functioning Questionnaire. RESULTS: Psychotic symptoms were strongly associated with visual impairment (Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR) 1.81, 95% Confidence Intervals (CI) 1.33 to 2.44), especially moderate visual impairment (AOR 2.75, 95% CI 1.78 to 4.24, p < .001). Psychotic symptoms were associated with a severe degree of hearing impairment (AOR 4.94, 95% CI 1.66 to 14.67, p = .004), and weakly associated with hearing impairment overall (AOR 1.50, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.04, p = .010). Social functioning accounted for approximately 50% of associations with both types of sensory impairment, but the confidence intervals around these estimates were broad. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest an association between psychosis and visual impairment, with the strongest evidence for moderate visual impairment; the findings also support a linear relationship between psychosis and degree of hearing impairment. Social functioning may mediate these relationships and be a potential target for intervention, alongside sensory correction. These should be investigated longitudinally.

Common mental illness in people with sensory impairment: results from the 2014 adult psychiatric morbidity survey.

BACKGROUND: People with sensory impairments may be at increased risk of depression and anxiety but experience barriers to accessing treatment. AIMS: To investigate whether people with sensory impairment have more depressive and anxiety symptoms than people without, whether this is mediated by social functioning and whether they report greater non-treatment. METHOD: We analysed data from the English 2014 Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey using regression models, with the Clinical Interview Schedule-Revised (CIS-R) score as the primary outcome and self-reported hearing and vision impairment as exposures. A secondary outcome was self-reported receipt of mental health diagnosis and treatment. We used structural equation modelling to assess for mediation by social functioning. RESULTS: A total of 19.0% of people with hearing impairment, and 30.9% and 24.5% with distance and near visual impairments, respectively, had clinically significant psychological morbidity. Adjusted mean CIS-R score was 1.86 points higher in people with hearing impairment compared with those without (95% CI 1.30-2.42, P<0.001). People with distance and near vision impairment had mean CIS-R scores 3.61 (95% CI 2.58-4.63, P<0.001) and 2.74 (95% CI 2.12-3.37, P<0.001) points higher, respectively, than those without. Social functioning accounted for approximately 50% of these relationships between sensory impairment and psychological morbidity. We found no evidence of an increased treatment gap for people with sensory impairment. CONCLUSIONS: Social functioning, a potentially modifiable target, may mediate an association between sensory impairment and depressive and anxiety symptoms.

Prevalence of anxiety disorders and symptoms in people with hearing impairment: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: Anxiety disorders are common. Prevalence is likely to be raised in people with hearing impairment, who experience higher rates of associated risk factors. We conducted, to our knowledge, the first systematic review of the prevalence and correlates of anxiety in people with hearing impairment. METHODS: We searched electronic databases and references of included studies, using predetermined criteria to retrieve original research reporting prevalence of anxiety disorders or symptoms in adult, hearing impaired populations. We assessed risk of bias using the adapted Newcastle Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: We included 25 studies evaluating 17,135 people with hearing impairment. Community studies of higher quality reported a lifetime prevalence of anxiety disorder of 11.1% (one study) and point prevalences of 15.4-31.3% for clinically significant anxiety symptoms (five studies) in people who predominantly had acquired hearing impairment. Anxiety prevalence was higher in hearing impaired people in 8/10 studies with a comparator non-hearing impaired group. Anxiety symptoms decreased after surgical intervention for hearing in all studies investigating this. Correlates consistently associated with anxiety were tinnitus and hearing impairment severity. CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence of anxiety is higher among people with hearing impairment than the general population; our findings indicate that this excess morbidity may be related to the hearing impairment itself, as it was associated with the severity of impairment, and reduced after surgical treatment. Clinicians should be aware of the potential impact of hearing on mental health, and that where hearing ability can be improved, this may reduce anxiety. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018088463.