Post-traumatic stress, depression, and anxiety during the 2021 Myanmar conflict: a nationwide population-based survey.

Background: The UN warns that Myanmar faces the 'triple crises' of mass conflict, uncontrolled COVID-19, and economic collapse. Therefore, we aimed to assess the population mental health burden, healthcare needs, and the associated risk factors in Myanmar. Methods: We established a nationwide random sample and recruited 1038 adults via random digit dialling from July 3-Aug 9, 2021, during the ongoing conflict since Feb 1, 2021, and surge in SARS-CoV-2 infections. Probable post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) was assessed using the PTSD Checklist-Civilian Version. Probable depression and anxiety were assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire-2 and the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-2. We calculated population attributable fractions for probable mental disorders using multivariable logistic regression models. Based on the mental health burden and healthcare-seeking patterns, we projected the need for mental health services. Findings: During the 'triple crises', a third of adults in Myanmar (34.9%, 95% CI 32.0-37.7) reported a probable mental disorder. Prevalence of probable PTSD, depression, and anxiety were 8.1% (6.6-9.7), 14.3% (12.0-16.6), and 22.2% (19.7-24.7), respectively. We estimated that up to 79.9% (43.8-97.9) of probable PTSD was attributable to political stress. This corresponds to 2.1 million (1.1-3.2 million) fewer adults with probable PTSD if political stress was removed from the population. The mental health burden could translate into roughly 5.9 million adults seeking mental health services. Interpretation: The mental health burden in Myanmar is substantial, and population mental health might only be restored when the three crises have ended. An accelerated peace process is critical to protecting Myanmar's population mental health. Funding: This research was supported the Research Grants Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China (Project No. HKU 17606122) and the Michele Tansella Award.

A community-based study of the relationship between somatic and psychological distress in Hong Kong.

Although the predominantly somatic presentation of distress has been used to explain low rates of emotional illnesses and health service use in Chinese communities, this concept of somatization has not been examined by concurrently studying the profile of somatically and psychologically distressed Chinese individuals. A random population-based sample of 3014 adults underwent a structured telephone interview that examined their sociodemographic characteristics, somatic distress (Patient Health Questionnaire-15, PHQ-15), non-specific psychological distress (Kessler Scale-6, K6), health service use, and functional impairment. Four groups of individuals identified by PHQ-15 and K6 cut-off scores were compared. Results showed that PHQ-15 and K6 scores were positively correlated. The large majority of respondents (85.9%) reported both somatic and psychological distress. The proportions of Low Distress Group, Somatically Distressed Group, Psychologically Distressed Group, and Mixed Distress Group were 69.2%, 5.0%, 15.8%, and 10.0%, respectively. Specific age range, male gender, greater family income, higher education level, and retirement were associated with decreased odds of somatic and/or psychological distress. Although psychological distress best predicted impairment, somatic distress best predicted health service use. Mixed distress predicted most impairment and health service use. Thus, psychological distress and somatic distress commonly coexist across Chinese sociodemographic groups. This speaks against the conventional notion of somatization and is consistent with recent findings of a higher prevalence of emotional illnesses in Chinese people. That psychologically distressed individuals are more impaired but less inclined to seek help than somatically distressed individuals may partly explain low levels of help-seeking for mental disorders found in epidemiological studies.

Somatic symptom burden and health anxiety in the population and their correlates.

OBJECTIVE: Somatic symptom burden and health anxiety demonstrate overlapping clinical characteristics but their relationship in the general population is unclear. This study examined the association between these dimensions after adjustment for confounders and their respective correlation with outcome measures. METHODS: A randomly selected population-based sample of 3014 respondents aged 15-65 was interviewed by telephone using a structured questionnaire that included the 15-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-15), Whiteley-7, Kessler-6, Sheehan Disability Scale, socio-demographic variables and items regarding health care utilization. Respondents who scored 10 or above on PHQ-15 and 4 or above on Whiteley-5 were regarded as having high somatic symptom burden and high health anxiety respectively. RESULTS: Somatic symptom burden and health anxiety are moderately correlated after adjustment for confounders (p<.001). Both have important effects on psychological distress, functional impairment and health care utilization independent of each other (ps<.001). A considerable number of respondents (5.7%) reported both high somatic symptom burden and high health anxiety and this group showed the greatest general psychological distress, functional impairment and health care utilization. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the close association of somatic symptom burden and health anxiety but also their independent association with psychological distress, functional impairment and health care utilization. The findings support the concept of the DSM-5 category of somatic symptom disorder, but also demonstrate that individuals with high somatic symptom burden or high health anxiety alone may merit separate diagnoses. More sophisticated studies of the relationship between somatic symptom burden and health anxiety are needed.