Search

Background: The patterns of health service use by rural and remote residents are poorly understood and under-represented in national surveys. This paper examines professional and non-professional service use for mental health problems in rural and remote communities in Australia. Methods: A stratified random sample of adults was drawn from non-metropolitan regions of New South Wales, Australia as part of a longitudinal population-based cohort. One-quarter (27.7%) of the respondents were from remote or very remote regions. The socio-demographic, health status and service utilization (professional and non-professional) characteristics of 2150 community dwelling residents are described. Hierarchical logistic regressions were used to identify cross-sectional associations between socio-demographic, health status and professional and non-professional health service utilization variables. Results: The overall rate of professional contacts for mental health problems during the previous 12 months (17%) in this rural population exceeded the national rate (11.9%). Rates for psychologists and psychiatrists were similar but rates for GPs were higher (12% vs. 8.1%). Non-professional contact rates were 12%. Higher levels of help seeking were associated with the absence of a partner, poorer finances, severity of mental health problems, and higher levels of adversity. Remoteness was associated with lower utilization of non-professional support. A Provisional Service Need Index was devised, and it demonstrated a broad dose-response relationship between severity of mental health problems and the likelihood of seeking any professional or non-professional help. Nevertheless, 47% of those with estimated high service need had no contact with professional services. Conclusions: An examination of self-reported patterns of professional and non-professional service use for mental health problems in a rural community cohort revealed relatively higher rates of general practitioner attendance for such problems compared with data from metropolitan centres. Using a measure of Provisional Service Need those with greater needs were more likely to access specialist services, even in remote regions, although a substantial proportion of those with the highest service need sought no professional help. Geographic and financial barriers to service use were identified and perception of service adequacy was relatively low, especially among those with the highest levels of distress and greatest adversity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper, presented at the 2010 rural health researchers' National Scientific Symposium on Rural and Remote Health, provides an overview of large Australian population mental health cohort studies which have a focus on climate‐related and environmental adversity, social factors and mental health. These studies highlight the value of exploiting multiple exceptional datasets to better understand the drivers of rural health, including how to use population‐level research to improve health resources in non‐metropolitan areas. We show how the key characteristics of rural and remote mental health might be explored by exploiting the following cohort studies: Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia Survey; Australian Rural Mental Health Study; Hunter Community Study; and Extending Treatments, Education and Networks in Depression study. Existing cohort studies that focus on significant rural and regional characteristics can be creatively analysed to better understand geographic variation in mental health. They have the potential to move understanding beyond simple prevalence to building knowledge about the trajectories of psychological distress and determinants of mental disorders and outcomes over time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: As research focuses on the concept of resilience, evidence suggests that greater levels of personal hope may have a mitigating effect on the mental health impact of adversity. In view of the adversity affecting rural communities, a better understanding of factors influencing personal hope may help identify foci for mental health promotion and mental illness prevention research and interventions. Aim: To explore the relationship between demographic, socioeconomic and mental health factors and personal hopefulness, including the influence of locality and remoteness. Method: Using data from two community-based longitudinal cohorts from New SouthWales - one urban and one rural - we analysed cross-sectional relationships between a range of factors and personal hopefulness using logistic regression techniques, as part of a common follow-up. Personal hopefulness was measured using a 12-item scale and scores were categorised as low (<2.5), medium (2.5-3.4) and high (≥3.5). Results: Of 2774 participants (53% female, mean age 69.1 years [SD 7.3, range 58-91 years], 36% living outside metropolitan areas) 32% had low, 51% had medium and 17% had high personal hopefulness scores. Several factors displayed univariate associations with personal hopefulness. In the multivariate model, five factors were independently associated with lower personal hopefulness: being older, having lower perceived prosperity, less frequent socialisation, experiencing high psychological distress or psychological impairment. Hopefulness was not associated with geographical location. Conclusion: The impact of current psychological distress and aspects of adversity on personal hopefulness over time should be further investigated in longitudinal research. Personal hopefulness did not differ across geographical location. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The variation of determinants of mental health with remoteness has rarely been directly examined. The current research aims to examine whether the association of psychosocial factors with psychological distress outcomes varies with increasing remoteness. Methods: Participants were persons aged 55 and over from two community cohorts sampling from across rural and urban New South Wales (N = 4219; mean age = 69.00 years; 46.1% male). Measures of social support from these studies were calibrated to facilitate comparison across the sample. Remoteness was assessed using a continuous measure, the Accessibility/Remoteness Index of Australia. The association between demographic characteristics, social support, remoteness, and their interactions with remoteness in the prediction of high psychological distress (cut-off > 21 on the Kessler 10) were examined using logistic regression. Results: Not being in a married or defacto relationship (OR 0.69; 99% CI 0.51-0.94), lower education (OR 0.52; 99% CI 0.38-0.71) and decreased social support (OR 0.36; 99% CI 0.31-0.42) significantly predicted psychological distress There was a significant interaction of age and remoteness (OR 0.84; 99% CI 0.67-1.00), indicating that as remoteness increases, older persons are less likely to be highly distressed, as well as a significant interaction of social support and remoteness (OR 1.22; 99% CI 1.04-1.44), indicating that as remoteness decreases, persons with low levels of social support are more likely to be highly distressed. Conclusions: Remoteness may moderate the influence of social support and age on psychological distress outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Excessive alcohol use is a significant problem in rural and remote Australia. The factors contributing to patterns of alcohol use have not been adequately explained, yet the geographic variation in rates suggests a potential contribution of district-level factors, such as socio-economic disadvantage, rates of population change, environmental adversity, and remoteness from services/population centres. This paper aims to investigate individual-level and district-level predictors of alcohol use in a sample of rural adults. Methods: Using baseline survey data (N = 1,981) from the population-based Australian Rural Mental Health Study of community dwelling residents randomly selected from the Australia electoral roll, hierarchal logistic regression models were fitted for three outcomes: 1) at-risk alcohol use, indicated by Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test scores ≥8; 2) high alcohol consumption (> 40 drinks per month); and 3) lifetime consequences of alcohol use. Predictor variables included demographic factors, pre-dispositional factors, recent difficulties and support, mental health, rural exposure and district-level contextual factors. Results: Gender, age, marital status, and personality made the largest contribution to at-risk alcohol use. Five or more adverse life events in the past 12 months were also independently associated with at-risk alcohol use (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR] 3.3, 99%CI 1.2, 8.9). When these individual-level factors were controlled for, at-risk alcohol use was associated with having spent a lower proportion of time living in a rural district (AOR 1.7, 99%CI 1.3, 2.9). Higher alcohol consumption per month was associated with higher district-level socio-economic ranking, indicating less disadvantage (AOR 1.2, 99%CI 1.02, 1.4). Rural exposure and district-level contextual factors were not significantly associated with lifetime consequences of alcohol use. Conclusions: Although recent attention has been directed towards the potential adverse health effects of district or community level adversity across rural regions, our study found relatively few district-level factors contributing to at-risk alcohol consumption after controlling for individual-level factors. Population-based prevention strategies may be most beneficial in rural areas with a higher socio-economic ranking, while individual attention should be focused towards rural residents with multiple recent adverse life events, and people who have spent less time residing in a rural area. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]