Self-Harm Among 17-Year-Old Adolescents With/Without Disabilities in the United Kingdom.

Background: Self-harm is a critical public health issue for adolescents/young adults. Aims: To estimate the prevalence of self-harm among adolescents with/without disabilities in the United Kingdom. Method: Secondary analysis of data collected at age 17 in the UK's Millennium Cohort Study. Results: Prevalence of self-harm was significantly greater among adolescents with disabilities for suicide attempts and six forms of self-harming behaviors. The lifetime prevalence of suicide attempts was 5.3% (4.5-6.3) among adolescents without disabilities, 21.9% (18.2-26.2) among adolescents with less limiting disabilities, and 25.5% (17.2-35.9) among adolescents with more limiting disabilities. Adjusted prevalence rate ratios ranged from 5.13 (3.58-7.36) for those with mental health limitations to 1.48 (0.65-3.35) for those with mobility limitations. Similar patterns were observed for the 12-month prevalence of six self-harming behaviors. Limitations: Further studies are needed to identify potential mediators of the association between disability and self-harm that are potentially modifiable. Conclusion: Adolescents with disabilities are at markedly greater probability of suicide attempts and self-harming behaviors than their peers.

Disability-related inequalities in the prevalence of loneliness across the lifespan: trends from Australia, 2003 to 2020.

BACKGROUND: Experiencing loneliness can be distressing and increasing evidence indicates that being lonely is associated with poor physical and mental health outcomes. Cross-sectional studies have demonstrated that people with disability have increased risk of experiencing loneliness compared to people without disability. However, we do not know if these inequalities have changed over time. This study investigated the prevalence of loneliness for people with disability in Australia annually from 2003 to 2020 to examine whether disability-related inequalities in loneliness have changed over time, and disaggregated results for subgroups of people with disability by age group, sex, and disability group. METHODS: We used annual data (2003-2020) from the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia Survey. Loneliness was measured by a single question assessing the subjective experience of loneliness. For each wave, we calculated population-weighted age-standardised estimates of the proportion of people experiencing loneliness for people with and without disability. We then calculated the absolute and relative inequalities in loneliness between people with and without disability for each wave. Analyses were stratified by 10-year age groups, sex, and disability group (sensory or speech, physical, intellectual or learning, psychological, brain injury or stroke, other). RESULTS: From 2003 to 2020, the prevalence of loneliness was greater for people with disability, such that people with disability were 1.5 to 1.9 times more likely to experience loneliness than people without disability. While the prevalence of loneliness decreased for people without disability between 2003 and 2020, the prevalence of loneliness did not decrease for people with disability during this period. Inequalities in loneliness were more substantial for people with intellectual or learning disabilities, psychological disability, and brain injury or stroke. CONCLUSION: This study confirms that people with disability have increased risk of loneliness compared to people without disability. We add to the existing evidence by demonstrating that disability-related inequalities in loneliness have persisted for two decades in Australia without improvement. Our findings indicate that addressing inequalities in loneliness for people with disability is a critical public health concern given that loneliness is associated with a wide range of poor health outcomes.

Disability and loneliness in the United Kingdom: cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses of trends and transitions.

BACKGROUND: Loneliness can have a detrimental impact on health, yet little is known about the association between disability and loneliness. METHODS: Secondary analysis of three waves of data collected between 2017 and 2020 by the UK's annual household panel study, Understanding Society. Direct age-standardisation was used to compare the prevalence of loneliness at each wave and the persistence of loneliness across all three waves for participants with/without disabilities aged 16-65 years. Transitional probabilities for the stability of loneliness, the stability of non-loneliness, the onset of loneliness and the offset of loneliness between consecutive waves were also estimated. RESULTS: At each wave, the prevalence of loneliness was significantly higher among respondents with disabilities than respondents without disabilities; these inequalities persisted with no evidence of change over time. The prevalence of persistent loneliness was 46% for respondents with disabilities compared with 22% for respondents without disabilities. Risk factors for the likelihood of persistent loneliness included disability, financial stress, not living as a couple, living in rented accommodation, being female and not being employed. The probability of the onset and stability of loneliness between successive waves were markedly higher for people with disabilities compared with people without disabilities. CONCLUSION: Adults with disabilities were more likely to experience loneliness, become lonely and remain lonely over time than their peers. Policies and interventions aimed at reducing loneliness should ensure that they are accessible and effective for people with disabilities. Further research is needed to explore the health outcomes of persistent loneliness among people with/without disabilities.

Health and wellbeing outcomes associated with loneliness for people with disability: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Loneliness is a significant public health concern due to its detrimental impact on health and wellbeing. Despite people with disability reporting higher levels of loneliness than the general population, there has been little research into how this is affecting their health and wellbeing. In light of this, the aim of our study was to scope both the existing evidence about the health and wellbeing outcomes associated with loneliness for people with disability, as well as the conceptual frameworks and measures utilised in this field of research. METHODS: To conduct this scoping review, we followed the methodology outlined by JBI and searched MEDLINE, Scopus, Informit, Embase, and Web of Science for peer-reviewed, English-language articles published between 1 January 2000 and 8 February 2023. Two independent reviewers completed screening, full-text review and data extraction, with consensus sought at each stage. Data were analysed using content analysis and presented both numerically and narratively. RESULTS: Out of the initial 1602 publications identified in the scoping review, only nine were included after duplicate removal, title and abstract screening, and full-text review. This limited number of studies, with the earliest study one published in 2015, represents a key finding. Eight of the nine studies were quantitative, and all were conducted in high income countries. Most of these studies utilised a version of the University of Los Angles Loneliness Scale to measure loneliness and addressed specific impairment groups. Notably, most of the studies identified associations between loneliness and health and wellbeing outcomes for people with disability. CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review highlights the current scarcity of studies examining the effect that loneliness has on the health and wellbeing outcomes of people with disability. As most of the reviewed studies relied on loneliness measures designed for individuals without disability, they potentially overlook the unique life experiences of people with disability. Given that loneliness is an international public health concern, it is imperative that people with disability are not left behind or overlooked in efforts to address the impact of loneliness on health and wellbeing.

The impact of employment on mental healthcare use among people with disability: distinguishing between part- and full-time employment.

OBJECTIVE: Employment can improve mental health among people with disability (PWD), however, little is known about how different levels of workforce participation influence mental healthcare use. The aim of this study was to estimate the extent to which different levels of working hours are associated with changes in mental healthcare use among PWD. METHODS: Data on working hours and healthcare use among working age PWD who were receiving government benefits (N=260 825) was obtained from Australian Census-linked administrative records between 2011 and 2019. Individual fixed effects panel models were used to estimate the impact of increased working hours on mental healthcare (services and prescriptions). Heterogeneity analyses by job security and key sociodemographic characteristics were conducted. RESULTS: Compared to not working, we found that working 1-14, 15-29, and ≥30 hours per week was respectively associated with a 3.3%, 18.0%, and 9.9% reduction in the use of mental healthcare prescriptions as well as a 6.8%, 18.4%, and 22.3% reduction in the use of mental healthcare services by PWD. The effects were larger for PWD in more secure work and those living in rural and disadvantaged areas. CONCLUSIONS: Working more hours was associated with reduced mental healthcare use among PWD. Policy interventions should consider the broader benefits of enabling part-time and secure work placements for PWD, particularly for those living in rural and disadvantaged regions.

Trends in mental health inequalities for people with disability, Australia 2003 to 2020.

OBJECTIVE: Cross-sectional studies have demonstrated that people with disability have substantial inequalities in mental health compared to people without disability. However, it is not known if these inequalities have changed over time. This study compared the mental health of people with and without disability annually from 2003 to 2020 to investigate time trends in disability-related mental health inequalities. METHODS: We use annual data (2003-2020) of the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia Survey. Mental health was measured using the five-item Mental Health Inventory. For each wave, we calculated population-weighted age-standardised estimates of mean Mental Health Inventory scores for people with and without disability and calculated the mean difference in Mental Health Inventory score to determine inequalities. Analyses were stratified by age, sex and disability group (sensory or speech, physical, intellectual or learning, psychological, brain injury or stroke, other). RESULTS: From 2003 to 2020, people with disability had worse mental health than people without disability, with average Mental Health Inventory scores 9.8 to 12.1 points lower than for people without disability. For both people with and without disability, Mental Health Inventory scores decreased, indicating worsening mental health, reaching the lowest point for both groups in 2020. For some subpopulations, including young females and people with intellectual disability, brain injury or stroke, mental health inequalities worsened. CONCLUSION: This paper confirms that people with disability experience worse mental health than people without disability. We add to previous findings by demonstrating that disability-related inequalities in mental health have been sustained for a long period and are worsening in some subpopulations.

A systematic review of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of adolescents and young people with disabilities aged 15-29 years.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated the psychological burden on young people around the world and may have disproportionately large impacts for young people with disabilities. This review aims to systematically review the quantitative evidence on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of young people with disabilities and evaluate the quality of included studies. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted using 5 electronic databases. The quality of the studies was assessed using the SIGN risk of bias assessment tool. A narrative synthesis was performed to synthesize the results of included studies. RESULTS: The initial search yielded 1935 studies, of which two met the eligibility criteria, one longitudinal study and one cross-sectional study, both assessed to be of low quality. In the cross-sectional study, young people with intellectual and developmental disabilities self-reported an increase in mental health symptoms. The longitudinal study found no evidence of a change in mental health symptoms from pre-pandemic to during the pandemic among young people with autism spectrum disorder, although these individuals reported negative impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on their emotional or mental health. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this review provide some weak evidence of a negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of young people with disabilities. Importantly, the findings highlight the lack of research in this area. More research is needed to investigate the impact of the pandemic on the mental health of young disabled people, in order for governments to develop emergency preparedness plans to safeguard the well-being of this population.

Does employment status mediate the association between disability status and mental health among young adults? Evidence from the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) survey.

OBJECTIVE: Young adults with disabilities are less likely to be employed and more likely to have poor mental health than peers without disabilities. Growing evidence shows that social determinants of health may be causally related to mental health outcomes of people with disabilities. We aimed to assess if the disability to mental health association was mediated by employment status among young adults aged 20-35 years. METHODS: Four consecutive years (2016-2019) of data from the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia survey were used to conduct a causal mediation analysis. We decomposed the total causal effect of disability status on mental health (Short Form-36 Mental Health Inventory-5) into the natural direct effect from disability to mental health and the natural indirect effect representing the pathway through the employment mediator (being employed; being unemployed or wanting to work). RESULTS: 3435 participants (3058 with no disabilities, 377 with disabilities) were included in the analysis. The total causal effect of disability status on mental health was an estimated mean decrease in mental health of 4.84 points (95% CI -7.44 to -2.23). The indirect effect, through employment status, was estimated to be a 0.91-point decline in mental health (95% CI -1.50 to -0.31). CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest disability has an effect on the mental health of young adults; a proportion of this effect appears to operate through employment. The mental health of young adults with disabilities could potentially be improved with interventions to improve employment outcomes among this group, and by supporting individuals with disabilities into suitable employment.

Part-time versus full-time employment and mental health for people with and without disability.

Objectives: This paper investigates the relationship between part-time and full-time employment and mental health for people with and without disability, as well as differences in the relationship by age and sex. Methods: Using data from 13,219 working-aged people (15-64 years) in the labour force who participated in five annual waves of a longitudinal cohort study in Australia, the analysis used fixed effect regression models to examine within-person changes in mental health associated with changes in employment status (full-time; part-time; unemployed). Differences in the relationship between employment status and mental health by disability, sex, and age were assessed. Results: Among people with disability, there was evidence that working part-time and full-time were associated with a 4.2-point (95% CI 2.6, 5.7) and 6.0-point (95% CI 4.4, 7.6) increase in mental health scores compared with when they were unemployed. For people without disability, there were much smaller differences in mental health associated with working part-time (ß = 1.0, 95% CI 0.2, 1.9) and full-time (ß = 1.4, 95% CI 0.5, 2.2) compared with when they were unemployed. The positive effects of both part-time and full-time employment were of greater magnitude for people with disability aged younger than 45 years compared to those aged 45 years and older. Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that both part-time and full-time employment may have beneficial effects on the mental health of people with disability, particularly for younger people. The findings underscore the value of employment for people with disability, given we found much larger beneficial mental health effects in comparison to people without disability.

Smoking Inequality Trends by Disability and Income in Australia, 2001 to 2020.

BACKGROUND: While policies to reduce smoking in many countries have been successful, disadvantaged groups (such as low-income groups) have only seen minor gains. People with disability are one such disadvantaged group and are more likely to smoke. However, evidence is limited on trends and inequalities in smoking for disabled people and on whether those also on low incomes are more likely to smoke. METHODS: We use annual data from 2001 to 2020 of the Household Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia survey. We use a Bayesian model to estimate smoking prevalence trends and inequalities for people with disability (2020, n = 1,370) and without disability (2020, n = 6,229) across the whole population and within income tertiles. To avoid reverse causation (smoking causing disability), we focus on younger people (15-44 years). RESULTS: Absolute reductions (per 100 people, [95% credible intervals]) in smoking were similar for people with (-13 [-16, -11]) and without disability (-15 [-16, -14]), with stable absolute but increasing relative inequalities. In the low-income group, absolute reductions in smoking prevalence for people with disability (-10 [-14, -6]) were smaller than in people without disability (-14 [-15, -12]), resulting in moderate evidence for increasing absolute inequalities (4 [0, 8]) and strong evidence for increasing relative inequalities. In high-income groups, disability-related absolute inequalities narrowed (-6 [-10, -3]), and relative inequalities were stable. CONCLUSIONS: Disabled people in Australia, especially those on low incomes, show signs of being left behind in efforts to reduce smoking.

COVID-19 vaccination coverage and vaccine hesitancy among Australians with disability and long-term health conditions.

ISSUE ADDRESSED: COVID-19 vaccination is the cornerstone of managing Australia's COVID-19 pandemic and the success of the vaccination program depends on high vaccination coverage. This paper examined differences in COVID-19 vaccination coverage and vaccine hesitancy for people with disability, long-term health conditions, and carers - subgroups that were prioritised in Australia's vaccination program. METHODS: Using data from 2400 Australians who participated in two waves of the Taking the Pulse of the Nation survey in April and May 2021, we described vaccination coverage and hesitancy among people with disability, severe mental health conditions, severe long-term health conditions, frequent need for assistance with everyday activities, and carers. RESULTS: Vaccination coverage was estimated to be 8.2% in the population overall and was similar for people with disability, those with frequent need for assistance, and carers. It was higher for people with severe long-term health conditions (13.4%) and lower for people with severe mental health conditions (4.3%). Vaccine hesitancy was high overall (35.6%) and was similarly high across the priority groups, with only small differences for people with disability, severe long-term health conditions and frequent need for assistance. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights a lack of difference in vaccination coverage for people with disability, long-term health conditions, and carers compared to the general population. So what? Sub-optimal vaccination coverage for people in the priority groups leaves many people at significant risk of serious disease or death if exposed to COVID-19, particularly in light of easing of disease-control restrictions across Australia and the emergence of new variants.

Disability-related inequalities in health and well-being are mediated by barriers to participation faced by people with disability. A causal mediation analysis.

Large inequalities in health and well-being exist between people with and without disability, in part due to poor socio-economic circumstances, and potentially also related to societal factors including issues associated with accessibility and participation. To better understand the contribution of societal factors, we used a unique longitudinal survey of disability in Great Britain to quantify the extent to which barriers to participation contribute to poorer health and well-being. We used data from 2354 individuals who participated in three waves of the Life Opportunities Survey between 2009 and 2014 and compared five health and well-being outcomes (self-rated health, anxiousness, life satisfaction, life worth, happiness) between adults who acquired an impairment and those who remained disability-free. Causal mediation analysis was conducted to quantify how much of the effect of disability acquisition on each outcome was explained by barriers to participation in employment, economic life, transport, community, leisure and civic activities, social contact, and accessibility. People who recently acquired a disability had poorer health and well-being compared to people with no disability. Barriers to participation explained 15% of inequalities in self-rated health, 28% for anxiousness, 32% for life satisfaction, 37% for life worth, and 70% for happiness. A substantial proportion of the inequalities in health and well-being experienced by people with recently acquired disability were socially produced, driven by barriers to participation in different life domains. Furthermore, there was evidence that barriers to participation mediated the effect of well-being measured to a greater extent than the more clinically aligned measures, self-reported health and anxiousness. These findings highlight modifiable factors amenable to public health interventions that could lead to substantial improvements in health and well-being for people with disability.

The impact of the COVID pandemic on working age adults with disability: Meta-analysis of evidence from four national surveys.

Concern has been expressed about the extent to which people with disabilities may be particularly vulnerable to negative impacts of the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic. However, to date little published research has attempted to characterise or quantify the risks faced by people with/without disabilities in relation to COVID-19. We sought to compare the impact of the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic and associated government responses among working age adults with and without disabilities in the UK on; COVID-19 outcomes, health and wellbeing, employment and financial security, health behaviours, and conflict and trust. We undertook secondary analysis of data collected in four UK longitudinal surveys; the Millennium Cohort Study, Next Steps, the British Cohort Study and the National Child Development Study. Combining analyses across surveys with random effects meta-analysis, there was evidence that people with disabilities were significantly more likely to report having had COVID-19 and had significantly increased levels of stress, less exercise, poorer sleep patterns, more conflict with their partner and others in their local area, and to have less trust in the government. While most outcomes did not differ significantly between participants with and without disability, the findings suggest that in the early days of COVID-19 a detrimental impact emerges for those with disabilities which is more pronounced among older people with disabilities. Future research is needed to determine the longer-term impact of the pandemic.

Health and healthcare for people with disabilities in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: While emerging evidence shows increased mortality from COVID-19 among people with disability, evidence regarding whether there are disability-related inequalities in health during the pandemic is lacking. OBJECTIVE: This study compares access to COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 related health care and mental health of people with and without disability. METHODS: Longitudinal analysis of 12,703 adults (16-64 years) who participated in W9 (2017-2019) and the April and/or May COVID-19 special surveys of the UK Understanding Society study. Descriptive analyses and Poisson regression (adjusted for age, gender, ethnicity and financial stress) were conducted to estimate associations between disability (measured at Wave 9) and a number of different COVID-19-related health and health care outcomes (COVID-19 symptoms, testing and hospitalisation), mental health and loneliness, and non-COVID-19 related health care (e.g. outpatient and inpatient hospital care, prescription medications). RESULTS: Results from the fully-adjusted regression models found that people with disability were more likely: to be hospitalised if symptomatic (adjusted PRR 3.0 95% 1.07-8.43); to experience current symptoms of psychological distress (PRR 1.15, 95% CI 1.05-1.26) and to report being lonely (PRR 1.75, 95% CI 1.46-2.09) compared to non-disabled people. People with disability reported much higher levels of comorbidities than people without disability. However, inability to access health care and treatment were similar. CONCLUSIONS: As the UK opens up, it is important that health care services and social policy address the poor mental health and social isolation of people with disability so that the inequalities occurring early in the pandemic do not become further entrenched.

The association between disability and risk of exposure to peer cyber victimisation is moderated by gender: Cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the exposure of youth with disability to cyber victimisation. OBJECTIVE: /Hypothesis: To estimate the prevalence of peer cyber and non-cyber victimisation in a nationally representative sample of 14-year-old adolescents with and without disability and to determine whether gender moderates the relationship between disability and exposure to victimisation. METHODS: Secondary analysis of data collected in Wave 6 of the UK's Millennium Cohort Survey on 11,726 14-year-old adolescents living in the UK. RESULTS: Adolescents with disability had higher prevalence of cyber and non-cyber victimisation than those with no disability. For cyber victimisation there was a statistically significant interaction between gender and disability, with evidence of increased cyber victimisation for adolescents with disability compared to those with no disability among girls, but not boys. For non-cyber victimisation there was no evidence of an interaction between gender and disability. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of both cyber and non-cyber victimisation was higher among adolescents with disability than those with no disability. The association between disability and risk of exposure to peer cyber victimisation appears to be moderated by gender.

How much of the effect of disability acquisition on mental health is mediated through employment and income? A causal mediation analysis quantifying interventional indirect effects using data from four waves of an Australian cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: There is evidence that disability acquisition causes a decline in mental health, but few studies have examined the causal mechanisms through which the effect operates. This study used a novel approach to mediation analysis to quantify interventional indirect effects (IIEs) through employment and income. DESIGN AND SETTING: We used four waves of longitudinal data (2011-2014) from the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia Survey, a nationally representative survey of Australian households. PARTICIPANTS: Working aged individuals who acquired a disability (n=233) were compared with those who remained disability-free in all four waves (n=5419). PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: Self-reported mental health was measured using the Mental Health Inventory subscale of the Short Form 36 general health questionnaire, which measures symptoms of depression, anxiety and psychological well-being. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: We conducted a causal mediation analysis quantifying IIEs of disability acquisition on mental health operating through two distinct mediators: employment status and income. We used multiple imputation with 50 imputed datasets to account for missing data. RESULTS: The total causal effect of disability acquisition on mental health was estimated to be a 4.8-point decline in mental health score (estimated mean difference: -4.8, 95% CI -7.0 to -2.7). The IIE through employment was estimated to be a 0.5-point difference (-0.5, 95% CI -1.0 to 0.0), accounting for 10.6% of the total effect, whereas there was no evidence that income explained any of the effects. CONCLUSIONS: This study estimated that disability-related mental health inequalities could be reduced by 10.6% if employment rates were the same for people with disability as those without disability. The results suggest that employment is implicated in the relationship between disability acquisition and mental health and that more research is needed to understand the influence of other aspects of employment and other socioeconomic characteristics.

The impact of disability on employment and financial security following the outbreak of the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic in the UK.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic may have a greater impact on people with disabilities than non-disabled people. Our aim was to compare the short-term impact of the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic and first lockdown on the employment and financial security of working age adults with and without disabilities in the UK. METHODS: Secondary analysis of data collected in Wave 9 and the special April, May and June COVID-19 monthly surveys of 'Understanding Society', the UK's main annual household panel study. RESULTS: During the first 3 months of the introduction of the COVID-19 lockdown in the UK, respondents with disability were more likely than their peers to be working reduced hours and experience higher levels of financial stress. These differences were attenuated, but not eliminated, when estimates were adjusted to take account of pre-lockdown financial status. CONCLUSIONS: Working age adults with disability were particularly disadvantaged by the financial impact of the COVID-19 lockdown in the UK. The UN Secretary-General António Guterres has stated the need for a disability-inclusive COVID-19 government response. The results of our analysis suggest that these pleas have either not been heeded, or if measures have been implemented, they have so far been ineffectual in the UK.

Overt acts of perceived discrimination reported by British working-age adults with and without disability.

BACKGROUND: Exposure to discrimination can have a negative impact on health. There is little robust evidence on the prevalence of exposure of people with disabilities to discrimination, the sources and nature of discrimination they face, and the personal and contextual factors associated with increased risk of exposure. METHODS: Secondary analysis of de-identified cross-sectional data from the three waves of the UK's 'Life Opportunities Survey'. RESULTS: In the UK (i) adults with disabilities were over three times more likely than their peers to be exposed to discrimination, (ii) the two most common sources of discrimination were strangers in the street and health staff and (iii) discrimination was more likely to be reported by participants who were younger, more highly educated, who were unemployed or economically inactive, who reported financial stress or material hardship and who had impairments associated with hearing, memory/speaking, dexterity, behavioural/mental health, intellectual/learning difficulties and breathing. CONCLUSIONS: Discrimination faced by people with disabilities is an under-recognised public health problem that is likely to contribute to disability-based health inequities. Public health policy, research and practice needs to concentrate efforts on developing programs that reduce discrimination experienced by people with disabilities.

The impact of the disability support pension on mental health: evidence from 14 years of an Australian cohort.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of the Australian Disability Support Pension (DSP) on the symptomology of depression and anxiety over and above the effects of reporting a disability itself. METHODS: We used the Household Income Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) survey from 2004 to 2017. We used fixed effects regression to understand mental health differences (using the Mental Health Inventory-5 [MHI-5]) when a person reported: i) a disability; or ii) a disability and receiving the DSP) compared to when they reported no disability. The models controlled for time-varying changes in the severity of the disability and other time-related confounders. RESULTS: There was a 2.97-point decline (95%CI -3.26 to -2.68) in the MHI-5 when a person reported a disability compared to waves in which they reported no disability and 4.48-point decline (95%CI -5.75 to -3.22) when a person reported both a disability and being on the DSP compared to waves in which they reported neither. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that accessing and being in receipt of the DSP can impact the mental health of people with disabilities. Implications for public health: Government income support policies should address the unintended adverse consequences in already vulnerable populations.

The effect of gender on mental health service use: an examination of mediation through material, social and health-related pathways.

PURPOSE: We aimed to understand how much of the gender difference in mental health service use could be due to the joint mediation of employment, behavioural and material factors, social support and mental health need. METHODS: We used data from employed individuals aged 18-65 years who participated in the 2015-2017 waves of the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia survey. The exposure (male, female) and confounders were measured in 2015, mediators in 2016 and the outcome-whether a person had seen a mental health professional in the previous year-was measured in 2017. We estimated natural mediation effects using weighted counterfactual predictions from a logistic regression model. RESULTS: Men were less likely to see a mental health care provider than women. The total causal effect on the risk difference scale was - 0.045 (95% CI - 0.056, - 0,034). The counterfactual of men taking the mediator values of women explained 28% (95% CI 1.7%, 54%) of the total effect, with the natural direct effect estimated to represent an absolute risk difference of - 0.033 (95% CI - 0.048, - 0.018) and the natural indirect effect - 0.012 (95% CI - 0.022, - 0.0027). CONCLUSION: Gendered differences in the use of mental health services could be reduced by addressing inequalities in health, employment, material and behavioural factors, and social support.