Refugee status and the incidence of affective psychotic disorders and non-psychotic bipolar disorder: A register-based cohort study of 1.3m people in Sweden.

BACKGROUND: Refugees are at increased risk of non-affective psychotic disorders, but it is unclear whether this extends to affective psychotic disorders [APD] or non-psychotic bipolar disorder [NPB]. METHODS: We conducted a nationwide cohort study in Sweden of all refugees, non-refugee migrants and the Swedish-born population, born 1 Jan 1984-31 Dec 2016. We followed participants from age 14 years until first ICD-10 diagnosis of APD or NPB. We fitted Cox proportional hazards models to estimate hazard ratios [HR] and 95 % confidence intervals [95%CI], adjusted for age, sex and family income. Models were additionally stratified by region-of-origin. RESULTS: We followed 1.3 million people for 15.1 million person-years, including 2428 new APD cases (rate: 16.0 per 100,000 person-years; 95%CI: 15.4-16.7) and 9425 NPB cases (rate: 63.8; 95%CI: 62.6-65.1). Rates of APD were higher in refugee (HRadjusted: 2.07; 95%CI: 1.55-2.78) and non-refugee migrants (HRadjusted: 1.40; 95%CI: 1.16-1.68), but lower for NPBs for refugee (HRadjusted: 0.24; 95%CI: 0.16-0.38) and non-refugee migrants (HRadjusted: 0.34; 95%CI: 0.28-0.41), compared with the Swedish-born. APD rates were elevated for both migrant groups from Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, but not other regions. Migrant groups from all regions-of-origin experienced lower rates of NPB. LIMITATIONS: Income may have been on the causal pathway making adjustment inappropriate. CONCLUSIONS: Refugees experience elevated rates of APD compared with Swedish-born and non-refugee migrants, but lower rates of NPB. This specificity of excess risk warrants clinical and public health investment in appropriate psychosis care for these vulnerable populations.

The effect of immigration policy reform on mental health in people from minoritised ethnic groups in England: an interrupted time series analysis of longitudinal data from the UK Household Longitudinal Study cohort.

BACKGROUND: In 2012, the UK Government announced a series of immigration policy reforms known as the hostile environment policy, culminating in the Windrush scandal. We aimed to investigate the effect of the hostile environment policy on mental health for people from minoritised ethnic backgrounds. We hypothesised that people from Black Caribbean backgrounds would have worse mental health relative to people from White ethnic backgrounds after the Immigration Act 2014 and the Windrush scandal media coverage in 2017, since they were particularly targeted. METHODS: Using data from the UK Household Longitudinal Study, we performed a Bayesian interrupted time series analysis, accounting for fixed effects of confounders (sex, age, urbanicity, relationship status, number of children, education, physical or mental health impairment, housing, deprivation, employment, place of birth, income, and time), and random effects for residual temporal and spatial variation. We measured mental ill health using a widely used, self-administered questionnaire on psychological distress, the 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12). We compared mean differences (MDs) and 95% credible intervals (CrIs) in mental ill health among people from minoritised ethnic groups (Black Caribbean, Black African, Indian, Bangladeshi, and Pakistani) relative to people of White ethnicity during three time periods: before the Immigration Act 2014, after the Immigration Act 2014, and after the start of the Windrush scandal media coverage in 2017. FINDINGS: We included 58 087 participants with a mean age of 45·0 years (SD 34·6; range 16-106), including 31 168 (53·6%) female and 26 919 (46·3%) male participants. The cohort consisted of individuals from the following ethnic backgrounds: 2519 (4·3%) Black African, 2197 (3·8%) Black Caribbean, 3153 (5·4%) Indian, 1584 (2·7%) Bangladeshi, 2801 (4·8%) Pakistani, and 45 833 (78·9%) White. People from Black Caribbean backgrounds had worse mental health than people of White ethnicity after the Immigration Act 2014 (MD in GHQ-12 score 0·67 [95% CrI 0·06-1·28]) and after the 2017 media coverage (1·28 [0·34-2·21]). For Black Caribbean participants born outside of the UK, mental health worsened after the Immigration Act 2014 (1·25 [0·11-2·38]), and for those born in the UK, mental health worsened after the 2017 media coverage (2·00 [0·84-3·15]). We did not observe effects in other minoritised ethnic groups. INTERPRETATION: Our finding that the hostile environment policy worsened the mental health of people from Black Caribbean backgrounds in the UK suggests that sufficient, appropriate mental health and social welfare support should be provided to those affected. Impact assessments of new policies on minority mental health should be embedded in all policy making. FUNDING: Wellcome Trust.

The social determinants of mental health and disorder: evidence, prevention and recommendations.

People exposed to more unfavourable social circumstances are more vulnerable to poor mental health over their life course, in ways that are often determined by structural factors which generate and perpetuate intergenerational cycles of disadvantage and poor health. Addressing these challenges is an imperative matter of social justice. In this paper we provide a roadmap to address the social determinants that cause mental ill health. Relying as far as possible on high-quality evidence, we first map out the literature that supports a causal link between social determinants and later mental health outcomes. Given the breadth of this topic, we focus on the most pervasive social determinants across the life course, and those that are common across major mental disorders. We draw primarily on the available evidence from the Global North, acknowledging that other global contexts will face both similar and unique sets of social determinants that will require equitable attention. Much of our evidence focuses on mental health in groups who are marginalized, and thus often exposed to a multitude of intersecting social risk factors. These groups include refugees, asylum seekers and displaced persons, as well as ethnoracial minoritized groups; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (LGBTQ+) groups; and those living in poverty. We then introduce a preventive framework for conceptualizing the link between social determinants and mental health and disorder, which can guide much needed primary prevention strategies capable of reducing inequalities and improving population mental health. Following this, we provide a review of the evidence concerning candidate preventive strategies to intervene on social determinants of mental health. These interventions fall broadly within the scope of universal, selected and indicated primary prevention strategies, but we also briefly review important secondary and tertiary strategies to promote recovery in those with existing mental disorders. Finally, we provide seven key recommendations, framed around social justice, which constitute a roadmap for action in research, policy and public health. Adoption of these recommendations would provide an opportunity to advance efforts to intervene on modifiable social determinants that affect population mental health.

Neighborhood-Level Predictors of Age-at-First-Diagnosis of Psychotic Disorders: A Swedish Register-Based Cohort Study.

The relationship between neighborhood-level factors and the incidence of psychotic disorders is well established. However, it is unclear whether neighborhood characteristics are also associated with age-at-first-diagnosis of these disorders. We used linked Swedish register data to identify a cohort of persons first diagnosed with an ICD-10 non-affective or affective psychotic disorder (F20-33) between 1997 and 2016. Using multilevel mixed-effect linear modelling, we investigated whether neighborhood deprivation and population density at birth were associated with age-at-first diagnosis of a psychotic disorder. Our final cohort included 13,440 individuals, with a median age-at-first-diagnosis of 21.8 years for women (interquartile range [IQR]: 19.0-25.5) and 22.9 years for men (IQR: 20.1-26.1; P < .0001). In an unadjusted model, we found no evidence of an association between neighborhood deprivation and age-at-first-diagnosis of psychotic disorder (P = .07). However, after multivariable adjustment, age-at-first-diagnosis increased by .13 years (95% CI: .05 to .21; P = .002) for a one standard deviation increase in neighborhood deprivation. This was equivalent to a later diagnosis of 47 days (95% CI: 18 to 77). We found no evidence of a different relationship for non-affective versus affective psychoses [LRT χ 2(1) = .14; P = .71]. Population density was not associated with age-at-first-diagnosis in unadjusted (P = .81) or adjusted (P = .85) models. Later age-at-first-diagnosis for individuals born in more deprived neighborhoods suggests structural barriers in accessing equitable psychiatric care.