Anxiety and depression in Guatemala: Sociodemographic characteristics and service access.

Epidemiological data on depression and anxiety in Guatemala is lacking. Using 2016 National Disability Survey data, we explored the sociodemographics of people with anxiety and/or depression and its heightened burden on access to key services. The survey (n = 13,073) used the Washington Group Extended Set to estimate disability prevalence, including anxiety and/or depression. A nested case-control study was included to explore the impact of disability on key life areas. Cases (indicating 'A lot of difficulty' or 'Cannot do' in one or more functional domain) and age-/sex-matched controls were administered a structured questionnaire. Multivariable logistic regression and heightened-burden analysis were conducted. Higher odds of anxiety and/or depression were found in participants who were 50+ (aOR 2.3, 1.8-3.1), female (aOR 1.8, 1.4-2.2), urban (aOR 1.5, 1.2-1.9), divorced/separated (aOR 2.0, 1.3-3.0), and widowed (aOR 1.6, 1.0-2.4), as well as those with impaired communication or cognition (aOR 17.6, 13.0-23.8), self-care (aOR 13.2, 8.5-20.5), walking (aOR 13.3, 9.7-18.3), hearing (aOR 8.5, 5.6-13.1), and vision (aOR 8.5, 6.1-11.8). Lower odds of anxiety and/or depression were found in participants with a university education (aOR 0.2, 0.5-0.9), and those living in the southeast (aOR 0.2, 0.1-0.3) or northeast (aOR 0.3, 0.2-0.4). Compared to people with impairments that were not depression and/or anxiety, people with depression and/or anxiety were less likely to receive a retirement pension (aOR 0.4, 0.2-0.8), and more likely to receive medication for depression/anxiety (aOR 4.1, 1.9-9.1), report a serious health problem (aOR 1.8, 1.3-2.5), and seek advice/treatment with a government health worker/health post (aOR 6.3, 1.0-39.2).

Interrogating and Reflecting on Disability Prevalence Data Collected Using the Washington Group Tools: Results from Population-Based Surveys in Cameroon, Guatemala, India, Maldives, Nepal, Turkey and Vanuatu.

The Washington Group (WG) tools capture self-reported functional limitations, ranging from 6 domains in the Short Set (SS) to 11 in the Extended Set (ESF). Prevalence estimates can vary considerably on account of differences between modules and the different applications of them. We compare prevalence estimates by WG module, threshold, application and domain to explore these nuances and consider whether alternative combinations of questions may be valuable in reduced sets. We conducted secondary analyses of seven population-based surveys (analyses restricted to adults 18+) in Low- and Middle-Income Countries that used the WG tools. The prevalence estimates using the SS standard threshold (a lot of difficulty or higher in one or more domain) varied between 3.2% (95% Confidence Interval 2.9-3.6) in Vanuatu to 14.1% (12.2-16.2) in Turkey. The prevalence was higher using the ESF than the SS, and much higher (5 to 10-fold) using a wider threshold of "some" or greater difficulty. Two of the SS domains (communication, self-care) identified few additional individuals with functional limitations. An alternative SS replacing these domains with the psychosocial domains of anxiety and depression would identify more participants with functional limitations for the same number of items. The WG tools are valuable for collecting harmonised population data on disability. It is important that the impact on prevalence of use of different modules, thresholds and applications is recognised. An alternative SS may capture a greater proportion of people with functional domains without increasing the number of items.

Disability among Older People: Analysis of Data from Disability Surveys in Six Low- and Middle-Income Countries.

This analysis of surveys from six low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) aimed to (i) estimate the prevalence of disability among older adults and (ii) compare experiences and participation in key life areas among older people with and without disabilities which may show vulnerability during the COVID-19 pandemic. Data were analysed from district-level or national surveys in Cameroon, Guatemala, Haiti, India, Nepal and the Maldives, which across the six databases totalled 3499 participants aged 60 years and above including 691 people with disabilities. Disability was common among adults 60+, ranging from 9.7% (8.0-11.8) in Nepal to 39.2% in India (95% CI 34.1-44.5%). Mobility was the most commonly reported functional difficulty. In each setting, older people with disabilities were significantly less likely to be working and reported greater participation restrictions and environmental barriers in key life areas compared to people in the same age categories without disabilities (p < 0.05). Disability is common in this population, and older people with disabilities may have greater difficulties participating in COVID-19 responses and have high economic vulnerabilities. It is imperative to prioritise the needs of older people with disabilities in the COVID-19 pandemic, including ensuring accessibility of both health services and the community in general.

Multidimensional poverty and disability: A case control study in India, Cameroon, and Guatemala.

Although the association between disability and multidimensional poverty has been consistently found in several studies in Low- and Middle-Income Countries. None of these studies so far has used an extended and internationally comparable questionnaire (extended Washington Group Questionnaire) and a clinical screening of disability. The purpose of this article is to calculate, compare and analyse the levels of multidimensional poverty of people with and without disabilities in Guatemala (national), in one district of Cameroon (Fundong Health District, North West Cameroon) and in one district in India (Mahbubnagar District, Telangana State). We used a case-control study approach; adults with disabilities identified in a population-based disability survey using the Washington Group Extended Questionnaire were matched to age-sex matched controls without disabilities and interviewed about their levels of access and use of different social services. Following the Alkire-Foster method, the levels of multidimensional poverty between cases and control were computed and compared. Additionally, we analysed how disability and other individual characteristics are associated with being poor in each country. The results showed that people with disabilities in all three-study settings face significantly higher levels of poverty and the intensity of their poverty is higher. In the case of Cameroon, differences in the levels of deprivation between people with and without disabilities were smaller than those observed in India and Guatemala. This might suggest that in countries with higher levels of human, economic and social development people with disabilities are being left behind by public policies aiming to reduce poverty and deprivation in basic indicators. In addition, indicators related to health contributed the most to the levels of multidimensional poverty for people with disabilities. These findings provide important evidence about the association of multidimensional poverty and disability and underline the importance of including indicators capturing individual deprivations to analyse poverty for this group.

Can we achieve universal health coverage without a focus on disability? Results from a national case-control study in Guatemala.

OBJECTIVE: To compare access to healthcare services for people with disabilities to those without disabilities, within a national case-control study in Guatemala. METHODS: We undertook a population-based case-control study, nested within a national survey in Guatemala. Cases with disabilities were people with self-reported difficulties in functioning. One control without disabilities was selected per case, matched by age, gender and cluster. Information was collected on: health status, access to health services and rehabilitation, and socioeconomic status. RESULTS: The study included 707 people with disabilities, and 465 controls. People with disabilities were more likely to report a serious health problem (aOR 2.8, 2.2-3.7) or doctor-diagnosis of one of 17 general health conditions (aOR 2.9, 2.2-3.8) as compared to controls without disabilities. People with disabilities were twice as likely as controls to have received treatment for a diagnosed condition (aOR 2.2, 1.7-2.8). Coverage of treatment for impairment-related health conditions was low, as was awareness and access to rehabilitation services. People with disabilities were more likely than controls to report being disrespected (aOR 1.9, 1.0-3.7) or finding it difficult to understand information given (aOR 1.6, 1.1-1.4). CONCLUSION: Efforts are needed to raise awareness about rehabilitation services and improve quality of health services for people with disabilities in Guatemala, to ensure that their rights are fulfilled and to assist in the achievement of Universal Health Coverage. Better tools are needed to measure healthcare access, including consideration of geographic access, quality and affordability, to allow the generation of comparable data on access to healthcare among people with disabilities.

Exploring the links between water, sanitation and hygiene and disability; Results from a case-control study in Guatemala.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) access and appropriateness of people with disabilities compared to those without, in Guatemala. METHODS: A case-control study was conducted, nested within a national survey. The study included 707 people with disabilities, and 465 age- and sex-matched controls without disabilities. Participants reported on WASH access at the household and individual level. A sub-set of 121 cases and 104 controls completed a newly designed, in-depth WASH questionnaire. RESULTS: Households including people with disabilities were more likely to use an improved sanitation facility compared to control households (age-sex-adjusted OR: 1.7, 95% CI 1.3-2.5), but otherwise there were no differences in WASH access at the household level. At the individual level, people with disabilities reported greater difficulties in relation to sanitation (mean score 26.2, SD 26.5) and hygiene access and quality (mean 30.7, SD 24.2) compared to those without disabilities (15.5, 21.7, p<0.001; 22.4, 19.1, p<0.01). There were no differences in different aspects of water collection between people with and without disabilities in this context where over 85% of participants had water piped into their dwelling. Among people with disabilities, older adults were more likely to experience difficulties in hygiene and sanitation than younger people with disabilities. CONCLUSIONS: People with disabilities in Guatemala experience greater difficulties in accessing sanitation facilities and practicing hygienic behaviours than their peers without disabilities. More data collection is needed using detailed tools to detect these differences, highlight which interventions are needed, and to allow assessment of their effectiveness.