Joht Singh Chandan1, Tom Thomas2, Caroline Bradbury-Jones3, Rebecca Russell4, Siddhartha Bandyopadhyay5, Krishnarajah Nirantharakumar6, Julie Taylor7. 1. Academic Clinical Fellow in Public Health, Institute of Applied Health Research, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, UK. 2. Clinical Research Fellow, Institute of Applied Health Research, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, UK. 3. Reader in Nursing, School of Nursing, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, UK. 4. Public Health Registrar, Institute of Applied Health Research, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, UK. 5. Professor of Economics and Director of the Centre of Crime, Justice and Policing, Department of Economics, University of Birmingham, UK. 6. Senior Clinical Lecturer, Institute of Applied Health Research, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, UK. 7. Professor of Child Protection, School of Nursing, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham Women's and Children's Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Internationally, intimate partner violence (IPV) cohorts have demonstrated associations with depression and anxiety. However, this association has not yet been described in a UK population, nor has the association with serious mental illness (SMI). AIMS: To explore the relationship between IPV exposure and mental illness in a UK population. METHOD: We designed a retrospective cohort study whereby we matched 18 547 women exposed to IPV to 74 188 unexposed women. Outcomes of interest (anxiety, depression and SMI) were identified through clinical codes. RESULTS: At baseline, 9174 (49.5%) women in the exposed group had some form of mental illness compared with 17 768 (24.0%) in the unexposed group, described as an adjusted odds ratio of 2.62 (95% CI 2.52-2.72). Excluding those with mental illness at baseline, 1254 exposed women (incidence rate 46.62 per 1000 person-years) went on to present with any type of mental illness compared with 3119 unexposed women (incidence rate 14.93 per 1000 person-years), with an aIRR of 2.77 (95% CI 2.58-2.97). Anxiety (aIRR 1.99, 95% CI 1.80-2.20), depression (aIRR 3.05, 95% CI 2.81-3.31) and SMI (aIRR 3.08, 95% CI 2.19-4.32) were all associated with exposure to IPV. CONCLUSIONS: IPV remains a significant public health issue in the UK. We have demonstrated the significant recorded mental health burden associated with IPV in primary care, at both baseline and following exposure. Clinicians must be aware of this association to reduce mental illness diagnostic delay and improve management of psychological outcomes in this group of patients.
BACKGROUND: Internationally, intimate partner violence (IPV) cohorts have demonstrated associations with depression and anxiety. However, this association has not yet been described in a UK population, nor has the association with serious mental illness (SMI). AIMS: To explore the relationship between IPV exposure and mental illness in a UK population. METHOD: We designed a retrospective cohort study whereby we matched 18 547 women exposed to IPV to 74 188 unexposed women. Outcomes of interest (anxiety, depression and SMI) were identified through clinical codes. RESULTS: At baseline, 9174 (49.5%) women in the exposed group had some form of mental illness compared with 17 768 (24.0%) in the unexposed group, described as an adjusted odds ratio of 2.62 (95% CI 2.52-2.72). Excluding those with mental illness at baseline, 1254 exposed women (incidence rate 46.62 per 1000 person-years) went on to present with any type of mental illness compared with 3119 unexposed women (incidence rate 14.93 per 1000 person-years), with an aIRR of 2.77 (95% CI 2.58-2.97). Anxiety (aIRR 1.99, 95% CI 1.80-2.20), depression (aIRR 3.05, 95% CI 2.81-3.31) and SMI (aIRR 3.08, 95% CI 2.19-4.32) were all associated with exposure to IPV. CONCLUSIONS: IPV remains a significant public health issue in the UK. We have demonstrated the significant recorded mental health burden associated with IPV in primary care, at both baseline and following exposure. Clinicians must be aware of this association to reduce mental illness diagnostic delay and improve management of psychological outcomes in this group of patients.
Authors: C Christ; M M de Waal; M J Kikkert; D G Fluri; A T F Beekman; J J M Dekker; D J F van Schaik Journal: BMC Psychiatry Date: 2022-06-16 Impact factor: 4.144
Authors: Beatriz Cerda-De la O; Ana Lilia Cerda-Molina; Lilian Mayagoitia-Novales; Margarita de la Cruz-López; Marcela Biagini-Alarcón; Erika Lucia Hernández-Zúñiga; Javier I Borráz-León; Jesús Alfredo Whaley-Sánchez Journal: Front Psychiatry Date: 2022-06-27 Impact factor: 5.435
Authors: Frederick Isasi; Mary D Naylor; David Skorton; David C Grabowski; Sandra Hernández; Valerie Montgomery Rice Journal: NAM Perspect Date: 2021-11-29
Authors: Sarah M Murray; Stephanie Skavenski Van Wyk; Kristina Metz; Saphira Munthali Mulemba; Mwamba M Mwenge; Jeremy C Kane; Michelle Alto; Katherine E Venturo-Conerly; Akash R Wasil; Shoshanna L Fine; Laura K Murray Journal: Soc Sci Med Date: 2020-10-17 Impact factor: 4.634
Authors: David Riedl; Silvia Exenberger; Judith K Daniels; Bettina Böttcher; Thomas Beck; Daniel Dejaco; Astrid Lampe Journal: Eur J Psychotraumatol Date: 2019-08-22