Psychological distress in rural Australia: regional variation and the role of family functioning and social support

P Butterworth; T E Handley; T J Lewin; Prasuna Reddy; B J Kelly

doi:10.1007/s10389-014-0640-9

Back

Psychological distress in rural Australia: regional variation and the role of family functioning and social support

Journal article

Peer reviewed

Psychological distress in rural Australia: regional variation and the role of family functioning and social support

P Butterworth, T E Handley, T J Lewin, Prasuna Reddy and B J Kelly

Journal of Public Health, Vol.22(6), pp.481-488

2014

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10389-014-0640-9

Files and links (1)

url

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10389-014-0640-9View

Published Version

Abstract

psychological distress

regional variation

household factors

multilevel analysis

Aim: Regional variation in the prevalence of mental disorders and particularly variation in the role of risk and protective factors has received limited research attention. This study investigates variation in the prevalence of significant psychological distress across regions, and quantifies the relative impact of family functioning and social support. Subject and method: Multilevel analysis of data from the longitudinal Australian Rural Mental Health Study, comprising a stratified random sample from non-metropolitan New South Wales. Distress was assessed using the Kessler-10. The analysis considered clustering within households and across geographic regions based on Local Government Areas and collapsed to represent residence in inner regional, outer regional, remote and very remote locations. Results: There was limited clustering of psychological distress within areas (0.4 %). However, the household accounted for almost 45 % of the variance in psychological distress, and the salience of the household was greater in more remote regions (33.1 % in inner regional to 60.5 % in very remote areas). Family functioning and perceived social support were associated with increased risk of psychological distress, but explained only a modest amount of variance in mental health at household level. After controlling for individual and family/social covariates, 34.5 % of the remaining variance in psychological distress was observed at the household level. Conclusion: The findings suggest that individuals in remote locations are more reliant on their family/confidants for their mental health than those in more populated areas. Future research will consider whether this simply reflects differences in the accessibility of formal health services or broader social and cultural differences. © 2014, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.

Details

Title: Psychological distress in rural Australia: regional variation and the role of family functioning and social support
Authors: P Butterworth (Author) - Australian National University
T E Handley (Author) - University of Newcastle
T J Lewin (Author) - University of Newcastle
Prasuna Reddy (Author) - University of Newcastle
B J Kelly (Author) - University of Newcastle
Publication details: Journal of Public Health, Vol.22(6), pp.481-488
Publisher: Springer
Date published: 2014
DOI: 10.1007/s10389-014-0640-9
ISSN: 1613-2238
Organisation Unit: University of the Sunshine Coast, Queensland
Language: English
Record Identifier: 99450940202621
Output Type: Journal article

Metrics

573 Record Views

13 Times Cited - Web of Science

InCites Highlights

These are selected metrics from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics tool, related to this output

Collaboration types: Domestic collaboration
Web Of Science research areas: Public, Environmental & Occupational Health

UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

This output has contributed to the advancement of the following goals:

Source: InCites