Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T03:16:23.002Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Predicting Posttraumatic Stress Symptom Prevalence and Local Distribution after an Earthquake with Scarce Data

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 March 2017

Francisca Dussaillant Open the ORCID record for Francisca Dussaillant [Opens in a new window]  and
Mauricio Apablaza
Francisca Dussaillant*
Affiliation:
School of Government, Universidad del Desarrollo, Santiago, Chile
Mauricio Apablaza
Affiliation:
School of Government, Universidad del Desarrollo, Santiago, Chile
*
Correspondence: Francisca Dussaillant, PhD Universidad del Desarrollo Avenida Plaza 680 Santiago, Chile 56-2-223279314 E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background

After a major earthquake, the assignment of scarce mental health emergency personnel to different geographic areas is crucial to the effective management of the crisis. The scarce information that is available in the aftermath of a disaster may be valuable in helping predict where are the populations that are in most need.

Objective

The objectives of this study were to derive algorithms to predict posttraumatic stress (PTS) symptom prevalence and local distribution after an earthquake and to test whether there are algorithms that require few input data and are still reasonably predictive.

Methods

A rich database of PTS symptoms, informed after Chile’s 2010 earthquake and tsunami, was used. Several model specifications for the mean and centiles of the distribution of PTS symptoms, together with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) prevalence, were estimated via linear and quantile regressions. The models varied in the set of covariates included.

Results

Adjusted R2 for the most liberal specifications (in terms of numbers of covariates included) ranged from 0.62 to 0.74, depending on the outcome. When only including peak ground acceleration (PGA), poverty rate, and household damage in linear and quadratic form, predictive capacity was still good (adjusted R2 from 0.59 to 0.67 were obtained).

Conclusions

Information about local poverty, household damage, and PGA can be used as an aid to predict PTS symptom prevalence and local distribution after an earthquake. This can be of help to improve the assignment of mental health personnel to the affected localities.

DussaillantF, ApablazaM. Predicting Posttraumatic Stress Symptom Prevalence and Local Distribution after an Earthquake with Scarce Data. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2017;32(4):357–367.

Keywords

Chiledisaster reliefearthquakenatural disasterposttraumatic stress
Type
Original Research
Information
Prehospital and Disaster Medicine , Volume 32 , Issue 4 , August 2017 , pp. 357 - 367
Copyright
© World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Conflicts of interest: none

References

1. McFarlane, AC, Van Hoof, M, Goodhew, F. “Anxiety Disorders and PTSD.” In: Neria Y, Galea S, Norris FH, (eds). Mental Health and Disasters. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press; 2009: 47-66.Google Scholar
2. Ursano, RJ, Fullerton, CS, Benedek, DM. “What is Psychopathology after Disasters? Considerations about the Nature of the Psychological and Behavioral Consequences of Disasters.” In: Neria Y, Galea S, Norris FH, (eds). Mental Health and Disasters. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press; 2009: 131-142.Google Scholar
3. Samarasundera, E, Hansell, A, Leibovici, D, Horwell, C, Anand, S, Oppenheimer, C. Geological hazards: from early warning systems to public health toolkits. Health Place. 2014;30:116-119.Google Scholar
4. Dominici, F, Levy, J, Louis, T. Methodological challenges and contributions in disaster epidemiology. Epidemiol Rev. 2005;27(1):9-12.Google Scholar
5. Galea, S, Nandi, A, Vlahov, D. The epidemiology of post-traumatic stress disorder after disasters. Epidemiol Rev. 2005;27(1):78-91.Google Scholar
6. Forneris, CA, Gartlehner, G, Brownley, KA, et al. Interventions to prevent post-traumatic stress disorder: a systematic review. Am J Prev Med. 2013;44(6):635-650.Google Scholar
7. Kliem, S, Kroger, C. Prevention of chronic PTSD with early cognitive behavioral therapy. A meta-analysis using mixed-effects modeling. Behav Res Ther. 2013;51(11):753-771.Google Scholar
8. Shalev, AY, Ankri, Y, Israeli-Shalev, Y, et al. Prevention of posttraumatic stress disorder by early treatment: results from the Jerusalem Trauma Outreach and Prevention study. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2012;69(2):166-176.Google Scholar
9. Kessler, RC, Rose, S, Koenen, KC, et al. How well can post-traumatic stress disorder be predicted from pre-trauma risk factors? An exploratory study in the WHO World Mental Health Surveys. World Psychiatry. 2014;13(3):265-274.Google Scholar
10. Neria, Y, Nandi, A, Galea, S. Post-traumatic stress disorder following disasters: a systematic review. Psychol Med. 2008;38(4):467-480.Google Scholar
11. Neria, Y, Galea, S, Norris, FH. “Disaster Mental Health Research: Current State, Gaps in Knowledge, and Future Directions.” In: Neria Y, Galea S, Norris FH, (eds). Mental Health and Disasters. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press; 2009: 594-610.Google Scholar
12. Norris, FH, Friedman, MJ, Watson, PJ, Byrne, CM, Diaz, E, Kaniasty, K. 60,000 disaster victims speak: part I. An empirical review of the empirical literature, 1981-2001. Psychiatry. 2002;65(3):207-239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Norris, FH, Wind, LH. “The Experience of Disaster: Trauma, Loss, Adversities, and Community Effects.” In: Neria Y, Galea S, Norris FH, (eds). Mental Health and Disasters. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press; 2009: 29-46.Google Scholar
14. Zubizarreta, JR, Cerdá, M, Rosenbaum, PR. Effect of the 2010 Chilean Earthquake on posttraumatic stress reducing sensitivity to unmeasured bias through study design. Epidemiology. 2013;24(1):79-87.Google Scholar
15. Ministerio de Desarrollo Social Encuesta Post Terremoto 2010. Chile. http://observatorio.ministeriodesarrollosocial.gob.cl/enc_post_basedatos.php. Published 2010. Accessed August 19, 2016.Google Scholar
16. Davidson, JR, Book, SW, Colket, JT, et al. Assessment of a new self-rating scale for post-traumatic stress disorder. Psychol Med. 1997;27(1):153-160.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 4th edition. Washington, DC USA: American Psychiatric Association; 2000.Google Scholar
18. Ministerio de Planificación. Encuesta Casen 2009. Manual del Encuestador. Observatorio Social Universidad Alberto Hurtado. Chile, 2009.Google Scholar
19. NOAA. National Geophysical Data Center / World Data Service (NGDC/WDS): Global Historical Tsunami Database. National Geophysical Data Center, NOAA. Published 2015. Accessed August 16, 2016.Google Scholar
20. United States Geological Survey (USGS), DYFI Archives. http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/dyfi/archives.php. Accessed September 1, 2015.Google Scholar
21. Atkinson, GM, Wald, DJ. “Did You Feel It?” intensity data: a surprisingly good measure of earthquake ground motion. Seism Res Lett. 2007;78(3):362-368.Google Scholar
22. Wald, DJ, Quitoriano, V, Dengler, LA, Dewey, JW. Utilization of the Internet for rapid community intensity maps. Seism Res Lett. 1999;70(6):680-697.Google Scholar
23. Nahuepan, E, Varas, J. El terremoto/tsunami en Chile. Una mirada a las estadísticas médico legales. Investigación Forense. 2013;2:113-129.Google Scholar
24. Instituto Nacional de Estadísticas. Estadísticas demográficas y vitales. Comunas: Actualización de Población 2002-2012 y Proyecciones 2012-2020. http://www.ine.cl/canales/chile_estadistico/familias/demograficas_vitales.php. Published 2015. Accessed August 19, 2016.Google Scholar
25. Bobes, J, Calcedo-Barba, A, García, M, et al. Grupo español de trabajo para el estudio del trastorno por estrés postraumático. Evaluación de las propiedades psicométricas de la versión española de cinco cuestionarios para la evaluación del trastorno de estrés postraumático. Actas Especialidad Psiquiatría. 2000;28(4):207-218.Google Scholar
26. Stein, MB, Walker, JR, Hazen, AL, Forde, DR. Full and partial posttraumatic stress disorder: findings from a community survey. Am J Psych. 1997;154(8):1114-1119.Google Scholar
27. Milliken, CS, Auchterlonie, JL, Hoge, CW. Longitudinal assessment of mental health problems among active and reserve component soldiers returning from the Iraq war. JAMA. 2007;298(18):2141-2148.Google Scholar
28. Koenker, R. Quantile Regression. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 2005.Google Scholar
29. Efron, B, Hastie, T, Johnstone, I, Tibshirani, R. Least angle regression. Ann Statist. 2004;32(2):407-499.Google Scholar
30. O’Brien, RM. A caution regarding rules of thumb for variance inflation factors. Quality & Quantity. 2007;41(5):673.Google Scholar
31. Geisser, S. The predictive sample reuse method with applications. J Amer Statist Assoc. 1975;70(350):320-328.Google Scholar
32. Arlot, S, Celisse, A. A survey of cross-validation procedures for model selection. Statist Surv. 1991;4:40-79.Google Scholar
33. North, C. “Epidemiology of Disaster Mental Health.” In: Ursano RJ, Fullerton CS, Weisaeth L, Raphael B, (eds). Textbook of Disaster Psychiatry. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 2007: 29-47.Google Scholar
34. Schultz, JM, Espinel, Z, Galea, S, Reissman, D. “Disaster Ecology: Implications for Disaster Psychiatry.” In: Ursano RJ, Fullerton CS, Weisaeth L, Raphael B, (eds). Textbook of Disaster Psychiatry. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 2007: 69-96.Google Scholar
35. Hogg, D, Kingham, S, Wilson, T, Griffin, E, Ardagh, M. Geographic variation of clinically diagnosed mood and anxiety disorders in Christchurch after the 2010/11 earthquakes. Health Place. 2014;30:270-278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
36. Piantadosi, S, Byar, D, Green, S. The ecological fallacy. Am J Epidem. 1988;127(5):893-904.Google Scholar
37. Galea, S, Maxwell, A. “Methodological Challenges in Studying the Mental Health Consequences of Disasters.” In: Neria Y, Galea S, Norris FH, (eds). Mental Health and Disasters. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press; 2009: 579-593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Dussaillant and Apablaza supplementary material

Appendix

Download Dussaillant and Apablaza supplementary material(File)
File 16.9 KB