Psychiatric Disorders Among Adults Seeking Emergency Disaster Assistance After a Wildland-Urban Interface Fire
2007; American Psychiatric Association; Volume: 58; Issue: 4 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1176/appi.ps.58.4.509
ISSN1557-9700
Autores Tópico(s)Disaster Response and Management
ResumoBack to table of contents Previous article Next article ArticleFull AccessPsychiatric Disorders Among Adults Seeking Emergency Disaster Assistance After a Wildland-Urban Interface FireGrant N. Marshall Ph.D.Terry L. Schell Ph.D.Marc N. Elliott Ph.D.Nadine R. Rayburn Ph.D.Lisa H. Jaycox Ph.D.Grant N. Marshall Ph.D.Search for more papers by this authorTerry L. Schell Ph.D.Search for more papers by this authorMarc N. Elliott Ph.D.Search for more papers by this authorNadine R. Rayburn Ph.D.Search for more papers by this authorLisa H. Jaycox Ph.D.Search for more papers by this authorPublished Online:1 Apr 2007AboutSectionsPDF/EPUB ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack Citations ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail In late October and early November of 2003 wildfires ravaged large sections of Southern California. Burning an area roughly the size of Rhode Island and destroying more than 3,700 homes, the California firestorms were one of the most expensive natural disasters in state history. An estimated 100,000 persons faced mandatory emergency evacuation under harrowing circumstances ( 1 ). Although a cataclysmic event for California, these firestorms are not isolated occurrences. From 2002 to 2004, for example, wildland-urban interface fires destroyed more than 9,000 structures ( 2 ). Moreover, mass exposure to wildfires has become an increasingly common public health problem, because millions of residents have moved into the wildland-urban interface areas that were formerly wilderness ( 3 ). By one estimate, nearly 40% of new home construction in the Western United States occurs in or adjacent to the wildland-urban interface ( 4 ). Despite its emerging importance, little relevant research has addressed the mental health consequences of exposure to wildland-urban interface fires. The scientific literature on adjustment to wildfire disasters has focused primarily on firefighters and rescue workers ( 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 ). Although these studies elucidate factors associated with mental health consequences of occupational exposure for professional emergency service providers, the relevance of these data for ordinary community-dwelling survivors of wildfire disaster is unclear. A few investigations have examined the impact of fire disasters in the wildland-urban interface on the exposed public ( 11 , 12 , 13 ). However, this research has not studied disaster survivors until weeks or months after fire exposure, thus limiting the value of these investigations for public health emergency planning. Similarly, these studies have not attempted to assess the prevalence of trauma-related psychopathology among survivors of wildland-urban interface fires. Effective public health planning for fire disasters in the wildland-urban interface requires collecting basic information about the mental health consequences of exposure to fire in these areas during or immediately after the disaster. In particular, it is essential to understand the mental health needs of persons who are affected by fire disasters in the wildland-urban interface to such a degree that they seek disaster-related assistance at government aid agencies or the American Red Cross. Recognizing their needs is critical for at least two reasons. Persons who seek disaster-related services are likely to include many persons most affected by the fires as well as those who have fewer resources than their counterparts who do not seek aid, thus increasing their vulnerability to psychopathology. In addition, from a pragmatic standpoint, disaster-assistance centers appear to be a logical location for identification, triage, and preventive treatment for persons at high risk of fire-related psychopathology. At this juncture in the development of public health planning for fire disasters in the wildland-urban interface it would be useful to estimate the prevalence of trauma-related psychopathology in settings that provide disaster relief services to the affected community. Moreover, because large numbers of people seek such services from these agencies, any effective prevention or intervention strategy would benefit from an easily administered short screener for early identification of persons at elevated risk of trauma-related psychopathology. Although many people may experience symptoms of distress in the hours and days after trauma exposure, most individuals will recover without intervention ( 14 , 15 , 16 ). Therefore, an efficient public health response during or immediately after a disaster may be to screen for individuals who are at elevated risk of future psychopathology, rather than for persons who are experiencing high levels of current distress. The goals of the study presented here were twofold: to estimate the prevalence of two commonly occurring posttraumatic psychiatric disorders (major depression and posttraumatic stress disorder [PTSD]) among individuals who had sought disaster services or shelter as a result of a wildland-urban interface fire three months previously and to evaluate whether a short, easy-to-use, and relatively nonintrusive screener—administered within hours or days of the disaster—might aid in identification of persons at elevated risk of subsequent posttraumatic psychopathology.MethodsParticipantsA total of 357 individuals who were subjected to mandatory evacuation in response to the California wildfires in October 2003 participated in this study. Study participants were recruited from two adjacent facilities that provided emergency disaster services: an American Red Cross center offering temporary shelter and other assistance (N=224) and a government assistance center housing federal, state, and county aid agencies (N=133).Sampling and proceduresAll adults in or leaving the two recruitment sites between the hours of 10 a.m. and 6 p.m. over the course of several days were invited to participate by a member of the research team. Staff members fully explained study procedures, answered questions, obtained written informed consent, and distributed and collected self-administered questionnaires. The research protocol was reviewed and approved by the RAND Institutional Review Board. A single, randomly selected adult from each household was invited to complete the survey. Of the 402 households approached to participate, 357 persons completed the questionnaire, yielding a baseline response rate of 89%. Insufficient information about initial nonrespondents was available to assess whether nonrespondents differed from respondents at baseline, although the low level of nonresponse limits the potential bias.At follow-up, a multistep procedure was followed to recontact participants: questionnaires were mailed to the last known address as well as to the addresses of friends and family provided by the respondent, phone calls were made to participants whose questionnaires were returned as undeliverable, and Internet search services were used to obtain updated contact information. Both the initial and follow-up questionnaires, which were written in English, took approximately 15 to 20 minutes to complete.Of the 357 participants at baseline, 234 (66%) returned a completed three-month follow-up survey through the mail. To adjust for the effects of study attrition, a logistic regression model was built to assess differences between participants who completed the follow-up survey and those who did not. We considered demographic characteristics, degree of fire exposure, exposure to prior traumatic events, initial reactions, and measures of social support as candidate predictors of attrition. Variables associated with nonresponse with bivariate p values of less than .20 were included in the multivariate logistic regression model. This model was used to generate inverse-probability attrition weights employed in all analyses that predicted follow-up outcomes from baseline measures. All weighted analyses incorporated the variance inflation attributable to the use of weights.MeasuresDemographic information. Participants provided information about their gender, age, marital status, race or ethnicity, household income, work status, and education. Objective severity of fire exposure. Items using a response format of "yes," "no," and "don't know" measured severity of fire exposure. In selecting items, we drew upon other questionnaires on fire exposure ( 12 ) and included items such as whether the respondents' house was damaged or destroyed by the fire, whether they were able to see the flames of the fire from their home or neighborhood, whether they had difficulty breathing because of smoke or ashes, and whether they were physically injured because of the fires. Respondents were also asked to indicate whether they had stayed at a temporary shelter at any time since the fires started. In the reported analyses, we combined the "no" and "don't know" response options into one category. Initial reactions. A series of items using a "yes, very much," "yes, a little," and "no, not at all" response format assessed the extent to which participants had experienced fear for their life, fear for the life of a loved one, fear that their home or property was in danger, feeling helpless, and feeling terrified. Items were modeled after a survey by Brewin and colleagues ( 17 ). For the purpose of the analyses reported here, we created dichotomous yes and no variables by combining the "yes, very much" and "yes, a little" response options. Posttraumatic stress symptom severity. The Posttraumatic Symptom Checklist (PCL) was used as a screener to assess probable PTSD at the three-month follow-up ( 18 ). This instrument contains 17 symptom items keyed directly to the DSM-IV ( 19 ). By using a time frame of the past two weeks, respondents answered each item with respect to the fire on a 5-point scale reflecting symptom severity. The scale was used to derive a probable diagnosis of PTSD following guidelines provided by Weathers and colleagues ( 18 ). Specifically, the PCL was scored by using the DSM-IV symptom cluster algorithm, and symptoms were counted as present if they were rated as moderately, quite a bit, or extremely bothersome to the respondent. The PCL has been used in various traumatized populations and has been found to possess solid psychometric properties and construct validity in diverse samples ( 20 , 21 , 22 ). Depressive symptoms. Depressive symptoms were assessed at follow-up by using the eight-item version (PHQ-8) of the nine-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) ( 23 , 24 ). The PHQ-9 is well validated and widely used as a brief screening measure for major depression ( 24 ). The PHQ-8 consists of the criteria on which a DSM-IV diagnosis of major depression is based, excluding suicidality, and can be used as a screener to determine a probable diagnosis of major depressive disorder. Responses are provided with respect to the frequency with which symptoms were experienced in the past two weeks, by using a 4-point scale ranging from 1, not at all, to 4, every day. Persons with summed scores greater than 9 were classified as being depressed ( 23 ). Statistical analysisThe mean and standard deviation of age were calculated for baseline respondents. For all other baseline demographic characteristics and fire exposure measures, proportions and their 95% margins of error were calculated. The prevalence and comorbidity of probable PTSD and major depression at the three-month follow-up were calculated by using attrition weights, as were the corresponding 95% confidence intervals.Logistic regression was used to calculate bivariate odds ratios for the association between baseline measures of fire exposure and the presence of either probable PTSD or major depression at the three-month follow-up. In addition, adjusted odds ratios for each fire exposure measure were derived from logistic regressions that controlled for age, gender, race or ethnicity, education, employment status, and income. For predictive purposes, we used best-subsets regression to identify fire exposure and subjective reaction measures that were statistically significant predictors of psychopathology. This method involves assessing all models created from all possible combinations of predictor variables, using R 2 as the criterion to determine best fit. We first examined all possible two-item combinations and then proceeded to examine additional items for their contribution to improved fit. We evaluated alternative scoring rules for the selected items and calculated the positive and negative predictive values of the resulting scores. ResultsCharacteristics of the baseline sample The demographic characteristics of our baseline sample are displayed in Table 1 . Our sample included approximately equal numbers of men and women, individuals who were married or cohabitating and those who were single, and persons who were employed and those who were not. Thirty-eight percent of the sample had annual household incomes below the federal poverty level. Table 1 Baseline demographic characteristics of 357 persons who were affected by the October 2003 California firestorm at the wildland-urban interfaceTable 1 Baseline demographic characteristics of 357 persons who were affected by the October 2003 California firestorm at the wildland-urban interfaceEnlarge table Participants reported high levels of fire exposure ( Table 2 ). Participants' responses to items inquiring about initial reactions to the fires revealed that more than two-thirds of participants experienced fear for their well-being or that of a loved one. Ninety-four percent indicated that they had feared that their home was in danger. Table 2 Fire exposure and initial reactions at baseline for 357 persons who were affected by the October 2003 California firestorm at the wildland-urban interfaceTable 2 Fire exposure and initial reactions at baseline for 357 persons who were affected by the October 2003 California firestorm at the wildland-urban interfaceEnlarge tableResults of the attrition model Fifteen measures were retained for the multivariate model predicting attrition: three demographic characteristics (age, gender, and marital status), nine measures of fire exposure, a prior traumatic events exposure count, a social support scale, and a scale of initial reactions to the fire. The overall attrition model was statistically significant, ( χ2 =32.44, df=15, p=.006) and predicted attrition reasonably well (concordance=.67). Participants lost to follow up were younger and had more severe fire exposure. Prevalence and comorbid psychopathology at follow-up As shown in Table 3 , participants reported significant levels of psychopathology three months after the fires, as reflected by the percentages of people meeting probable diagnoses for PTSD or major depression. Furthermore, the co-occurrence of probable depression and PTSD was striking ( Φ =.74, p<.001). Table 3 Weighted prevalence and psychiatric comorbidity at follow-up for 234 persons affected by the October 2003 California firestormTable 3 Weighted prevalence and psychiatric comorbidity at follow-up for 234 persons affected by the October 2003 California firestormEnlarge tableBecause of the high co-occurrence of probable major depression and PTSD, as well as preliminary analyses that showed a similar pattern of associations involving probable depression and PTSD with baseline predictors, we focused subsequent analyses on the dichotomous outcome variable, PTSD or depression. This index reflected whether a participant met criteria for either disorder at follow-up.Predictors of psychopathology at follow-up The bivariate associations between demographic factors and the dichotomous index reflecting the probable presence of either PTSD or depression at follow up were small; none were statistically significant at the p<.05 level. As displayed in Table 4 , however, several measures of participants' fire exposure and initial reactions to the fire showed significant bivariate associations with psychopathology at follow-up. Difficulty breathing because of smoke or ashes, house or property damage, and physical injury to the respondent or a loved one were predictive of a probable diagnosis. In terms of participants' initial reactions to the fire, fear that one's own life was in danger, fear that the life of a loved one was in danger, feeling terrified, and being separated from loved ones and being fearful for them increased the risk of psychopathology at follow-up. Demographically adjusted multivariate analyses revealed odds ratios and levels of statistical significance that were virtually identical to unadjusted results. Only the association between "difficulty breathing because of smoke or ashes" and any psychopathology was no longer significant after the analysis adjusted for demographic characteristics. Table 4 Predictions of probable posttraumatic stress disorder or major depression at three-month follow-up for 234 persons who were affected by the October 2003 California firestorm at the wildland-urban interfaceTable 4 Predictions of probable posttraumatic stress disorder or major depression at three-month follow-up for 234 persons who were affected by the October 2003 California firestorm at the wildland-urban interfaceEnlarge table Best-subset regression revealed a two-item model predicting any psychopathology. These items were house or property damage and physical injury to oneself or a loved one ( χ2 =27.76, df=2, p<.001). No additional items provided a significant incremental improvement in prediction. This two-item index displayed adequate properties for use as a screener for future psychopathology. Of the 49% of our sample who endorsed at least one of these items at baseline, 47% had a probable disorder at follow-up (71% sensitivity, 63% specificity, 47% positive predictive value, and 81% negative predictive value). Of the 11% who endorsed both items, 69% had a probable disorder (22% sensitivity, 95% specificity, 69% positive predictive value, and 70% negative predictive value). Finally, among those who endorsed neither risk factor, 19% had a probable disorder at follow-up. Discussion Fires in the wildland-urban interface constitute a growing public health problem, particularly in the Western United States ( 3 ). The toll on public mental health and suffering exacted by these fires has not, however, attracted commensurate attention. This study examined issues relevant to the mental health needs of persons seeking disaster aid after exposure to these fires. The first goal was to estimate the prevalence of common trauma-related psychopathology in a disaster relief-seeking sample in the weeks after fire exposure. We found high levels of probable PTSD and major depression, with 34% of participants meeting screening criteria for at least one of the disorders three months after the fire. Moreover, considerable comorbidity was observed for the two conditions, with nearly one-quarter of our sample meeting screening criteria for both disorders at follow-up. A growing body of research now recognizes the frequent comorbidity of PTSD and depression ( 25 , 26 , 27 ). Indeed, some research has suggested that PTSD and depression may reflect a common vulnerability to experience posttraumatic distress ( 25 ). The rate of co-occurrence in the study presented here appears somewhat higher than that found in other studies. Insofar as no other research has examined this issue in a fire-exposed sample, additional research is needed. With respect to our second objective, we identified two items that possessed good ability to identify persons who subsequently met criteria for probable PTSD or major depression. Composed of unobtrusive questions about property damage and physical injury to oneself or a loved one, these items could serve as a potential screener to provide an easy-to-administer, relatively nonintrusive tool to triage persons at elevated risk of subsequent postdisaster psychopathology after fires occurring at the wildland-urban interface. Two possible cutoff points for this screener were evaluated. The more lenient scoring algorithm did a better job of balancing sensitivity with specificity. In view of the large number of persons affected in a mass disaster and limited mental health resources, however, the higher cutoff point (that is, requiring "yes" answers to both screening questions) may possess greater utility. Additional research is needed to determine the value of these items for use as a screener in other samples exposed to fire at the wildland-urban interface. Early identification of at-risk disaster survivors is a widely recognized, but elusive, goal. A recent review of more than 160 early postdisaster intervention programs has concluded that early intervention for trauma survivors is important ( 15 ). These authors also observed that early identification poses a very significant challenge ( 28 ). To the degree that our findings are generalizable to survivors of other wildland-urban interface fires, this brief screener may provide information needed to efficiently allocate scarce mental health resources after this type of disaster. No other tools are currently available to triage disaster-exposed adults at risk of future psychopathology. These data should not be taken as evidence that these items would be appropriate for use as predictors of postdisaster psychopathology in other contexts. At the same time, the transparent nature and seeming relevance of these two items (that is, "property damage" and "physical injury to oneself or a loved one") to various natural and human-caused mass disasters suggest that these items might have predictive utility in other settings. At the very least these data point toward a potentially promising avenue of research aimed at identifying brief screeners for early identification of persons at elevated risk of trauma-related psychopathology.In interpreting our findings, one should be mindful of certain limitations. Perhaps most important, this research was not intended to directly assess a representative sample of all persons affected by the California wildfires. We deliberately chose to sample at a location that naturally congregates individuals who are most likely to benefit from mental health services, thereby addressing critical policy questions about the feasibility and need of postdisaster mental health services. Moreover, we employed diagnostic screeners rather than full diagnostic instruments. Thus our prevalence rates might overestimate the actual numbers of individuals who would meet full criteria for PTSD or major depression at follow-up. In particular, screeners do not adequately measure all criteria required for an actual diagnosis—for example, functional impairment. In addition, rates of major depression in this sample at follow-up substantially exceed past-12-month prevalence rates in a nationally representative sample, suggesting fire exposure as a proximate cause ( 29 ). Nonetheless, the possibility remains that some persons had been experiencing an episode of major depression either before the fire or for reasons entirely unrelated to the disaster. Thus our estimates of the relationship between fire exposure and major depression may also be somewhat inflated. Finally, although a three-month follow-up period seems reasonable for purposes of identifying individuals who might benefit from treatment, additional research might fruitfully examine survivors over an even longer period. ConclusionsThese findings document that individuals seeking disaster relief after wildland-urban interface fires are at heightened risk of subsequent psychopathology. Emergency relief centers constitute not only convenient locations for mental health triage but also important sites for such services. Moreover, early identification of individuals at risk of future psychopathology in these settings seems to be feasible by using easily administered, relatively nonintrusive questions about objective fire exposure. Finally, the generic nature of the items that emerged as the best set of predictors of posttraumatic psychopathology raises the possibility of their utility in other trauma contexts, although this prospect awaits further study.Acknowledgments and disclosuresThis research was supported by grant R01-MH-056122 from the National Institute of Mental Health and the RAND Corporation. The authors thank the RAND Survey Research Group for their assistance with data collection and Annie Zhou, M.S., for her help with data analysis. The authors also acknowledge H. Frank Chew, Ph.D., for his assistance with data collection logistics. The authors are indebted to the study participants. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the National Institute of Mental Health or the RAND Corporation.The authors report no competing interests.Dr. Marshall, Dr. Schell, Dr. Elliott, and Dr. Rayburn are affiliated with the RAND Corporation, 1776 Main St., Santa Monica, CA 90407 (e-mail: [email protected]). Dr. Jaycox is with the RAND Corporation, Arlington, Virginia.References1. Walls of Flame Devour Southern California. Environmental News Service, Oct 27, 2003. Available at www.ens-newswire.com/ens/oct 2003/2003-10-27-04.asp. Accessed Jan 24, 2006Google Scholar2. Wildland Fire Statistics. National Interagency Fire Center, 2005. Available at www.nifc.gov/stats/index.html. Accessed May 20, 2006Google Scholar3. McDougle J: Statement of Janice McDougle, Deputy Chief, State and Private Forestry. US Forest Service: A Cohesive Strategy Is Needed to Address Catastrophic Wildfire Threats: Hearing Before the Committee on Resources, Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health of the Congressional Committee on Resources. June 29, 1999. Available at http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/resources/hii59491.000/hii594910f.htm. Accessed May 20, 2006Google Scholar4. Fires in the wildland/urban interface. United States Fire Administration: Topical Fire Research Series 2:16, Mar 2002. Available at www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/tfrs/v2i16-508.pdf. Accessed May 20, 2006Google Scholar5. Bryant RA, Harvey AG: Posttraumatic stress in volunteer firefighters: predictors of distress. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease 183:267–271, 1995Google Scholar6. Corneil W, Beaton R, Murphy S, et al: Exposure to traumatic incidents and prevalence of posttraumatic stress symptomatology in urban firefighters in two countries. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology 4:131–141, 1999Google Scholar7. Fullerton CS, McCarroll JE, Ursano RJ, et al: Psychological responses of rescue workers: fire fighters and trauma. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 62:371–378, 1992Google Scholar8. McFarlane AC: Avoidance and intrusion in posttraumatic stress disorder. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease 180:439–445, 1992Google Scholar9. Moran C, Britton NR: Emergency work experience and reactions to traumatic incidents. Journal of Traumatic Stress 7:575–585, 1994Google Scholar10. Regehr C, Hill J, Glancy GD: Individual predictors of traumatic reactions in firefighters. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease 188:333–339, 2000Google Scholar11. Jones RT, Ribbe DP, Cunningham PB, et al: Psychological impact of fire disaster on children and their parents. Behavior Modification 26:163–186, 2002Google Scholar12. Koopman C, Classen C, Spiegel D: Predictors of posttraumatic stress symptoms among survivors of the Oakland/Berkeley, Calif, firestorm. American Journal of Psychiatry 151:888–894, 1994Google Scholar13. McFarlane AC, Clayer JR, Bookless CL: Psychiatric morbidity following a natural disaster: an Australian bushfire. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology 32:261–268, 1997Google Scholar14. Gerrity ET, Steinglass P: Relocation stress following catastrophic events, in Terrorism and Disaster: Individual and Community Mental Health Interventions. Edited by Ursano RJ. New York, Cambridge University Press, 2003Google Scholar15. Norris FH, Friedman MJ, Watson PJ, et al: 60,000 disaster victims speak: part I. an empirical review of the empirical literature, 1981–2001. Psychiatry 65:207–239, 2002Google Scholar16. Shalev AY, Tuval-Mashiach R, Hadar H: Posttraumatic stress disorder as a result of mass trauma. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry 65:4–10, 2004Google Scholar17. Brewin CR, Andrews B, Rose S: Fear, helplessness, and horror in posttraumatic stress disorder: investigating DSM-IV criterion A2 in victims of violent crime. Journal of Trauma Stress 13:499–509, 2000Google Scholar18. Weathers FW, Litz BT, Herman DS, et al: The PTSD Checklist (PCL): Reliability, Validity, and Diagnostic Utility. Presented at the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies, San Antonio, Tex, Oct 1993Google Scholar19. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th ed. Washington, DC, American Psychiatric Association, 1994Google Scholar20. Andrykowski MA, Cordova MJ, Studts JL, et al: Posttraumatic stress disorder after treatment of breast cancer: prevalence and diagnosis and use of the PTSD Checklist—Civilian Version (PCL-C) as a screening instrument. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 66:586–590, 1998Google Scholar21. Blanchard EB, Jones-Alexander J, Buckley T, et al: Psychometric properties of the PTSD Checklist (PCL). Behaviour Research and Therapy 34:669–673, 1996Google Scholar22. Marshall GN, Orlando M: Acculturation and peritraumatic dissociation in young adult Latino survivors of community violence. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 111:166–174, 2002Google Scholar23. Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB: The PHQ-9: validity of a brief depression severity measure. Journal of General Internal Medicine 16:606–613, 2001Google Scholar24. Lowe B, Kroenke K, Herzog W, et al: Measuring depression outcome with a brief self-report instrument: sensitivity to change of the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). Journal of Affective Disorders 81:61–66, 2004Google Scholar25. O'Donnell ML, Creamer M, Pattison P: Posttraumatic stress disorder and depression following trauma: understanding comorbidity. American Journal of Psychiatry 161:1390–1396, 2004Google Scholar26. Blanchard EB, Buckley TC, Hickling EJ, et al: Posttraumatic stress disorder and comorbid major depression: is the correlation an illusion? Journal of Anxiety Disorders 12:21–37, 1998Google Scholar27. Shalev AY, Freedman S, Peri T, et al: Prospective study of posttraumatic stress disorder and depression following trauma. American Journal of Psychiatry 155:630–637, 1998Google Scholar28. Norris FH, Friedman MJ, Watson PJ: 60,000 disaster victims speak: part II. summary and implications of the disaster mental health research. Psychiatry 65:240–260, 2002Google Scholar29. Kessler RC, Berglund P, Demler O, et al: The epidemiology of major depressive disorder: results from the National Comorbidity Survey Replication (NCS-R). JAMA 289:3095–3105, 2003Google Scholar FiguresReferencesCited byDetailsCited ByBushfire Smoke and Children’s Health—Exploring a Communication Gap29 September 2022 | International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, Vol. 19, No. 19Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, Major Depressive Disorder, and Wildfires: A Fifth-Year Postdisaster Evaluation among Residents of Fort McMurray8 August 2022 | International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, Vol. 19, No. 15Rates of Occurrence and Influence of Trauma Exposure on Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Symptoms Among Survivors of Terrorist Attacks in Northeast Nigeria13 April 2021 | International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, Vol. 20, No. 4Birth Outcomes, Health, and Health Care Needs of Childbearing Women following Wildfire Disasters: An Integrative, State-of-the-Science ReviewEnvironmental Health Perspectives, Vol. 130, No. 8Efficacy of a therapist-assisted self-help internet-based intervention targeting PTSD, depression and insomnia symptoms after a disaster: a randomized controlled trialBehavior Therapy, Vol. 16Cumulative trauma from multiple natural disasters increases mental health burden on residents of Fort McMurray17 May 2022 | European Journal of Psychotraumatology, Vol. 13, No. 1Incidence and factors impacting PTSD following the 2005 Eyre Peninsula bushfires in South Australia – A 7 year follow up study27 July 2022 | Australian Journal of Rural Health, Vol. 58Community resilience to crime: A study of the 2011 Brisbane flood28 June 2022 | American Journal of Community Psychology, Vol. 29Five Years after the Fort McMurray Wildfire: Prevalence and Correlates of Low Resilience30 March 2022 | Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 12, No. 4Understanding the concurrent risk of mental health and dangerous wildfire events in the COVID-19 pandemicScience of The Total Environment, Vol. 806Long-Term Mental Health Effects of a Devastating Wildfire Are Amplified by Sociodemographic and Clinical Antecedents in College Students15 June 2020 | Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness, Vol. 15, No. 6Early Childhood Development in the Aftermath of the 2016 Wildfires in Alberta, CanadaJournal on Education in Emergencies, Vol. 7, No. 1Prevalence Rates and Correlates of Likely Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder in Residents of Fort McMurray 6 Months After a Wildfire13 May 2019 | International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, Vol. 19, No. 3Mental Health Symptoms Unexpectedly Increased in Students Aged 11–19 Years During the 3.5 Years After the 2016 Fort McMurray Wildfire: Findings From 9,376 Survey Responses20 May 2021 | Frontiers in Psychiatry, Vol. 12Psychological Symptoms Among Evacuees From the 2016 Fort McMurray Wildfires: A Population-Based Survey One Year Later4 May 2021 | Frontiers in Public Health, Vol. 9Health and social impacts of California wildfires and the deficiencies in current recovery resources: An exploratory qualitative study of systems-level issues26 March 2021 | PLOS ONE, Vol. 16, No. 3Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 11, No. 9Threats to Mental Health and Well-Being Associated with Climate ChangeJournal of Anxiety Disorders, Vol. 76Social, Economic and Health Effects of the 2016 Alberta Wildfires: Pediatric Resilience1 December 2020 | Journal of Disaster Research, Vol. 15, No. 7Non-linear Dynamic Shifts in Distress After Wildfires: Further Tests of the Self-Regulation Shift Theory6 October 2020 | Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 11An examination of the social-psychological drivers of homeowner wildfire mitigationJournal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 70The California Wildfires8 May 2020Closing the Psychological Treatment Gap During the COVID-19 Pandemic With a Supportive Text Messaging Program: Protocol for Implementation and Evaluation22 June 2020 | JMIR Research Protocols, Vol. 9, No. 6Changes in Stress, Anxiety, and Depression Levels of Subscribers to a Daily Supportive Text Message Program (Text4Hope) During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Cross-Sectional Survey Study18 December 2020 | JMIR Mental Health, Vol. 7, No. 12After the Fort McMurray wildfire there are significant increases in mental health symptoms in grade 7–12 students compared to controls10 January 2019 | BMC Psychiatry, Vol. 19, No. 1International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, Vol. 17, No. 1International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, Vol. 16, No. 9Priority focus areas for a sub-national response to climate change and health: A South African provincial case studyEnvironment International, Vol. 122Canadian Journal of Public Health, Vol. 109, No. 3Frontiers in Psychiatry, Vol. 9Climate Change and Mental HealthAJN, American Journal of Nursing, Vol. 117, No. 4Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol. 124, No. 9An Ecosystems and Vulnerable Populations Perspective on Solastalgia and Psychological Distress After a Wildfire25 August 2015 | EcoHealth, Vol. 12, No. 4Trajectories of perceived social support among low-income female survivors of Hurricane Katrina21 November 2014 | Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, Vol. 32, No. 8Screeningfragebögen zu Risiko- und Schutzfaktoren für Traumafolgestörungen – Ein systematischer ReviewZeitschrift für Psychiatrie, Psychologie und Psychotherapie, Vol. 62, No. 3Annals of Emergency Medicine, Vol. 64, No. 1Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness, Vol. 7, No. 3Disaster exposure as a risk factor for mental health problems, eighteen months, four and ten years post-disaster – a longitudinal study18 September 2012 | BMC Psychiatry, Vol. 12, No. 1Environmental Health, Vol. 10, No. 1After the fire: the mental health consequences of fire disastersCurrent Opinion in Psychiatry, Vol. 24, No. 1Psychological Medicine, Vol. 40, No. 2Psychology, Health & Medicine, Vol. 15, No. 1The Experience of Disaster:Anxiety Disorders And PTSDDepression and Prolonged Grief in the Wake of DisastersLettersJoel Kanter, M.S.W., L.C.S.W.-C.1 January 2008 | Psychiatric Services, Vol. 59, No. 1LetterRobert Paul Liberman, M.D.1 January 2008 | Psychiatric Services, Vol. 59, No. 1LettersGary R. Bond, Ph.D.Haiyi Xie, Ph.D.Robert E. Drake, M.D., Ph.D.1 January 2008 | Psychiatric Services, Vol. 59, No. 1LetterPhilippe J. Birmes, M.D., Ph.D.Laetitia Daubisse, M.D.Alain Brunet, Ph.D.1 January 2008 | Psychiatric Services, Vol. 59, No. 1LetterRickard Ljung, M.D., Ph.D.Charlotte Björkenstam, M.Sc.Emma Björkenstam, B.Sc.1 January 2008 | Psychiatric Services, Vol. 59, No. 1Journal of Traumatic Stress, Vol. 21, No. 5 Volume 58Issue 4 April, 2007Pages 509-514PSYCHIATRIC SERVICES April 2007 Volume 58 Number 4 Metrics PDF download History Published online 1 April 2007 Published in print 1 April 2007
Referência(s)