Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-k7p5g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-10T08:43:48.988Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Risk and Protective Factors for Mental Health and Community Cohesion After the 2013 Calgary Flood

Part of: Floods collection

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 August 2017

Erin Hetherington Open the ORCID record for Erin Hetherington [Opens in a new window] ,
Sheila McDonald ,
Muci Wu  and
Suzanne Tough
Erin Hetherington
Affiliation:
Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Sheila McDonald
Affiliation:
Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Muci Wu
Affiliation:
Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Suzanne Tough*
Affiliation:
Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
*
Correspondence and reprint requests to Suzanne Tough, Owerko Centre, c/o 2500 University Dr. NW, Calgary, AB, T2N 1N4, Canada (e-mail: stough@ucalgary.ca).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective

To examine mental health and community cohesion in women living in Calgary after a natural disaster considering previously collected mental health data.

Methods

Data from an ongoing longitudinal cohort, the All Our Families study, were used to examine mental health and community cohesion 5 months after a major flood in Calgary, Canada. Participants who had completed a baseline questionnaire before the flood were eligible for inclusion in this study (N=923). Four multivariable logistic regression models were built to examine predictors of post-traumatic stress, depression, anxiety, and community cohesion.

Results

Elevated anxiety before the flood was associated with 2.49 (95% CI: 1.17, 5.26) increased odds of experiencing high levels of post-traumatic stress, regardless of whether respondents lived in a flood-risk community or not. Women who experienced damage to property, or who provided help to others, were more likely to perceive an increased sense of community cohesion (adjusted ods ratio (AOR): 1.67; 95% CI: 1.09, 2.54 and AOR: 1.68; 95% CI: 1.13, 2.52, respectively).

Conclusions

Women with underlying mental health conditions may be more vulnerable to the psychological impacts of a natural disaster regardless of their level of exposure. Natural disasters may bring communities together, especially those who were more tangibly impacted. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2018;12:470–477)

Keywords

floodsnatural disastersmental healthcommunity cohesioncohort
Type
Original Research
Information
Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness , Volume 12 , Issue 4 , August 2018 , pp. 470 - 477
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Disaster Medicine and Public Health, Inc. 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.)

References

1. Tremblay, MA, Blanchard, CM, Pelletier, LG, et al. A dual route in explaining health outcomes in natural disaster. J Appl Soc Psychol. 2006;36(6):1502-1522.Google Scholar
2. Fernandez, A, Black, J, Jones, M, et al. Flooding and mental health: a systematic mapping review. PloS One. 2015;10(4):e0119929.Google Scholar
3. Goldmann, E, Galea, S. Mental health consequences of disasters. Annu Rev Public Health. 2014;35:169-183.Google Scholar
4. Mason, V, Andrews, H, Upton, D. The psychological impact of exposure to floods. Psychol Health Med. 2010;15(1):61-73.Google Scholar
5. Kaniasty, K, Norris, FH. Longitudinal linkages between perceived social support and posttraumatic stress symptoms: sequential roles of social causation and social selection. J Trauma Stress. 2008;21(3):274-281.Google Scholar
6. Patterson, O, Weil, F, Patel, K. The role of community in disaster response: conceptual models. Popul Res Policy Rev. 2010;29(2):127-141.Google Scholar
7. Norris, FH, Friedman, MJ, Watson, PJ. 60,000 disaster victims speak: Part II. Summary and implications of the disaster mental health research. Psychiatry. 2002;65(3):240-260.Google Scholar
8. Stanke, C, Murray, V, Amlôt, R, et al. The effects of flooding on mental health: outcomes and recommendations from a review of the literature. PLOS Curr Disasters. 2012. doi: 10.1371/4f9f1fa9c3cae.Google Scholar
9. Kaniasty, K. Predicting social psychological well-being following trauma: the role of postdisaster social support. Psychol Trauma. 2012;4(1):22.Google Scholar
10. Paranjothy, S, Gallacher, J, Amlôt, R, et al. Psychosocial impact of the summer 2007 floods in England. BMC Public Health. 2011;11(1):1.Google Scholar
11. Tracy, M, Norris, FH, Galea, S. Differences in the determinants of posttraumatic stress disorder and depression after a mass traumatic event. Depress Anxiety. 2011;28(8):666-675.Google Scholar
12. Alderman, K, Turner, LR, Tong, S. Assessment of the health impacts of the 2011 summer floods in Brisbane. Disaster Med Public Health Prep. 2013;7(4):380-386.Google Scholar
13. North, CS. Disaster mental health epidemiology: methodological review and interpretation of research findings. Psychiatry. 2016;79(2):130-146.Google Scholar
14. Moffitt, TE, Caspi, A, Taylor, A, et al. How common are common mental disorders? Evidence that lifetime prevalence rates are doubled by prospective versus retrospective ascertainment. Psychol Med. 2010;40(6):899-909.Google Scholar
15. Chang, K. Community cohesion after a natural disaster: insights from a Carlisle flood. Disasters. 2010;34(2):289-302.Google Scholar
16. Sweet, S. The effect of a natural disaster on social cohesion: a longitudinal study. Int J Mass Emerg Disasters. 1998;16(3):321-331.Google Scholar
17. Government of Alberta. Southern Alberta 2013 Floods: The Provincial Recovery Framework. 2013. https://www.alberta.ca/assets/documents/2013-Flood-Recovery-Framework.pdf. Accessed July 14, 2017.Google Scholar
18. CBC. Alberta flood remembered a year later. 2014. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/alberta-flood-remembered-a-year-later-1.2682396. Accessed 28 September 2016.Google Scholar
19. Sahni, V, Scott, AN, Beliveau, M, et al. Public health surveillance response following the southern Alberta floods, 2013. Can J Public Health. 2016;107(2):e142-e148.Google Scholar
20. McDonald, SW, Lyon, AW, Benzies, KM, et al. The All Our Babies pregnancy cohort: design, methods, and participant characteristics. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2013;13(1):1.Google Scholar
21. Horowitz, M, Wilner, N, Alvarez, W. Impact of Event Scale: a measure of subjective stress. Psychosom Med. 1979;41(3):209-218.Google Scholar
22. Weiss, DS. The impact of event scale: revised. In: Wilson JP, Tang CS eds. Cross-Cultural Assessment of Psychological Trauma and PTSD. New York: Springer; 2007:219-238.Google Scholar
23. Poulin, C, Hand, D, Boudreau, B. Validity of a 12-item version of the CES-D [Centre for Epidemiological Studies Depression scale] used in the National Longitudinal Study of Children and Youth. Chronic Dis Can. 2005;26(2-3):65.Google Scholar
24. Kozyrskyj, A, Letourneau, N, Kang, L, et al. Associations between postpartum depressive symptoms and childhood asthma diminish with child age. Clin Exp Allergy. 2016;47:324-330.Google Scholar
25. Marteau, TM, Bekker, H. The development of a six‐item short‐form of the state scale of the Spielberger State—Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI). Br J Clin Psychol. 1992;31(3):301-306.Google Scholar
26. Radloff, LS. The CES-D scale a self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Appl Psychol Meas. 1977;1(3):385-401.Google Scholar
27. Speilberger, C, Gorsuch, R, Lushene, R, et al. Manual for the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press; 1983.Google Scholar
28. Knight, RG, Waal‐Manning, HJ, Spears, GF. Some norms and reliability data for the State‐Trait Anxiety Inventory and the Zung Self‐Rating Depression scale. Br J Clin Psychol. 1983;22(4):245-249.Google Scholar
29. Statistics_Canada. Microdata User Guide: National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth. Cycle 5; 2003. http://www23.statcan.gc.ca/imdb-bmdi/document/4450_D4_T9_V5-eng.pdf. Accessed 28 September 2016.Google Scholar
30. McDonald, SW, Kehler, HL, Tough, SC. Protective factors for child development at age 2 in the presence of poor maternal mental health: results from the All Our Babies (AOB) pregnancy cohort. BMJ Open. 2016;6(11):e012096.Google Scholar
31. Calgary, C.o. Before, During and After Flooding in Calgary: Your Guide to Protecting Family an Property. City of Calgary: Water Services; 2012.Google Scholar
32. Kleinbaum, D, Nizam, M. Applied Regression Analysis and Other Multivariable Methods. 4th edition. Belmont, California: Thomson Brooks/Cole Publishing; 2008.Google Scholar
33. StataCorp. Stata Statistical Software: Release 13, College Station, TX; 2013.Google Scholar
34. ESRI. ArcGIS Desktop: Release 10. Redlands, CA: Environmental Systems Research Institute; 2011.Google Scholar
35. Fergusson, DM, Boden, JM. The psychological impacts of major disasters. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2014;48(7):597-599.Google Scholar
36. Bonanno, GA, Brewin, CR, Kaniasty, K, et al. Weighing the costs of disaster consequences, risks, and resilience in individuals, families, and communities. Psychol Sci Public Interest. 2010;11(1):1-49.Google Scholar
37. Fergusson, DM, Boden, JM, Horwood, LJ, et al. Perceptions of distress and positive consequences following exposure to a major disaster amongst a well-studied cohort. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2014;49(4):351-359.Google Scholar
38. Norris, FH, Stevens, SP, Pfefferbaum, B, et al. Community resilience as a metaphor, theory, set of capacities, and strategy for disaster readiness. Am J Community Psychol. 2008;41(1-2):127-150.Google Scholar