Kessler Ronald C, Akiskal Hagop S, Ames Minnie, Birnbaum Howard, Greenberg Paul, Hirschfeld Robert M A, Jin Robert, Merikangas Kathleen R, Simon Gregory E, Wang Philip S
Department of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, 180 Longwood Ave., Boston, MA 02115, USA.
Am J Psychiatry. 2006 Sep;163(9):1561-8. doi: 10.1176/ajp.2006.163.9.1561.
Research on the workplace costs of mood disorders has focused largely on major depressive episodes. Bipolar disorder has been overlooked both because of the failure to distinguish between major depressive disorder and bipolar disorder and by the failure to evaluate the workplace costs of mania/hypomania.
The National Comorbidity Survey Replication assessed major depressive disorder and bipolar disorder with the World Health Organization (WHO) Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) and work impairment with the WHO Health and Work Performance Questionnaire. A regression analysis of major depressive disorder and bipolar disorder predicting Health and Work Performance Questionnaire scores among 3,378 workers was used to estimate the workplace costs of mood disorders.
A total of 1.1% of the workers met CIDI criteria for 12-month bipolar disorder (I or II), and 6.4% meet criteria for 12-month major depressive disorder. Bipolar disorder was associated with 65.5 and major depressive disorder with 27.2 lost workdays per ill worker per year. Subgroup analysis showed that the higher work loss associated with bipolar disorder than with major depressive disorder was due to more severe and persistent depressive episodes in those with bipolar disorder than in those with major depressive disorder rather than to stronger effects of mania/hypomania than depression.
Employer interest in workplace costs of mood disorders should be broadened beyond major depressive disorder to include bipolar disorder. Effectiveness trials are needed to study the return on employer investment of coordinated programs for workplace screening and treatment of bipolar disorder and major depressive disorder.
情绪障碍在职场成本方面的研究主要集中在重度抑郁发作上。双相情感障碍一直被忽视,原因一是未能区分重度抑郁症和双相情感障碍,二是未能评估躁狂/轻躁狂发作在职场的成本。
全国共病调查复制版使用世界卫生组织(WHO)复合国际诊断访谈(CIDI)评估重度抑郁症和双相情感障碍,并使用WHO健康与工作绩效问卷评估工作障碍情况。对3378名员工进行回归分析,以重度抑郁症和双相情感障碍预测健康与工作绩效问卷得分,从而估算情绪障碍在职场的成本。
共有1.1%的员工符合12个月双相情感障碍(I型或II型)的CIDI标准,6.4%的员工符合12个月重度抑郁症的标准。双相情感障碍患者每年因病缺勤65.5天,重度抑郁症患者为27.2天。亚组分析表明,双相情感障碍比重度抑郁症导致更高的工作损失,原因是双相情感障碍患者的抑郁发作比重度抑郁症患者更严重、更持久,而非躁狂/轻躁狂发作比抑郁发作的影响更强。
雇主对情绪障碍在职场成本的关注应从重度抑郁症扩大到双相情感障碍。需要进行有效性试验,以研究雇主投资于职场双相情感障碍和重度抑郁症筛查与治疗协调项目的回报情况。