Hao Yifan, Zhao Hu, Bai Ruhai, Xu Zhixian, Feng Yu, Gu Hui
School of Marxism, Nanjing University of Science & Technology, Nanjing 210094, China.
School of Public Affairs, Nanjing University of Science & Technology, Nanjing 210094, China.
Healthcare (Basel). 2025 Jun 9;13(12):1376. doi: 10.3390/healthcare13121376.
East Asia accounts for the highest number of anxiety disorders cases globally, with China, Japan, and Republic of Korea representing 17.5% of global incidence according to GBD 2021. These nations offer a unique context for examining how different modernization paths impact anxiety disorders patterns. This study examined anxiety disorders incidence trends across these countries from 1992 to 2021 to compare disease burdens and inform public health strategies. Using GBD 2021 data, we employed age-period-cohort analysis to evaluate factors affecting anxiety disorders incidence, examining age-specific rates, period effects, and birth cohort influences. All three countries experienced sharp increases in anxiety disorders following COVID-19. Age-standardized incidence rates decreased by 4.89% in China and 10.52% in Japan from 1992 to 2019, while remaining stable in Republic of Korea. Net drift was -0.40% for China, -0.50% for Japan, and approximately 0 for Republic of Korea. Local drifts were positive among older adults in China and Japan, and middle-aged adults in Republic of Korea. Longitudinal age curves showed inverted V-shaped patterns, peaking in the 10-14 age group across all three countries. China and Republic of Korea exhibit a second peak during middle age, while Japan shows continuous decline after the 10-14 age group. Period and cohort effects indicating overall decreases in China and Japan, with minimal changes in Republic of Korea. Different modernization trajectories have produced distinct anxiety disorders patterns across these East Asian nations. The elevated risk among adolescents across all countries warrants targeted interventions, while high risks among middle-aged adults in China and Republic of Korea requires age-specific approaches. Countries should utilize their healthcare systems' strengths to create targeted strategies for reducing anxiety disorders while addressing pandemic-related mental health impacts.
东亚是全球焦虑症病例数最多的地区，根据《2021年全球疾病负担研究》，中国、日本和韩国的焦虑症发病率占全球发病率的17.5%。这些国家为研究不同的现代化道路如何影响焦虑症模式提供了独特的背景。本研究调查了1992年至2021年期间这些国家的焦虑症发病率趋势，以比较疾病负担并为公共卫生策略提供参考。利用《2021年全球疾病负担研究》的数据，我们采用年龄-时期-队列分析来评估影响焦虑症发病率的因素，研究特定年龄发病率、时期效应和出生队列的影响。在新冠疫情之后，这三个国家的焦虑症发病率均大幅上升。从1992年到2019年，中国的年龄标准化发病率下降了4.89%，日本下降了10.52%，而韩国则保持稳定。中国的净漂移率为-0.40%，日本为-0.50%，韩国约为0。中国和日本的老年人以及韩国的中年人中局部漂移为正。纵向年龄曲线呈倒V形，在所有三个国家中均在10-14岁年龄组达到峰值。中国和韩国在中年时出现第二个峰值，而日本在10-14岁年龄组之后呈持续下降趋势。时期和队列效应表明中国和日本总体呈下降趋势，韩国变化最小。不同的现代化轨迹在这些东亚国家产生了不同的焦虑症模式。所有国家青少年中的高风险需要有针对性的干预措施，而中国和韩国中年成年人中的高风险则需要针对特定年龄的方法。各国应利用其医疗系统的优势，制定有针对性的战略，以减少焦虑症，同时应对与疫情相关的心理健康影响。
