ABSTRACT
Objective To identify factors associated with better or poorer self-reported health status in New Zealand Military Veterans.
Design An online cross-sectional survey.
Participants The total number of eligible Veterans is unknown, but a total of 1,817 Veterans responded, including 1009 serving personnel providing a 26% response rate from that group.
Study variables Health status was self-reported using the EQ-5D-5L, which asks about problems across five dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression), with five levels of severity (e.g. no, slight, moderate, severe or extreme problems). The EQ-5D-5L also contains a visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS), scaled from 0 (worst) to 100 (best) imagined health. Hypothetical relationships with better health were positive social support, sleep and psychological flexibility; with poorer health, exposure to psychological trauma, distress and hazardous drinking.
Results The proportion of Veterans reporting ‘any problems’ compared to ‘no problems’ with the five EQ-5D dimensions, was similar to those found in the general NZ population, although a higher proportion of Veterans reported problems with mobility, self-care, usual activities and pain/discomfort. Psychological flexibility and better sleep quality were associated with higher EQ-VAS scores; distress was associated with lower EQ-VAS scores.
Conclusion In this sample of New Zealand Veterans, psychological flexibility and good sleep are associated with better self-rated health, and distress and poor sleep with diminished health. These factors might be used as sentinel health indicators in assessing Veteran health status. As distress, psychological flexibility and sleep are closely related, cognitive behavioural therapy encompassing these domains may be useful in improving the health of New Zealand Veterans.
Strengths and limitations of this study
Many studies of Veterans have focused on adverse outcomes, but we have been able to focus on a holistic measure of ‘health’.
The study was sufficiently powered to detect important relationships indicating opportunities for intervention.
The exact response rate is unknown, and possible bias may be a limitation.
The cross-sectional design means that we cannot explore cause and effect relationships.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work was supported by a research grant from the Ministerial Veterans Health Advisory Panel, funded through the War Pensions Medical Research Trust Fund, also by Lottery Health and the Royal New Zealand Returned and Services Association.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethical approval for the study was obtained from the Northern B Health and Disability Ethics Committee, reference 17NTB118.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Subject Area
Reviews and Context
0
Comment
0
TRIP Peer Reviews
0
Community Reviews
0
Automated Services
0
Blogs/Media
Author Videos