Prevalence of self-reported lifetime medical diagnosis of depression in Brazil: analysis of data from the 2019 Brazilian National Health Survey

Abstract

ObjectivesTo assess the prevalence of and factors associated with the lifetime medical diagnosis of depression in Brazil.DesignPopulation-based, cross-sectional study.SettingAnalysis of data from the 2019 Brazilian National Health Survey.Participants90 846 individuals aged ≥15 years were included.Outcome measureThe self-reported medical diagnosis of depression at some point in one’s life was the main outcome. Prevalence ratios (PRs) with 95% CIs were calculated by Poisson regression with robust variance. The independent variables included the geographical area of residence, sociodemographic characteristics, current smoking status, alcohol abuse, daily screen time, and the presence of physical disorders and mental health comorbidities.ResultsThe self-reported lifetime prevalence of medical diagnosis of depression was 9.9% (95% CI 9.5% to 10.2%). The probability of having received a medical diagnosis of depression was higher among urban residents (PR 1.23; 95% CI 1.12 to 1.35); females (2.75; 2.52 to 2.99); those aged 20–29 years (1.17; 0.91 to 1.51), 30–39 years (1.73; 1.36 to 2.19), 40–49 years (2.30; 1.81 to 2.91), 50–59 years (2.32; 1.84 to 2.93) and 60–69 years (2.27; 1.78 to 2.90) compared with those under 20 years; white-skinned people (0.69 (0.61 to 0.78) for black-skinned people and 0.74 (0.69 to 0.80) for indigenous, yellow and brown-skinned people compared with white-skinned people); those with fewer years of education (1.33(1.12 to 1.58) among those with 9–11 years, 1.14 (0.96 to 1.34) among those with 1–8 years and 1.29 (1.11 to 1.50) among those with 0 years compared with those with ≥12 years of education); those who were separated/divorced (1.43; 1.29 to 1.59), widowed (1.06; 0.95 to 1.19) and single (1.01; 0.93 to 1.10) compared with married people; smokers (1.26; 1.14 to 1.38); heavy screen users (1.31; 1.16 to 1.48) compared with those whose usage was <6 hours/day; those with a medical diagnosis of a physical disorder (1.80; 1.67 to 1.97); and individuals with a medical diagnosis of a mental health comorbidity (5.05; 4.68 to 5.46).ConclusionThis nationwide population-based study of self-reported lifetime medical diagnosis of depression in Brazil showed that the prevalence was almost 10%. Considering the current Brazilian population, this prevalence corresponds to more than 2 million people who have been diagnosed with depression at some point in their lives.

Comparison of the epidemiology of disorders of gut–brain interaction in four Latin American countries: Results of The Rome Foundation Global Epidemiology Study

“…In Argentina, the poor economic situation in recent years may underly the higher level of anxiety in subjects with DGBI. In Brazil, in a nationwide population study, the lifetime‐self reported medical diagnosis of depression was almost 10%, and more frequent among women than men, which can explain the higher rates of depression among subjects with DGBI in that country 36 . In addition, a previous study among 113 consecutive patients with Rome III IBS showed that anxiety and/or depression using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HAD) were found in 81.5% of the patients 37 .…”

“…In Brazil, in a nationwide population study, the lifetime-self reported medical diagnosis of depression was almost 10%, and more frequent among women than men, which can explain the higher rates of depression among subjects with DGBI in that country. 36 In addition, a previous study among 113 consecutive patients with Rome III IBS showed that anxiety and/or depression using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HAD) were found in 81.5% of the patients. 37 Our findings among subjects with DGBI in Brazil was further impacted by the lower scores for mental health HRQOL among them, suggesting that patients with DGBI from Brazil and Argentina may require psychological support and providers need to be alert to symptoms and signs of anxiety and depression.…”

“…Bowel disorders were the only DGBI with differences based on the population size of the cities/towns. They were more common in larger populations vs. the smaller ones as follows: 36…”