Call for a new epidemiological approach to disaster response

Breast Cancer Provider Interval Length in Fukushima, Japan, After the 2011 Triple Disaster: A Long-Term Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

Minimizing the interval from symptom onset to treatment commencement is essential for a favorable outcome among breast cancer (BC) patients. This study examined whether provider interval (time elapsed from first consultation to treatment initiation) lengthened among BC patients after Japan's 2011 earthquake, tsunami, and nuclear disaster in Fukushima. Factors associated with the length of postdisaster interval and whether the interval was associated with BC stage were also investigated.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

So-so District (study site) was an area damaged by the 2011 disasters. Data of all BC patients who made their first medical consultation and received initial treatment at the core medical institutions in the area 5 years before or after the disaster were extracted from patient medical records. We used several regression approaches to fulfill our study objectives.

RESULTS

We included 263 (140 predisaster and 123 postdisaster) patients. After adjustment for covariates, the interval did not significantly change after the disaster compared to before the disaster. Those with 4 or 5 cohabiting family members experienced a shorter interval after the disaster than those with 0 or 1 cohabiting family members (relative length, 0.47; 95% confidence interval, 0.28-0.78). Those with an interval of > 60 days had lower odds of stage III or IV cancer after the disaster than those with an interval of < 30 days (odds ratio, 0.09; 95% confidence interval, 0.01-0.84).

CONCLUSION

Overall, provider interval did not lengthen after the disaster. However, those with fewer cohabiting family members might have experienced a longer total interval. Cancer stage may not necessarily reflect the influence of interval on patient outcome.

Beneficial Roles of Social Support for Mental Health Vary in the Japanese Population depending on Disaster Experience: A Nationwide Cross-Sectional Study

The purpose of the present study was to assess the effects of social capital on mental health among the Japanese population with or without natural disaster experience. A nationwide cross-sectional study was performed in the population aged 15 to 79 years old. We collected data on psychological status, social capital, disaster experience in ten years prior to the survey, and socio-demographic information. We assessed cognitive social capital (perceptions of support, reciprocity and trust), social support (support from individuals in the community), and social participation (participation in social activities) as components of social capital. The study outcome was mild mood or anxiety disorder (hereafter mood/anxiety disorder), defined as the score of 5 or higher in the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K6). Using logistic regression models, we tested whether each component of social capital was associated with mood/anxiety disorder with or without disaster experience. Out of 1,200 participants, 1,183 had available K6 score data and were considered. Among three components of social capital, only social support significantly interacted with disaster experience (p = 0.019). In the population without disaster experience, those with high social support were less likely to have mood/anxiety disorder (OR 0.45, 95% Cl 0.28-0.73); however, no such association was observed among those with disaster experience (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.64-1.90). Thus, the protective effects of social support against mood/anxiety disorder vary in the Japanese population depending on disaster experience. The present study provides important insight into the role of social capital on mental health after natural disaster.