Racial differences in veterans' satisfaction with examination of disability from posttraumatic stress disorder

Comparison of attitudes towards the service connection claims process among veterans filing for PTSD and veterans filing for musculoskeletal disorders

ABSTRACT

Many veterans have negative views about the service connection claims process for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), which likely impacts willingness to file service connection claims, re-file claims, and use Veterans Healthcare Administration care. Nevertheless, veterans have reported that PTSD claims are important to them for the financial benefits, validation of prior experience and harm, and self-other issues such as pleasing a significant other. It is unknown if reported attitudes are specific to PTSD claimants or if they would be similar to those submitting claims for other disorders, such as musculoskeletal disorders. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare attitudes and beliefs about service connection processes between veterans submitting service connection claims for PTSD and musculoskeletal disorders.Participants were Operation Enduring Freedom, Operation Iraqi Freedom, and Operation New Dawn veterans filing service connection claims for PTSD (n = 218) or musculoskeletal disorder (n = 257) who completed a modified Disability Application Appraisal Inventory. This secondary data analysis using multiple regression models tested the effect of demographics, clinical characteristics, and claim type on 5 Disability Application Appraisal Inventory subscales: Knowledge about service connection claims, Negative Expectations about the process, and importance of Financial Benefits, importance of Validation of veteran's experience/condition, and importance of Self-Other attitudes.The PTSD group assigned significantly less importance to financial benefits than the musculoskeletal disorder group. In addition, the subset of the PTSD group without depression had significantly more Negative Expectations than musculoskeletal disorder claimants without depression. Negative Expectations did not differ between the PTSD and musculoskeletal disorder groups with depression. Depression was significantly positively associated with Negative Expectations, importance of Financial Benefits, and importance of Validation.Most perceptions around seeking service connection are not specific to PTSD claimants. Depression is associated with having negative expectations about service connection claims and motivations to file claims. Addressing depression and negative expectations during the compensation and pension process might help veterans at this important point of contact with Veterans Healthcare Administration services.

World Health Organization disability assessment schedule 2.0: An international systematic review

PURPOSE

This systematic review examines research and practical applications of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) as a basis for establishing specific criteria for evaluating relevant international scientific literature. The aims were to establish the extent of international dissemination and use of WHODAS 2.0 and analyze psychometric research on its various translations and adaptations. In particular, we wanted to highlight which psychometric features have been investigated, focusing on the factor structure, reliability, and validity of this instrument.

METHOD

Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology, we conducted a search for publications focused on "whodas" using the ProQuest, PubMed, and Google Scholar electronic databases.

RESULTS

We identified 810 studies from 94 countries published between 1999 and 2015. WHODAS 2.0 has been translated into 47 languages and dialects and used in 27 areas of research (40% in psychiatry).

CONCLUSIONS

The growing number of studies indicates increasing interest in the WHODAS 2.0 for assessing individual functioning and disability in different settings and individual health conditions. The WHODAS 2.0 shows strong correlations with several other measures of activity limitations; probably due to the fact that it shares the same disability latent variable with them. Implications for Rehabilitation WHODAS 2.0 seems to be a valid, reliable self-report instrument for the assessment of disability. The increasing interest in use of the WHODAS 2.0 extends to rehabilitation and life sciences rather than being limited to psychiatry. WHODAS 2.0 is suitable for assessing health status and disability in a variety of settings and populations. A critical issue for rehabilitation is that a single "minimal clinically important .difference" score for the WHODAS 2.0 has not yet been established.