Table 4

Logistic regression results and marginal prevalence estimates for mental health services use among Regular and Reserve Force members with an Afghanistan deployment and an identified mental disorders

InformationMedicationCounsellingAny
Mental health service use (OR (95% CI))‡
 Model 1: unadjusted
  ResF versus RegF0.67* (0.52 to 0.86)0.50* (0.39 to 0.65)0.59* (0.47 to 0.76)0.51* (0.39 to 0.65)
 Model 2: adding covariates for military and sociodemographic characteristics
  ResF versus RegF0.85 (0.64 to 1.11)0.60* (0.45 to 0.79)0.72* (0.56 to 0.94)0.57* (0.43 to 0.75)
 Model 3: adding covariates for mental disorders and other health-related characteristics
  ResF versus RegF0.88 (0.66 to 1.18)0.65* (0.48 to 0.89)0.75† (0.55 to 1.01)0.59* (0.43 to 0.81)
 Model 4: adding covariates for LTE and child abuse (as propensity score)
  ResF versus RegF0.9 (0.67 to 1.23)0.67* (0.48 to 0.92)0.8 (0.58 to 1.09)0.62* (0.44 to 0.87)
 Model 5: adding covariates for deployment associated mental health training
  ResF versus RegF0.91 (0.67 to 1.23)0.67* (0.49 to 0.93)0.8 (0.59 to 1.10)0.62* (0.44 to 0.87)
 Model 6: adding covariates for deployment-related characteristics and experiences‡
  ResF versus RegF0.83 (0.61 to 1.15)0.62* (0.44 to 0.87)0.74† (0.53 to 1.03)0.50* (0.35 to 0.73)
Mental health services use: marginal prevalence estimates from the final logistic regression model (%, (95% CI))
 RegF40.7 (37.2 to 44.2)48.4 (45.0 to 51.8)62.1 (58.9 to 65.4)72.6 (69.6 to 75.6)
 ResF37 (31.7 to 42.2)39.3 (34.2 to 44.5)56.7 (51.7 to 61.6)61.3 (56.3 to 66.3)
 Marginal prevalence difference−3.7 (−10.2 to 2.8)−9.1* (−15.5 to −2.6)−5.4† (−11.5 to 0.7)−11.3* (−17.3 to −5.2)
  • *Significant at p≤0.05.

  • †Significant at 0.05<P≤0.10.

  • ‡A variable-reduction strategy was used with each logistic regression. Four outcomes were assessed and the retained covariates were not necessarily the same for each outcome.

  • LTE, lifetime exposure to potentially traumatic experiences; RegF, regular force; ResF, reserve force.