A community-based study of the relationship between somatic and psychological distress in Hong Kong.

Although the predominantly somatic presentation of distress has been used to explain low rates of emotional illnesses and health service use in Chinese communities, this concept of somatization has not been examined by concurrently studying the profile of somatically and psychologically distressed Chinese individuals. A random population-based sample of 3014 adults underwent a structured telephone interview that examined their sociodemographic characteristics, somatic distress (Patient Health Questionnaire-15, PHQ-15), non-specific psychological distress (Kessler Scale-6, K6), health service use, and functional impairment. Four groups of individuals identified by PHQ-15 and K6 cut-off scores were compared. Results showed that PHQ-15 and K6 scores were positively correlated. The large majority of respondents (85.9%) reported both somatic and psychological distress. The proportions of Low Distress Group, Somatically Distressed Group, Psychologically Distressed Group, and Mixed Distress Group were 69.2%, 5.0%, 15.8%, and 10.0%, respectively. Specific age range, male gender, greater family income, higher education level, and retirement were associated with decreased odds of somatic and/or psychological distress. Although psychological distress best predicted impairment, somatic distress best predicted health service use. Mixed distress predicted most impairment and health service use. Thus, psychological distress and somatic distress commonly coexist across Chinese sociodemographic groups. This speaks against the conventional notion of somatization and is consistent with recent findings of a higher prevalence of emotional illnesses in Chinese people. That psychologically distressed individuals are more impaired but less inclined to seek help than somatically distressed individuals may partly explain low levels of help-seeking for mental disorders found in epidemiological studies.