Understanding the client characteristics of Aboriginal residential alcohol and other drug rehabilitation services in New South Wales, Australia

Table 4 Mental health and quality of life characteristics of clients attending an Aboriginal alcohol and other drug residential rehabilitation service in New South Wales (NSW), Australia (1 January 2011–31 December 2016)

Mental health and quality of life characteristics	Study sites (N=2422)
	Namatjira Haven^a	The Glen Centre^b	Weigelli	Orana Haven	Oolong House	Maayu Mali
	n = 200	n = 703	n = 589
Mental health (%)
Kessler-10 (%)	–	–	–	–	–	–
Low psychological distress (score 10–15)	13	39	12	–	–	–
Moderate psychological distress (score 16–21)	17	23	17	–	–	–
High psychological distress (score 22–29)	28	19	35	–	–	–
Very high psychological distress (score > 30)	42	19	36	–	–	–
Indigenous Risk Impact Screen (IRIS)—mental health and wellbeing
At risk (score 11 +)	88	–	–	–	–	–
Quality of life (%)
WHO-Quality of Life (8 item version)^c
Total score for all 6 domains: mean, median	26, 26	30, 31	–	–	–	–
Index score (raw score for each of the 8 items):	25	30	–	–	–	–
Individual domain scores: mean, median
1. Quality of life	5.9, 6.0	8.3, 8.0	–	–	–	–
2. Health	5.9, 6.0	7.3, 8.0	–	–	–	–
3. Physical quality of life	6.7, 7.0	8.1, 8.0	–	–	–	–
4. Psychological quality of life	6.5, 6.0	7.5, 8.0	–	–	–	–
5. Satisfaction with social relationships	6.3, 6.0	7.0, 8.0	–	–	–	–
6. Satisfaction with environment	6.3, 7.0	7.4, 8.0	–	–	–	–

^aData varied for numbers of clients for different measures (range: n = 119 to n = 200; for Namatjira Haven)
^bData varied for numbers of clients for different measures (range: n = 703 for The Glen Centre)
^cNamatjira Haven uses the 26-item WHO-Qol while The Glen Centre uses the 8-item, which is a subset of the longer 26-item instrument. To assist with comparability, only the subset of 8-items collected by both services were considered

ISSN: 1940-0640