Skip to main content
Download PDF

Canadian Veteran chronic disease prevalence and health services use in the five years following release: a matched retrospective cohort study using routinely collected data

BMC Public Health volume 22, Article number: 1678 (2022) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Occupational exposures may result in Canadian military Veterans having poorer health and higher use of health services after transitioning to civilian life compared to the general population. However, few studies have documented the physical health and health services use of Veterans in Canada, and thus there is limited evidence to inform public health policy and resource allocation.

Methods

In a retrospective, matched cohort of Veterans and the Ontario general population between 1990–2019, we used routinely collected provincial administrative health data to examine chronic disease prevalence and health service use. Veterans were defined as former members of the Canadian Armed Forces or RCMP. Crude and adjusted effect estimates, and 95% confidence limits were calculated using logistic regression (asthma, COPD, diabetes, myocardial infarction, rheumatoid arthritis, family physician, specialist, emergency department, and home care visits, as well as hospitalizations). Modified Poisson was used to estimate relative differences in the prevalence of hypertension. Poisson regression compares rates of health services use between the two groups.

Results

The study included 30,576 Veterans and 122,293 matched civilians. In the first five years after transition to civilian life, Veterans were less likely than the general population to experience asthma (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.48–0.53), COPD (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.29–0.36), hypertension (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.71–0.76), diabetes (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.67–0.76), myocardial infarction (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.63–0.92), and rheumatoid arthritis (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.60–0.92). Compared to the general population, Veterans had greater odds of visiting a primary care physician (OR 1.76, 95% CI 1.70–1.83) or specialist physician (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.35–1.42) at least once in the five-year period and lower odds of visiting the emergency department (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.92–0.97). Risks of hospitalization and of receiving home care services were similar in both groups.

Conclusions

Despite a lower burden of comorbidities, Veterans had slightly higher physician visit rates. While these visits may reflect an underlying need for services, our findings suggest that Canadian Veterans have good access to primary and specialty health care. But in light of contradictory findings in other jurisdictions, the underlying reasons for our findings warrant further study.

Peer Review reports

Background

Globally, there are approximately 17 million military Veterans living in the United States [1], over 2 million armed forces Veterans residing in the United Kingdom [2], and approximately 597,200 Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) Veterans living in Canada [3]. During their military service, Veterans are exposed to a variety of unique occupational hazards (e.g., deployment to war zones, physically demanding tasks, etc.), placing them at risk for service-related injury, illness, and disability (e.g., traumatic brain injury, mental illness, limb amputation, etc.) [4, 5]. Thus, a substantial proportion of Veterans are also clients of Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC) [3], meaning that they receive additional support or benefits from VAC. While employed in the military, CAF members receive customized healthcare through the Department of National Defence to maintain a level of health and wellness that meets employer standards. However, the approximately 4,000–5,000 CAF members (and a comparative number of reserve force members) who are released each year receive the majority of their healthcare from civilian healthcare professionals in provincial and territorial health systems [6]. This differs from the US, which provides health services to all eligible Veterans in hospitals, clinics, counseling centres and long-term care facilities separate from the private healthcare system and funded by the Department of Veterans Affairs [7].

While there is a wealth of data from the US [8,9,10] and other countries [11, 12] supporting the delivery of evidence-based healthcare to Veterans, information on the health and health services use patterns of Canadian Veterans is limited. Research from the US demonstrates that Veterans have higher rates of diabetes [13, 14], chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [14, 15], arthritis [16, 17], high blood pressure [14, 18], and cancer [14, 17] than members of the general population. In the UK and Australia, Veterans have also been reported to have higher rates of cardiovascular disease [19,20,21]. However, military operations, military lifestyle, and military and post-service healthcare systems can vary significantly between countries and the underlying prevalence of chronic disease and health services use may also vary between countries. As such, Canada-specific data are needed to accurately inform healthcare policy and resource allocation for Veterans.

Only a small number of studies on post-discharge health risks and healthcare seeking behaviours among Canadian Veterans exist. Most of these studies focus on mental health [22,23,24], and the remainder rarely compare risks directly with the general population or measure disease or health service use status using administrative health system data. For example, a 2016 Veterans Affairs Canada and Statistics Canada-administered survey found that, compared to the 2013/14 Canadian general population, CAF Veterans reported higher prevalence of arthritis and cancer but similar or lower prevalence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), asthma, and diabetes [25]. Although a similar proportion of Veterans reported having a regular medical doctor and consulting with a family doctor or a specialist in the previous year as the general population, these findings are thought to be an underestimate of need given the higher rates of disability, chronic pain and other chronic illness among Veterans [26,27,28]. However, this survey relied on self-reported data from a small national sample of Veterans (n = 2,755) and may not be representative of Canadian Veterans residing in Ontario. Population-based routinely collected administrative health data have considerable advantages over survey data for estimating the prevalence of physical health conditions and the rates of health service use amongst Canadian Veterans relative to the general population. Primary amongst these is that studies using de-identified population-based administrative data do not rely on a sample, but instead capture the whole population of interest. Administrative data also do not rely on self-report, avoiding participation bias and recall bias in survey responses.

Methods

Study aim, design and setting

In this study, we used population-based administrative health and health services data from Ontario to compare the prevalence of health conditions (asthma, COPD, diabetes, hypertension, myocardial infarction, and rheumatoid arthritis) and health services use, defined as use of primary care, specialist care, emergency department visits, hospitalizations, and home care by CAF Veterans with the general population of Ontario, Canada. This information will be valuable to Canadian healthcare planners and providers in managing the health of Veterans in their home communities.

We used a retrospective, matched cohort design of Veterans and the Ontario general population. Ontario is the most populous province in Canada, with an estimated 14.7 million inhabitants as of March 31, 2020 [29]. It is also home to eight CAF bases, the Royal Military College of Canada, the Department of National Defence Headquarters, and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) headquarters [23]. This study received ethics approval from the University of Manitoba’s Health Research Ethics Board (protocol number HS22485).

Data sources

The data for this study are held at ICES (formerly the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences), a not-for-profit health services and policy research institute that provides stewardship over Ontario’s administrative health data. We linked the following ICES administrative datasets at the individual level using unique encoded identifiers: the Ontario Health Insurance Plan (OHIP) database (enrolment in provincial health insurance plan, physician billing records); the Ontario Drug Benefit database (enrolment in income support programs, long-term care stay); the National Rehabilitation Reporting System (rehabilitation stay); the Registered Persons Database (sociodemographic data, including Veteran status, age, sex, residential geography, neighbourhood median income, date of death, and end date of OHIP eligibility); the ICES Physician Database (physician specialty); the Canadian Institute of Health Information (CIHI) Discharge Abstract Database and the CIHI-Same Day Surgery databases (hospitalizations, including diagnoses and interventions); the National Ambulatory Care Reporting System (emergency department visits, including diagnostic and service information); and the Home Care database (publicly funded home care services, including those provided by nurses and allied health professionals, and general homemaking services).

Veteran status

We defined Veterans as former members of the CAF or RCMP who provided evidence of their military service to the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care (MOHLTC) at the time of enrolment in OHIP. Health insurance coverage transitions from federal to provincial oversight at the time of departure from the CAF and RCMP. In Ontario, standard waiting periods for provincial health insurance are waived when evidence of CAF or RCMP service is provided; an administrative military service code and service start, and end dates are linked to the individual’s provincial health card. The MOHLTC provided an anonymized list of individuals with an administrative military service code linked to their health card number to ICES. Data anonymization, linkage to the unique encoded identifier (ICES Key Number), and removal of the health card number were performed according to standard ICES protocol by the ICES Data Acquisition team. Identifying information was removed from the cohort prior to access by the study authors.

Veterans were included in the study if they registered for OHIP between January 1, 1990, and December 31, 2019. The date of OHIP registration is a close approximation of the Veteran’s release date from the CAF or RCMP [30]. We excluded Veterans who had OHIP coverage while still engaged in CAF or RCMP service, as indicated by OHIP billing record dates, or who were younger than 16 years of age at the start date of military or RCMP service. We have previously compared the representativeness and expected prevalence of Veterans in this cohort to federal and provincial statistics for Veterans and RCMP [30].

Matched civilian comparator cohorts

Veterans were matched with up to four members of the general population with replacement. Each Veteran’s OHIP registration date was used as the index date for the matched civilian reference groups. Eligible members of the general population were alive at the study index date. To reduce the likelihood of the healthy worker effect, where people who are employed generally experience lower mortality and morbidity than the general population (which includes those who cannot work due to disability or illness) [31], we selected members of the general population most likely to be employed during the period of military or RCMP service of the matched Veteran. As a result, we excluded members of the general population who had a long-term care stay, attended a rehabilitation facility, or received disability or income support during the period in which they would have been eligible for military service. The general population cohort was hard matched on age (birth year), sex, residential geography, and median neighbourhood income quintile in the index year. Individuals were assigned to one of fourteen geographic regions previously used for healthcare planning and provision based on their postal code. Median neighbourhood income quintile was derived from postal code and Canada Census information.

Outcome variables

The study had two primary outcome categories: chronic disease prevalence and health service use. Both categories were measured in the five-year period following the index date. Persons were followed until end of OHIP coverage (e.g., moved out of province), death, or until the end of the study period (December 31, 2019). Asthma, COPD, diabetes, hypertension, myocardial infarction, and rheumatoid arthritis were identified using standard algorithms at ICES, which are based on validated algorithms using data from physician visits, emergency department visits and hospitalizations [32,33,34,35,36,37]. The five-year prevalence of each chronic disease was estimated. Health service use outcomes included primary care physician visits, specialist physician visits, emergency department visits, hospitalizations, and home care visits, and were derived from the databases described above. Primary care visits were defined as visits to doctors with specialties in family medicine or family medicine/emergency medicine. Specialist physician visits were defined as all other physician visits. All health services use outcomes were measured as dichotomous variables (yes/no) and counts (number of encounters within the follow-up period).

Covariates

Covariates for models assessing chronic disease were held at their baseline status and included: age (continuous), sex, residential geography, socioeconomic status, and rurality of residence. Socioeconomic status was characterized by median community income quintile (1 = lowest to 5 = highest) using Canada Census data linked to postal codes. The Rurality Index of Ontario (RIO) [38] and participants’ postal codes were used to determine rurality of residence. For the RIO, municipalities are given a score ranging from 0–100 based on their total population, population density, and travel times to healthcare centres [39]. Using participants’ postal codes, we categorized RIO scores as major urban centres (0–9), non-major urban areas (10–30), rural areas (31–50), and rural-remote areas (51 +). Covariates for models assessing health services use also included the prevalence of asthma, COPD, diabetes, hypertension, myocardial infarction, and rheumatoid arthritis.

Statistical analysis

Demographic characteristics between the Veteran and general populations were compared using standardized differences and variance ratios [40]. Prevalence estimates are presented for Veterans and the general population. The number and percentage of Veterans and the general population who used each health service and the median number of times those individuals accessed that resource with interquartile range are described overall. Crude and adjusted prevalence risk ratios with 95% CI were computed using logistic regression models for asthma, COPD, diabetes, myocardial infarction, rheumatoid arthritis. Modified Poisson regression with robust error variance regression models were used for hypertension. Crude and adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were estimated for health service use dichotomous outcomes using logistic regression. Crude rate ratios and 95% CI were estimated for the count of each health services use outcome using Poisson models with a log link. Amount of follow-up time was included as an offset in the models. Prevalence ratios were adjusted for matching variables (baseline age, sex, residential geography, neighbourhood median income quintile) and rurality. Odds and rate ratios of health services use were further adjusted for the presence of measured chronic diseases. Stratified effect estimates were calculated for males and females. Two-sided hypothesis tests were completed, and P-values less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant. All analyses were performed using SAS 9.3 [41].

Sensitivity analyses

We created matched comparator cohorts using hard matching with replacement on age and sex alone, as well as on age, sex, and residential geography for comparability with other studies contrasting Veteran health with the general population [42]. We also restricted the cohort to those who had at least one year of follow up. In both of these analyses, we repeated the analytic plan described above.

Results

A total of 36,163 Veterans were eligible for inclusion in this study and, after applying the exclusion criteria, the study group comprised 31,760 individuals (Fig. 1). Of these, 30,576 Veterans were age-, sex-, geography- and income-matched to 122,293 residents of the general population who did not have a record of a long-term care stay, had not been admitted to a rehabilitation facility, and had not received disability or income support during the period in which they would have been eligible for military service (matching rate 96.8%). Among Veterans, 14.7% were female and more than half left the CAF or RCMP at the age of 40 or older. In terms of distribution across the study period, 17.3% of the study group left the CAF or RCMP between 1990–1995, 18.5% between 1996–2000, 14.8% between 2001–2005, 17.1% between 2006–2010, 16.5% between 2011 and 2015 and 15.9% between 2016 and 2019. Overall, 51% of Veterans served for twenty or more years, 16.8% for 10–19 years, 13.8% for five to nine years, and 18.4% served less than five years. Table 1 presents the baseline demographic characteristics of Canadian Veterans living in Ontario and their age-, sex-, geography- and income-matched comparisons from the general population. Overall, 0.5% of both the Veteran and the general population groups died during the study timeframe. Median follow-up time was five years in both groups.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Flow chart for Veteran cohort creation OHIP: Ontario Health Insurance Plan; MOHLTC: Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care; CAF: Canadian Armed Forces; RCMP: Royal Canadian Mounted Police

Full size image
Table 1 Sociodemographic characteristics of Veterans and age, sex, region of residence and income matched general population comparison cohort (n = 152,869)
Full size table

Table 2 describes the prevalence of asthma, COPD, hypertension, diabetes, myocardial infarction, and rheumatoid arthritis in Veterans in the five years following release and in the primary matched general population and summarizes the prevalence risk ratios for each chronic disease in Veterans compared to the general population. After adjusting for confounders, Veterans had a significantly lower prevalence of all measured chronic diseases than the general population, ranging from a 68% lower prevalence of COPD to a 24% lower prevalence of myocardial infarction during the first five years following release.

Table 2 Unadjusted and adjusted risk ratios of chronic disease (Reference: age-, sex-, geography- and median community income-matched general population cohort)
Full size table

Table 3 describes the proportion of Veterans and matched cohort who had at least one physician visit, emergency department visit, hospitalization, or homecare visit in the five years following release and summarizes the relative risk ratios comparing Veterans to the general population. Odds ratios increased in magnitude when comorbidities were added to the models as a means of adjusting for health service need. After adjusting for confounders, the odds of a primary care visit were 76% higher for Veterans compared to the general population and 39% higher for a specialist physician visit. Veterans had 5% lower odds of having at least one visit to the emergency department and were as likely as the general population to have a hospital admission or receive a homecare visit.

Table 3 Odds ratios of health care visits, by visit type and Veteran status
Full size table

Table 4 describes the median number of each healthcare encounter among those with at least one visit in the five years following release and summarizes the relative rate ratios comparing rates of health services use between Veterans and the general population. After adjusting for confounders, Veterans had a slightly higher relative rate of primary care physician visits, specialist physician visits, and emergency department visits than the general population, ranging from 6–9% higher. Hospitalization and home care rates were similar between groups.

Table 4 Relative rate ratios of health care visits, by visit type and Veteran status
Full size table

Stratification by sex

Comparisons between Veteran and general population health and health services use were stratified by sex (Supplementary Tables 1–3). For both sexes, effect estimates for Veterans compared to general population aligned with the main effects presented in Tables 2, 3 and 4 albeit more closely among males than females.

Sensitivity analyses

Results were robust to comparisons with an age- and sex-matched comparison group and with an age-, sex- and geography-matched comparator group (results available from authors). Results were also robust to excluding those with less than one year of potential follow-up data (results available from authors).

Discussion

Military service places greater physical and mental stress on its members than many other occupations and there is potential for members of the service to be exposed to environmental stimuli and/or physical conditions that could exacerbate chronic illness. On the other hand, a healthy worker effect, i.e., a tendency among people who are actively employed to be healthier [43], would not be unexpected in military Veterans, particularly in the first five-years following release. Our study documented a lower prevalence of asthma, COPD, hypertension, diabetes, myocardial infarction, and rheumatoid arthritis in Canadian Veterans relative to the general population. However, these findings differ from much of the published literature in this field of research. For example, in 2019, the Life After Service Studies (LASS) research program, which collects survey data from Canadian Veterans on their transition to civilian life, reported a higher lifetime prevalence of asthma among Veterans compared to civilians, and noted that self-reported rates of lifetime high blood pressure, depression, and anxiety were increasing over time [44]. Among Veterans in Scotland, the prevalence of cardiovascular disease (acute myocardial infarction, peripheral arterial disease, stroke) after a mean follow-up period of 38 years is slightly higher [21] and the prevalence of COPD after a mean follow-up period of 28 years is similar between Veterans and civilians [45]. In the US, Veterans have been reported to have higher age and sex standardized lifetime prevalence of diabetes [46, 47], rheumatoid arthritis and hypertension (the latter two linked to PTSD) [48, 49] compared to civilians. Reasons for the differences between our findings and other reports could include the methods by which the data were collected (e.g., in studies using survey data, people are more likely to respond if they have a complaint or concern, or if they require more services), analyzed (differences in results with direct comparisons versus the use of standardization), or variation in the specific study cohort or timeframe examined. Our study limited the time period of interest to the five years after release, whereas many other studies cited here report on Veterans’ long-term health outcomes. Future research could focus on routinely collected administrative health data so that we can better describe Veterans’ need for support related to chronic illnesses, and on comparing the quality and quantity of healthcare Veterans with a diagnosis receive in comparison to the general population. These studies would provide a more robust and comprehensive understanding of potential gaps in care.

Despite lower prevalence of common chronic illnesses, our study found the odds of using health services were higher or similar for Veterans compared to the general population. In particular, we documented higher rates of primary care and specialist physician visits and lower rates of emergency department visits among Veterans. Hospitalization rates and rates of receiving home care services were similar in both groups. Veterans’ health service use patterns reported in the literature are mixed. In the US, higher health service use among Veterans is often linked to elevated likelihood of adverse health outcomes, particularly among older Veterans: risk factors like smoking and alcohol misuse and higher rates of cardiovascular disease [50], mental disorders [50], and osteoarthritis [51] have been identified as drivers of this higher service use, as have higher frailty scores [52]. Veterans in New Zealand are reported to have higher hospitalization rates than the general public [53]; in the UK, Veterans with a self-reported mental health problem are more likely to be admitted to hospital for a chronic condition (e.g., hypertension, gastrointestinal disorders, joint disorders) [54]. There is also substantial concern about lack of access to mental health services and stigma in seeking mental health care [55]. Our study results, then, present something of a paradox in that lower rates of illness occurred in a population with higher health service use. This finding may reflect visits to physicians for conditions we didn’t measure in this study but are commonly associated with occupational military stressors, such as musculoskeletal injuries, hearing loss, or other operational injury such as traumatic brain injury [56,57,58]. Increased likelihood of visiting a physician among Veterans may relate to military-specific help-seeking behaviours resulting from a culture of maintaining peak condition of health to ensure operational readiness. Our findings may also represent an example of achieving good health through increased use of health services, surveillance, and monitoring, supported by the observed lower likelihood of visiting the emergency department but contradicted by similar rates of hospitalization. Further research exploring these potential explanations is warranted to understand why differences exist between Veterans and the general population and to determine whether the observed healthier status of Veterans can be sustained over time and/or be translated to the general population.

This study contributes novel information on Canadian Veterans’ health and health services use with important implications for health system and public health planners. Like civilians, Veterans are users of the Canadian healthcare system and must be accounted for when considering the overall health of the population and how health system resources are distributed. Veterans may leave military service with better health than the general population, but there is little understanding of military culture among healthcare providers [59, 60], making it difficult for the existing health system to support Veterans in maintaining this apparent advantage. Further studies are needed to examine in more detail what specific factors contribute to maintaining the health of Veterans and to identify conditions and illnesses more prevalent in this group, as well as opportunities to intervene on these conditions. Lessons learned from the health and health care use patterns of military Veterans could then be applied in the public health system to improve outcomes in the general population of Canada and support overall population health. As well, further analysis of age, sex and gender differences in Veteran outcomes will be important as our understanding of required supports for members of the military and their families continues to grow [61, 62].

Study limitations

Although the use of population-based administrative health data has many advantages, there are also some limitations related to the datasets used in this study that are worth noting. Veterans Affairs Canada estimates that approximately 1,050 Veterans are released from the CAF and take up civilian residence in Ontario each year [25]. While the true denominator of Veterans living in Ontario during our study timeframe is not known, the number of Veterans entering our cohort per year approximated the expected number of Veterans who take up residence in Ontario annually. Further, the overall age, sex, and length of service distribution in our cohort is similar to that reported by Veterans Affairs Canada with a slight exception: our cohort has fewer younger veterans (< 25 years old) and a larger number of older veterans (50 and older) than expected. This is likely explained by the inclusion in our cohort of RCMP Veterans who released between January 1, 1990 and March 31, 2013 [30]. We are unable to study CAF and RCMP Veterans who released during this timeframe separately as the MOHLTC includes both under a single Veteran status identifier variable. However, the majority of our cohort are likely to be Veterans of the CAF rather than the RCMP, as fewer than 200 RCMP Veterans take up residence in Ontario per year [30] and after March 31, 2013, only CAF Veterans were included in the cohort. Finally, we were only able to examine six chronic conditions in this study, but Veterans may experience other illnesses at higher rates than members of the Ontario general population. Further research is needed to validate additional chronic disease algorithms to support future investigations into other conditions. Routinely collected health administrative data do not include information on lifestyle factors that may explain differences in chronic disease prevalence, such as smoking, alcohol use, or physical activity levels. Future research comparing these lifestyle factors between Veterans and non-Veterans over time would provide context to these relative measures of disease.

Conclusions

Our study found that more Veterans visited a physician visit than the general population, a striking finding given the lower burden of comorbidities amongst Veterans. While this may reflect a need for services for diagnoses, disabilities or illnesses we did not measure in our study, our findings suggest that Canadian Veterans have good access to primary and specialty health care. However, there continues to be room for improvement and lessons that could be learned from Veteran health and health service use patterns. Calls to action to better support CAF Veterans have included increasing cultural competency among healthcare providers [59], increasing awareness of specialized healthcare services funded by VAC that eligible Veterans could be referred for [63], and enhancing collaboration and communication between healthcare providers and VAC staff to ensure continuity of care [64]. In order to ensure Canadian Veterans are truly well supported health system planners, analysts and researchers should take careful account of this population for both health system resources and health services research. The reasons for our findings in light of contradictory findings in other jurisdictions also warrant further study, and lessons learned could be applied in the public health system to improve outcomes in the general population of Canada.

Availability of data and materials

The data set from this study is held securely in coded form at ICES. While data sharing agreements prohibit ICES from making the data set publicly available, access may be granted to those who meet pre-specified criteria for confidential access, available at www.ices.on.ca/DAS. The full data set creation plan and underlying analytic code are available from the authors upon request, understanding that the programs may rely upon coding templates or macros that are unique to ICES.

Abbreviations

CAF:

Canadian armed forces

CI:

Confidence interval

CIHI:

Canadian institute of health information

COPD:

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

MOHLTC:

Ministry of health and long-term care

OHIP:

Ontario health insurance plan

RCMP:

Royal Canadian mounted police

RIO:

Rurality index of Ontario

UK:

United Kingdom

US:

United States

VAC:

Veterans affairs Canada

References

  1. Statista. Veterans in the United States - statistics and facts [Internet]. [cited 2021 Dec 16]. Available from: https://www.statista.com/topics/3450/veterans-in-the-united-states/

  2. Office for Veterans’ affairs. Veterans factsheet 2020 [Internet]. [cited 2021 Dec 16]. Available from: www.gov.uk/government/statistics/annual-population-survey-uk-armed-forces-veterans-residing-in-great-britain-2017

  3. Veterans affairs Canada. Veterans Affairs Canada: Facts and figures. March 2020 edition. [Internet]. Ottawa, ON; Available from: https://www.veterans.gc.ca/pdf/about-vac/news-media/facts-figures/facts-and-figures-mar2020-1.pdf

  4. Geretto M, Ferrari M, Angelis R, Crociata F, Sebastinai N, Pulliero A, et al. Occupational exposures and environmental health hazards of military personnel. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18:5395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Korzeniewski K. Health hazards in areas of military operations conducted in different climatic and sanitary conditions. Int Marit Heal. 2011;62(1):41–62.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Thompson J, W L. Backgrounder for the road to civilian life (R2CL) program of research into the mental health and well-being of Canadian Armed Forces members/Veterans during military-civilian transition. Ottawa: Veterans Affairs Canada; 2015.

  7. U.S. Department of Veterans affairs. VA health care [Internet]. 2021 [cited 2021 Nov 24]. Available from: https://www.va.gov/health-care/

  8. The National Academies of Sciences Engineering and Medicine, Health and Medicine Division, Board on Health Care Services, Committee to Evaluate the Department of Veterans Affairs Mental Health Services. Patient-Centered Care and the Veteran Experience. In: Evaluation of the Department of Veterans Affairs Mental Health Services. Washington, D.C.: Veterans Affairs Canada; 2018.

  9. Shulkin D. Why VA health care is different. Fed Pract. 2016;33(5):9–11.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Solberg L. Lessons for non VA care delivery systems from the U.S. Department of Veterans affairs quality enhancement research initiative: QUERI series. Implement Sci. 2009;26:4–9.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Dalton J, Thomas S, Melton H, Harden M, Eastwood A. The provision of services in the UK for UK armed forces veterans with PTSD: a rapid evidence synthesis [Internet]. Health Services and Delivery Research. Southampton: Veterans Affairs Canada; 2018. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK482398/.

  12. Oster C, Lawn S, Waddell E. Delivering services to the families of Veterans of current conflicts: a rapid review of outcomes for Veterans. J Mil Veteran Fam Heal. 2019;5(2):159–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Liu Y, Sayam S, Shao X, Wang K, Zheng S, Li Y, et al. Prevalence of and trends in diabetes among Veterans, United States, 2005–2014. Prev Chronic Dis. 2017;14: 170230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Eibner C, Krull H, Brown KM, Cefalu M, Mulcahy AW, Pollard M, et al. Current and Projected Characteristics and Unique Health Care Needs of the Patient Population Served by the Department of Veterans Affairs. Rand Health Q. 2016;5(4):13. PMID: 28083423; PMCID: PMC5158228.

  15. Murphy D, Chaudhry Z, Almoosa K, Panos R. High prevalence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among veterans in the urban midwest. Mil Med [Internet]. 2011 [cited 2021 Oct 1];176(5):552–60. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21634301/

  16. Dominick KL, Golightly YM, Jackson GL. Arthritis prevalence and symptoms among US non-veterans, veterans, and veterans receiving Department of Veterans affairs healthcare. J Rheumatol. 2006;33(2):348–54.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Hoerster KD, Lehavot K, Simpson T, McFall M, Reiber G, Nelson KM. Health and health behavior differences: U.S. military, veteran, and civilian men. Am J Prev Med. 2012;43(5):483–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Shrestha A, Ho T, Vie L, Labarthe D, Scheier L, Lester P, et al. Comparison of Cardiovascular Health Between US Army and Civilians. J Am Heart Assoc. 2019;8(12):e009056. https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.118.009056 (Available from: [cited 2021 Oct 1]).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Australian department of Veterans’ affairs. A study of the health of Australia’s Vietnam Veteran community. Melbourne: Veterans Affairs Canada; 1998.

  20. Sim M, Ikin J, McKenzie D. Health Study 2005: Australian Veterans of the Korean war [Internet]. Melbourne: Veterans Affairs Canada; 2005. Available from: http://www.dva.gov.au/aboutDVA/publications/health_research/korean_war/Pages/index.aspx.

  21. Bergman BP, Mackay DF, Pell JP. Trends in cardiovascular disease in Scottish military veterans: A retrospective cohort study. BMJ Open. 2021;11(7):1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Thompson J, VanTil L, Zamorski M, Garber B, Dursun S, Fikretoglu D, et al. Mental health of Canadian armed forces veterans: review of population studies. J Mil Veteran Fam Heal. 2016;2(1):70–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Mahar AL, Aiken AB, Whitehead M, Tien H, Cramm H, Fear NT, et al. Suicide in Canadian veterans living in Ontario: a retrospective cohort study linking routinely collected data. BMJ Open [Internet]. 2019 Jun 1 [cited 2021 Oct 1];9(6):e027343. Available from: https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/9/6/e027343

  24. Thompson J, Zamorski M, Sweet J, VanTil L, Sareen J, Pietrzak R, et al. Roles of physical and mental health in suicidal ideation in Canadian armed forces regular force veterans. Can J Public Heal. 2014;105:e109-115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. MacLean M, Poirier A, O’Connor T. Province of residence at release and post-release. Data from the income study. Charlottetown: Veterans Affairs Canada; 2011.

  26. MacLean MB, Sweet J, Mahar A, Gould S, Hall AL. Health care access and use among male and female Canadian armed forces veterans. Health Rep. 2021;32:17–22.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Perera E, Thompson JM, Asmundson GJG, El-Gabalawy R, Afifi TO, Sareen J, et al. Chronic pain: The Canadian Armed Forces members and Veterans mental health follow-up survey. 103138/jmvfh-2021-0051 [Internet]. 2021 Sep 14 [cited 2021 Dec 2];7(2):e20210051. https://doi.org/10.3138/jmvfh-2021-0051.

  28. Bisson EJ, Sawhney M, Duggan S, Good MA, Wilson R. Pain, mental health, and health care utilization of military Veterans compared to civilians in a chronic pain clinic. [Internet]. 2021. [cited 2021 Dec 2]. https://doi.org/10.3138/jmvfh-2021-0010.

  29. Statistics Canada. Annual population estimates by age and sex. Table 17–10–0005–01. 2016. Available from: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1710000501. [Cited 2018 Mar 23].

  30. Mahar AL, Aiken AB, Kurdyak P, Whitehead M, Groome P. Description of a longitudinal cohort to study the health of Canadian Veterans living in Ontario. J Mil Veteran Fam Heal. 2016;2(1):33–42. https://doi.org/10.3138/jmvfh.3721.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Porta M. A Dictionary of Epidemiology. 6th ed. Porta M, Greenland S, Hernán M, dos Santos Silva I, Last J, Burón A, editors. Oxford: Oxford University press; 2014.

  32. Austin PC, Daly PA, Tu J V. A multicenter study of the coding accuracy of hospital discharge administrative data for patients admitted to cardiac care units in Ontario. Am Heart J [Internet]. 2002 [cited 2021 Dec 16];144(2):290–6. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12177647/

  33. Gershon AS, Wang C, Guan J, Vasilevska-Ristovska J, Cicutto L, To T. Identifying patients with physician-diagnosed asthma in health administrative databases. Can Respir J [Internet]. 2009 [cited 2021 Dec 16];16(6):183–8. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20011725/

  34. Gershon AS, Wang C, Guan J, Vasilevska-Ristovska J, Cicutto L, To T. Identifying individuals with physcian diagnosed COPD in health administrative databases. COPD [Internet]. 2009 [cited 2021 Dec 16];6(5):388–94. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19863368/

  35. Hux JE, Ivis F, Flintoft V, Bica A. Diabetes in Ontario: determination of prevalence and incidence using a validated administrative data algorithm. Diabetes Care [Internet]. 2002 Mar [cited 2021 Dec 16];25(3):512–6. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11874939/

  36. Tu K, Campbell NR, Chen Z-L, Cauch-Dudek KJ, McAlister FA. Accuracy of administrative databases in identifying patients with hypertension. Open Med. 2007;14(1):1-e18 (/pmc/articles/PMC2801913/ Available from [cited 2021 Dec 16]).

  37. Widdifield J, Bernatsky S, Paterson J M, Tu K, Ng R, Thorne J C, et al. Accuracy of Canadian health administrative databases in identifying patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A validation study using the medical records of rheumatologists. Arthritis Care Res. 2013;65(10):1582–91.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Solomon Z, Mikulincer M. Trajectories of PTSD: a 20-year longitudinal study. Am J Psychiatry [Internet]. 2006 Apr 1 [cited 2021 Oct 1];163(4):659. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16585441/.

  39. Krali B. Measuring Rurality: RIO2008 BASIC: Methodology and Results. Toronto: Veterans Affairs Canada; 2008.

  40. Austin PC. Using the standardized difference to compare the prevalence of a binary variable between two groups in observational research. Commun Stat. 2009;38(6):1228–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. SAS Institute Inc. SAS Version 9.3. Cary, NC; 2008.

  42. Bergman BP, Mackay DF, Smith DJ, Pell JP. Non-fatal self-harm in Scottish military veterans: a retrospective cohort study of 57,000 veterans and 173,000 matched non-veterans. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2019;54(1):81–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-018-1588-9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Chowdhury R, Shah D, Payal A. Healthy worker effect phenomenon: Revisited with emphasis on statistical methods – A review. Indian J Occup Env Med. 2017;21(1):2–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Sweet J, Piorier A, Pound T, VanTil L. Well-being of Canadian Regular Force Veterans, Findings from LASS 2019 Survey [Internet]. Charlottetown: Veterans Affairs Canada; 2020. Available from: https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2020/acc-vac/V3-1-7-2020-eng.pdf.

  45. Bergman BP, Mackay DF, Pell JP. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in Scottish military veterans. J R Army Med Corps. 2018;164(1):25–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Roman J, Perez RL. COPD in VA hospitals. Clin Cornerstone. 2003;5(1):37–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Miller D, Safford M, Pogash L. Who has diabetes ? Best estimates of diabetes prevalence in the department. Diabetes Care. 2004;27:B10-21.

  48. Boscarino JA, Forsberg CW, Goldberg J. A twin study of the association between ptsd symptoms and rheumatoid arthritis. Psychosom Med. 2010;72(5):481–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Burg MM, Brandt C, Buta E, Schwartz J, Bathulapalli H, Dziura J, et al. Risk for incident hypertension associated with posttraumatic stress disorder in military veterans and the effect of posttraumatic stress disorder treatment. Psychosom Med. 2017;79(2):181–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Larson RJ, Welch HG. Risk for increased utilization and adverse health outcomes among men served by the veterans health administration. Mil Med. 2007;172(7):690–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Rivera JC, Amuan ME, Morris RM, Johnson AE, Pugh MJ. Arthritis, comorbidities, and care utilization in veterans of operations enduring and Iraqi Freedom. J Orthop Res. 2017;35(3):682–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Zylberglait Lisigurski M, Bueno YA, Karanam C, Andrade AD, Akkineni S, Cevallos V, et al. Healthcare utilization by frail, community-dwelling older veterans: A 1-year follow-up study. South Med J. 2017;110(11):699–704.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Cox B, McBride D, Broughton J, Tong D. Health conditions in a cohort of New Zealand Vietnam veterans: Hospital admissions between 1988 and 2009. BMJ Open. 2015;5(12):1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Goodwin L, Leightley D, Chui ZE, Landau S, McCrone P, Hayes RD, et al. Hospital admissions for non-communicable disease in the UK military and associations with alcohol use and mental health: A data linkage study. BMC Pub Health. 2020;20(1):1–17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-09300-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Fear N, Wood D, Wessely S. Health and social outcomes and health service experiences of UK military veterans a summary of the evidence. ACDMH/KCMHR, King’s College London. 2009. (November 2009). https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ukgwa/20130124054000, http://www.dh.gov.uk/prod_consum_dh/groups/dh_digitalassets/@dh/@en/@ps/documents/digitalasset/dh_113749.pdf.

  56. Mahar AL, Aiken AB, Cramm H, Whitehead M, Groome P, Kurdyak P. Mental health services use trends in Canadian Veterans: a population-based retrospective cohort study in Ontario. Can J Psychiatry. 2018;63(6):378–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/0706743717730826.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. VanTil L, Macintosh S, Thompson J, MacLean M, Campbell L, Sudom K, et al. 2013 Synthesis of Life After Service Studies. Charlottetown: Veterans Affairs Canada; 2014.

  58. Thompson J, VanTil L, Poirier A. Health and well-being of Canadian Armed Forces Veterans: findings from the 2013 Life After Service Survey. Charlottetown: Veterans Affairs Canada; 2014.

  59. Tam-Seto L, Krupa T, Stuart H, Aiken A, Lingley-Pottie P, Cramm H. Identifying military family cultural competencies: experiences of military and Veteran families in Canadian health care. J Mil Veteran Fam Heal. 2018;4(2):48–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Koonce T, Moore Z, Beck Dallaghan GL. Medical Students Learning to Take a Complete Military History. Fam Med [Internet]. 2021 Oct 4 [cited 2021 Dec 2];53(9):800–2. Available from: https://journals.stfm.org/familymedicine/2021/october/beck-dallaghan-2021-0029/

  61. Bélanger SAH, Pedlar D. The changing face of the military in Canada. 103138/jmvfh-62-0001 [Internet]. 2020 Aug 17 [cited 2021 Dec 2];6(2):1–2. Available from: https://jmvfh.utpjournals.press/doi/abs/https://doi.org/10.3138/jmvfh-6.2-0001

  62. Shoemaker M, Hlatky S von. Unblurring the lines of responsibility: the puzzle of veteran service provision and its gendered implications. J Vet Stud. 2020;6(2):88. https://doi.org/10.21061/jvs.v6i2.181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Pranger T, Murphy K, Thompson JM. Shaken world: Coping with transition to civilian life. Can Fam Physician [Internet]. 2009 Feb [cited 2021 Oct 1];55(2):159. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2642502/

  64. Thompson J, Scott K, Dubinsky L. Battlefield brain: unexplained symptoms and blast-related mild traumatic brain injury. Can Fam Physician [Internet]. 2008 Nov 1 [cited 2021 Oct 1];54(11):1549–51. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/19005124/?tool=EBI

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank IQVIA Solutions Canada Inc. for use of their Drug Information File.

Funding

The project was funded by the True Patriot Love Foundation through a collaboration between True Patriot Love and the Canadian Institute of Military and Veteran Health Research. The study funders had no role in study design, data analysis or interpretation, or writing of this manuscript. This study was supported in part by ICES, which is funded by an annual grant from the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care (MOHLTC). The opinions, results and conclusions reported in this paper are those of the authors and are independent from the funding sources. No endorsement by ICES or the Ontario MOHLTC is intended or should be inferred. Parts of this material are based on data and/or information compiled and provided by CIHI. However, the analyses, conclusions, opinions and statements expressed in the material are those of the author(s), and not necessarily those of CIHI. We thank IQVIA Solutions Canada Inc. for use of their Drug Information File.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. ICES, Toronto, Canada

    Alyson L. Mahar, Marlo Whitehead & Paul Kurdyak

  2. Manitoba Centre for Health Policy, Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada

    Alyson L. Mahar & Jennifer E. Enns

  3. Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

    Kate St. Cyr

  4. Faculty of Health, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada

    Alice B. Aiken

  5. School of Rehabilitation Therapy, Queen’s University, Kingston, Canada

    Heidi Cramm

  6. Institute for Health Policy, Management, and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

    Paul Kurdyak

Authors
  1. Alyson L. Mahar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kate St. Cyr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jennifer E. Enns
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Alice B. Aiken
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Marlo Whitehead
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Heidi Cramm
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Paul Kurdyak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

ALM conceived of the study, designed the work, acquired the data and interpreted the data, as well as drafted the manuscript. KS contributed to the study design, analytic plan, interpretation of the data, as well as drafted the manuscript. JEE interpreted the data, as well as drafted the manuscript. ABA contributed to the data acquisition, data interpretation, and critically revised the manuscript. HC contributed to data acquisition, data interpretation, as well as critically revised the manuscript. MW analyzed the data as well as critically revised the manuscript. PK contributed to study design, data acquisition, data interpretation, as well as critically revised the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alyson L. Mahar.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The study was carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations in the Declaration of Helsinki. We obtained ethics approval from the University of Manitoba’s Health Research Ethics Board (protocol number HS22485), and the study protocol underwent a privacy impact assessment at ICES, where the data are held. ICES is an independent, non-profit research institute whose legal status under Ontario’s health information privacy law allows it to collect and analyze health care and demographic data, without consent, for health system evaluation and improvement. Informed consent was not obtained from study participants, as Sect. 45 of the Personal Health Information Protection Act permits prescribed entities such as ICES to collect data and conduct analyses to improve health and healthcare without individual consent.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Additional file 1:

Supplementary Table 1. Unadjusted and adjusted risk ratios of chronic disease stratified by sex (reference: age-, sex-, geography- and median community income-matched general population cohort). Supplementary Table 2. Relative odds ratios of health care visits, by sex, visit type and Veteran status. Supplementary Table 3. Relative rate ratios of health care visits, by sex, visit type and Veteran status.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mahar, A.L., Cyr, K.S., Enns, J.E. et al. Canadian Veteran chronic disease prevalence and health services use in the five years following release: a matched retrospective cohort study using routinely collected data. BMC Public Health 22, 1678 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-14053-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-14053-4

Keywords

BMC Public Health

ISSN: 1471-2458

Contact us