Site maintenance Wednesday, November 13th, 2024. Please note that access to some content and account information will be unavailable on this date.
Skip to main content
Full access
Articles
Published Online: 31 October 2014

Health Risk Factors and Differences in Outcomes Between Younger and Older Veterans Using VA Transitional Housing

Abstract

Objective:

This study examined age-related differences in general medical and mental health risk factors for veterans participating in the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Grant Per Diem (GPD) transitional supportive housing program. The subpopulation of older homeless veterans is growing, and little is known about the implications of this fact for health care providers and for supportive programs intended to meet homeless veterans’ needs.

Methods:

Data were obtained from the VA records of all veterans (N=40,820) who used the GPD program during fiscal years 2003 to 2009. Unconditional adjusted and unadjusted odds ratios for general medical and psychiatric characteristics were calculated and were the primary study focus. Significant predictors of homeless program completion assessed from univariate models were then evaluated in multivariate models.

Results:

Younger (<55) and older (≥55) homeless veterans reported an equal number of days homeless before enrollment. Younger veterans averaged 19 fewer days in GPD. Older veterans had more general medical problems and approximately $500 more in program costs.

Conclusions:

Findings from this study indicate that older homeless veterans are at increased risk of serious medical problems. This group is especially vulnerable to experiencing negative consequences related to homelessness. Addressing these complex needs will allow the VA to provide enhanced care to older homeless veterans.
In 2009, President Obama and U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Secretary Eric Shinseki announced the federal government’s goal to end veteran homelessness by 2015. While major programs for homeless veterans are being implemented, little is known about the growing subpopulation of older homeless veterans and its implications for service provision. What is known is that, compared with younger adults, older adults in the general population experience more physical, behavioral, economic, and other risk factors associated with negative health outcomes (1,2). Risk and vulnerability increase with age as people become more susceptible to chronic disease, adverse effects of multiple prescription medications, nutritional problems, loss of functional abilities, and overall life loss and change (3). In addition, older adults are more likely than others to live in poverty and to lack the financial resources to obtain needed services (4). As homelessness in general is associated with increased risk of infection or contagious disease (5) and to exposure to elements (6), injury (7,8), and malnutrition (9,10), older homeless veterans are likely to be at even greater risk of negative outcomes resulting from the combined effects of age-associated decline in health and of changes in socioeconomic status (11,12).
Prior studies have identified differences in the needs and preferences of younger and older homeless populations, with older adults more likely to have chronic medical conditions, less likely to report the need for substance abuse treatment (despite high rates of substance use), and more likely to utilize street outreach and shelter-based services (13). Other research examining age differences found that compared with younger homeless adults, fewer older homeless people reported a history of drug abuse, although no differences existed for problems related to alcohol or mental health (14). In contrast, other research has documented substantial differences in comparisons of older and younger homeless adults in overall mental health, with older homeless people having higher rates of cognitive impairment and psychiatric disorders (15).
A study comparing older homeless adults (≥45 years) from the era of the military draft with younger adults (ages 20–44) from the era of all-volunteer forces found that younger veterans more often had drug and marital problems, spent time in a psychiatric ward, and were homeless for six months or more compared with nonveterans (16). Among older adults, veterans demonstrated a lower proportion of homelessness but a higher proportion of alcohol and psychiatric problems compared with nonveterans. The mixed findings concerning age of cohort may indicate that the veterans from the all-volunteer forces will continue to have problems into older age.
The VA’s Grant Per Diem (GPD) program offers grants to community-based providers to acquire and renovate facilities to create housing for veterans. The program also provides funding to defray operational expenses and the cost of supportive services, which may include vocational, substance abuse, and educational interventions. The GPD program provides housing support for a period of up to two years and is designed as a transitional program leading to permanent housing. Community-based providers differ in their eligibility requirements for admission and the mix of support services provided. Homeless veterans typically enter the GPD program from the street or a shelter but may move into GPD programs directly from a hospital, halfway house, or other short-term housing situation (17). Each veteran entering a GPD program has an individualized treatment program that includes a plan for housing and, as required, for employment, training, general medical care, and behavioral health care. Successful program completion is defined as accomplishment of all individualized treatment program goals.
Despite the number of published studies focusing on homeless veterans, few studies have examined how aging affects veterans’ health outcomes and participation in VA homeless services. In response to this gap in our knowledge about older homeless veterans, this study examined general medical and mental health risk factors and the differences in outcomes between younger (<55) and older (≥55) veterans in the VA transitional supportive housing program. In addition, we examined how age and health affect program completion.

Methods

Sample and Data Source

Approval from the University of South Florida Institutional Review Board was obtained for the purposes of this study. We used a national data set provided by the VA Northeast Program Evaluation Center that consisted of deidentified records of veterans who were admitted into and discharged from the GPD program during federal fiscal years 2003 through 2009. The data set was derived from two sources of information, VA Forms X and D.

Individual characteristics (Form X).

Form X is a relatively comprehensive structured interview administered by program staff to veterans in the community entering specialized VA homelessness service programs. Form X captures sociodemographic (such as gender, race-ethnicity, and marital status), psychosocial, health (including any serious medical condition, hypertension, or liver disease), housing (including length of homelessness, housing arrangement within the past 30 days, and type of housing), and employment (such as recent work history and payment for services) information. In addition, Form X captures mental health diagnosis (presence of psychiatric or mental health issues, such as depression or anxiety) and substance use disorder diagnosis (including substance abuse or dependence) data reported by participants. Their responses to items about the presence of general medical, mental, or substance abuse issues were collected and treated as simple dichotomous responses (yes or no).

Outcomes (Form D).

Form D is an administrative form completed by program staff that captures treatment and outcome status at the point of discharge from the GPD program. Information is recorded for the veteran’s living situation on program exit (such as no residence, apartment, incarceration facility, living with friends, or living alone), reason for program exit (such as successful completion, illness, elopement, or program violation), employment on program exit (full-time, part-time, or student), and arrangements for VA financial benefits (such as a pension or VA service-connected disability payments).

Analyses

Data are presented as means with standard deviations, and categorical data are presented as frequencies and percentages. All analyses compared veterans under 55 years of age with those 55 and older. Age 55 was chosen as a cutpoint because it is generally used by the VA and in homelessness research to distinguish older and younger persons (18). Student’s t test or chi square analyses were performed where appropriate. To compensate for potential type I errors due to the large sample size, we calculated effect sizes for all t tests and chi square analyses. Cohen’s d effect sizes were categorized as small (.2–<.5), medium (.5–<.8), and large (≥.8) (19). Absolute values less than .2 were considered meaningless, regardless of level of significance. Cramér’s phi was calculated for chi square effect size estimates (20). Effect sizes of phi were interpreted as small (.1–<.3), medium (.3–<.5), and large (≥.5). Absolute values less than .1 were considered meaningless, regardless of statistical significance. Because our statistical interpretation was based on effect sizes, we did not correct p values for the number of analyses conducted (for example, for Bonferroni adjustments).
Initial comparisons used Student’s t test or chi square analyses, where appropriate. In addition, using unconditional logistic regression, we modeled the probability of program completion (program completion=yes) after adjusting for covariates and potential confounding variables (including age, race-ethnicity, days homeless, general physical and mental well-being, and substance abuse history). Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals are presented for both unadjusted and adjusted models. A univariate assessment of the impact of predictors on program completion was conducted on all relevant parameter predictors through literature review or clinical judgment. Parameters significant in univariate models were subsequently evaluated in multivariate models. Model fitting for all models was assessed by the Homer and Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test and area-under-the-curve (AUC) diagnostics. We considered p<.05, two-tailed, to be statistically significant. All analyses were conducted with SAS, version 9.1.

Results

A total of 40,820 homeless veterans were in the GPD program between 2003 and 2009 and were therefore eligible for this analysis (Table 1). Homeless veterans were predominantly male (96.1%) and nonwhite (53.3%), and their mean±SD age was 49.1. When stratified by age, older homeless veterans were more likely to be white (54.1% versus 44.3%).
Table 1 Characteristics of veterans in the Grant Per Diem supportive housing program, 2003–2009
VariableAge <55 (N=30,679)Age ≥55 (N=10,141)All (N=40,820)
N%N%N%
Age (M±SD)45.7±6.7 59.4±4.8 49.1±8.6 
White13,59444.35,48754.119,08146.7
Male29,24595.39,94898.139,19396.1
Used VA services, past 6 months19,47363.56,95668.626,42964.7
Days homeless, past 30 days (M±SD)12.5±12.9 13.0±13.1 12.6±13.0 
Days housed, past 30 days (M±SD)9.3±12.1 9.9±12.4 9.5±12.1 
Estimated income, past 30 days (M±SD $)349.8±398.4 497.1±433.0 386.4±412.3 
Full-time work, past 3 years13,63144.62,82228.316,45340.3
Any work, past 30 days18,97862.17,29072.39,95724.4
VA SC/NSC pensiona1,5495.11,50214.93,0517.5
Non-VA support7,02822.93,47334.310,50125.7
a
Service-connected or non–service-connected Veterans Affairs disability benefit
A questionnaire assessing health status and a range of health issues—from oral and dental problems to tuberculosis—was administered to every homeless veteran at GPD program enrollment as part of the Form D interview. These data are presented in Table 2. In response to the item, “Do you have any serious medical problems?” a significantly greater proportion of older veterans (63.0%) responded yes, compared with 47.2% of younger veterans (p<.001). Older veterans presented with, on average, one more health problem compared with younger veterans (3.1 versus 2.3, p<.001). Health issues that affected older veterans were those traditionally associated with aging: hypertension (44.9% versus 25.2%, p<.001), heart and cardiovascular issues (21.1% versus 9.3%, p<.001), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or emphysema (16.8% versus 8.3%, p<.001). Across items assessing psychiatric problems, older and younger veterans were markedly similar on seven of 11 items. Older veterans were less likely to report either trouble controlling violent behavior (5.6% versus 6.6%, p<.001) or attempted suicide within the past 30 days (2.7% versus 3.3%, p<.003).
Table 2 Health and psychological characteristics of veterans in the Grant Per Diem program, 2003–2009a
CharacteristicAge <55 (N=30,679)Age ≥55 (N=10,141)   
N%N%χ2bpφ
Serious medical problem14,41047.26,36063.0762.06<.001.14
Oral or dental problems14,44447.15,35552.899.99<.001.04
Eye problem4,09413.32,06120.3289.89<.001.08
Hypertension7,73325.24,55844.91,411.30<.001.19
Heart or cardiovascular problem2,8529.32,13721.1985.29<.001.16
COPD or emphysemac2,5558.31,70616.8588.30<.001.12
Tuberculosis7662.53263.215.09<.001.02
Gastrointestinal problem4,95716.22,12821.0123.78<.001.06
Liver disease5,00016.31,93319.141.28<.001.03
Seizure disorder1,2914.24934.97.79<.005.01
Orthopedic problem11,59837.84,67846.1220.34<.001.07
Significant skin problems2,9499.61,26512.567.40<.001.04
Significant trauma4,32914.11,61615.920.42<.001.02
Diabetes1,1943.98258.1295.72<.001.09
Current psychiatric or emotional problem16,29953.15,38453.1.00.963.00
Previous hospitalization for psychiatric problem10,71534.93,34333.012.97<.001–.02
VA medical or psychiatric care, past 6 months19,47363.56,95668.687.33<.001.05
Issue in past 30 days       
 Serious depression14,48647.24,84547.81.06.303.01
 Serious anxiety or tension15,05849.15,00349.3.21.645.00
 Hallucinations2,5088.28758.62.04.154.01
 Trouble understanding, concentrating10,40233.93,61935.711.11<.001.02
 Trouble controlling violent behavior2,0146.65715.611.13<.001–.02
 Serious thoughts of suicide3,94212.81,23212.13.32.070–.01
 Attempted suicide1,0163.32762.78.60.003–.003
 Prescribed medication for psychological problem11,66138.03,85738.0.01.934.00
a
In addition to the values listed, veterans <55 had a mean±SD of 2.3±1.9 general medical problems, compared with 3.1±2.1 for veterans ≥55, t=38.2, df=40,815, p<.001, Cohen’s d=.40.
b
df=1
c
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
Table 3 presents a tabulated comparison of GPD program, housing, and employment outcomes, stratified by age. Time in the program and program cost were significantly different across age groups. Younger homeless veterans averaged 19 fewer days within the program (148.8 versus 130.1, p<.001) and approximately $500 less in program costs ($3,891.10 versus $3,374.20, p<.001). However, older veterans were less likely to complete the program (38.0% versus 50.5%, p<.001). Among homeless veterans with residence at discharge from the GPD program, older veterans reported a greater percentage of single-room occupancy (5.9% versus 4.6%) and living in an apartment or house (51.6% versus 48.1%), but a greater percentage of younger veterans left the program without sharing their plan for housing (17.1% versus 14.2%).
Table 3 Program, housing, and employment outcomes for veterans in the Grant Per Diem program, 2003–2009
OutcomeAge <55 (N=30,679)Age ≥55 (N=10,141)Test statisticdfpEffect size
N%N%
Days in program (M±SD)130.1±154.0 148.8±166.2 t=10.440,814<.001d=.06
Program cost (M±SD $)3,374.2±4,097.6 3,891.1±4,517.0 t=10.740,809<.001d=–.12
Completed program (yes)15,49750.53,85738.0χ2=228.602<.001φ=.07
Status on program discharge        
 Homeless again1,4414.74734.7χ2=111.427nsφ=.05
 Has residence28,93492.69,43393.0χ2=2.441.118φ=.001
 Living situation    χ2=112.117<.001φ=.05
  No residence1,4414.74734.7    
  Single-room occupancy1,3964.65935.9    
  Halfway house4,63915.11,39213.7    
  Institution2,0146.67087.0    
  Apartment or room in house14,77048.15,23051.6    
  Veteran left program without revealing plan5,24717.11,43714.2    
  Prison or jail3281.173.7    
  Other8422.72352.3    
  Living alone6,62521.63,07530.3χ2=320.501<.001φ=.09
 Employed on discharge11,24136.62,20721.8χ2=763.641<.001φ=–.14
Employment status    χ2=3,342.908<.001φ=.29
 Disabled or retired6,00919.64,93048.6    
 Unemployed9,34730.52,06420.6    
 Part-time or temporary2,1367.05505.4    
 Full-time9,10529.71,65716.3    
 VA’s IT/CWTa1,6425.43933.9    
 Other vocational training211.727.3    
 Unpaid volunteer52.218.2    
 Student3771.248.5    
 Veteran left program without revealing plan1,7975.94544.5    
a
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Incentive Therapy/Compensated Work Therapy program
Unconditional adjusted and unadjusted ORs and 95% confidence intervals for health and psychiatric characteristics predictive of program completion are presented in Table 4. GPD program completion was defined as yes or no and served as the dependent variable in all logistic regression models. Among self-reported health issues within unadjusted models, only the presence of liver disease (OR=.88), significant skin problems (OR=1.15), and significant trauma (OR=.86) were statistically significant in successfully predicting program completion when analyses were restricted to older homeless veterans.
Table 4 Likelihood of completion of the Grant Per Diem program in logistic regression models with general health and psychiatric characteristics as predictorsa
VariableUnadjustedAdjusted
Age ≥55 only (N=10,141)bAll veterans (N=40,820)cAge ≥55 versus <55 (N=10,141)dAge ≥55 only (N=10,141)bAll veterans (N=40,820)cAge ≥55 versus <55 (N=10,141)d
OR95% CIpOR95% CIpOR95% CIOR95% CIpOR95% CIpOR95% CI
N medical problems (reference: 0).99.97–1.01.3861.00.99–1.01.5541.401.33–1.471.00.98–1.02.9371.011.00–1.02.0101.421.35–1.49
Serious medical problem (reference: none)1.01.93–1.10.8241.041.00–1.08.0481.391.34–1.461.06.97–1.15.1981.061.02–1.10.0031.421.45–149
Oral or dental problems (reference: none).96.89–1.04.3021.01.97–1.05.7451.401.34–1.47.98.90–1.06.6111.011.00–1.02.0501.421.35–1.49
Eye problem (reference: none).94.85–1.03.178.94.89–.99.0171.411.35–1.48.96.87–1.06.4401.02.98–1.06.3041.431.36–1.49
Hypertension (reference: none)1.00.93–1.09.9421.081.04–1.13.0011.381.32–1.451.01.94–1.10.7261.091.04–1.14.0021.411.34–1.47
Heart or cardiovascular problem (reference: none)1.05.95–1.16.3111.081.02–1.15.0141.391.33–1.461.06.96–1.17.2441.091.02–1.17.0071.421.35–1.49
COPD or emphysema (reference: none)e1.05.95–1.16.3511.01.95–1.08.7501.401.34–1.471.06.96–1.15.2601.01.95–1.08.6941.43.95–1.08
Tuberculosis (reference: none).85.68–1.06.138.93.83–1.05.2441.401.34–1.47.89.70–1.11.291.97.85–1.09.5591.431.36–1.49
Gastrointestinal problem (reference: none)1.00.91–1.10.9671.071.02–1.14.0051.401.34–1.461.02.92–1.13.6951.081.03–1.14.0031.431.36–1.49
Liver disease (reference: none).88.80–.97.011.90.85–.94.0011.411.35–1.47.92.83–1.02.115.92.88–.97.0031.431.36–1.50
Seizure disorder (reference: none).91.75–1.09.285.81.74–.89.0011.411.34–1.47.93.77–1.11.416.82.75–.90.0011.431.36–1.50
Orthopedic problem (reference: none).95.88–1.03.1971.00.96–1.04.9581.401.34–1.47.98.90–1.06.5551.02.98–1.06.4641.431.36–1.50
Significant skin problem (reference: none)1.151.11–1.29.0281.091.02–1.16.0081.401.34–1.471.161.02–1.31.0191.101.03–1.18.0031.421.36–1.50
Significant trauma (reference: none).86.78–.96.007.90.85–.95.0011.411.34–1.47.89.79–.99.032.91.86–.96.0011.431.36–1.49
Diabetes (reference: none)1.02.89–1.18.758.99.90–1.08.8211.401.34–1.471.01.87–1.17.859.99.90–1.08.8181.431.36–1.50
Current psychiatric or emotional problem (reference: none).96.89–1.04.332.94.90–.97.0011.411.34–1.47.99.91–1.08.879.95.91–.99.0121.431.36–1.50
Previous hospitalization psychiatric problem (reference: none).81.75–.88.001.84.81–.88.0011.401.34–1.47.82.75–.90.001.84.81–.88.0011.421.35–1.49
VA medical or psychiatric care, past 6 months (reference: none).91.84–1.00.038.91.87–.95.0011.421.35–1.48.92.84–1.01.062.91.87–.95.0011.441.37–1.51
Issue in past 30 days                
 Serious depression (reference: none).93.86–1.01.080.93.90–.97.0011.411.34–1.47.95.88–1.04.264.95.92–.99.0011.431.36–1.50
 Serious anxiety or tension (reference: none)1.03.95–1.11.511.99.96–1.03.7411.411.34–1.471.05.96–1.14.2761.01.97–1.05.6691.431.37–1.50
 Hallucinations (reference: none).92.79–1.05.205.89.83–.95.0011.411.34–1.471.00.86–1.15.932.94.87–1.00.0651.431.36–1.50
 Trouble understanding, concentrating (reference: none)1.01.94–1.11.6901.00.96–1.04.9601.411.34–1.471.06.97–1.16.1781.02.98–1.07.3051.431.37–1.50
 Trouble controlling violent behavior (reference: none).80.78–.95.010.84.77–.91.0011.411.34–1.47.84.70–1.00.038.86.79–.93.0011.431.36–1.50
 Serious thoughts of suicide (reference: none)1.03.91–1.16.689.95.93–1.04.0021.401.34–1.471.05.92–1.18.4851.01.95–1.07.8401.431.36–1.50
 Attempted suicide (reference: none)1.04.81–1.32.767.99.88–1.10.7881.411.34–1.471.07.83–1.36.6171.01.90–1.13.8531.431.37–1.50
 Prescribed medication for psychological problem (reference: none).92.88–1.03.038.93.90–.97.0011.411.34–1.47.92.84–1.00.039.93.89–.97.0011.431.36–1.50
a
Program completion (yes-no) was the dependent variable for all logistic regression models. Adjusting variables included age, marital status, race, no current problems with alcohol dependence, no drug use in past 30 days, regular full-time or part-time work in past 3 years, no service-connected psychiatric disability, no PTSD from combat, veteran-initiated contact with program, and veteran interested in basic or full service.
b
Effect of specific parameter on program completion, veterans age 55 only
c
Effect of specific parameter on program completion, all veterans, with age ignored
d
Effect of specific parameter on program completion with adjustment for age 55 (yes-no) as covariate. The ORs for this model, in both adjusted and unadjusted models, represent the effect of age ≥55 after adjustment for the specific parameter. All comparisons were significant at p<.001.
e
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
When unadjusted logistic regression models included all veterans, liver disease, significant skin problems and significant trauma remained significant positive predictors of program completion, and additional predictors included hypertension (OR=1.08), heart and cardiovascular issues (OR=1.08), gastrointestinal issues (OR=1.07), and seizure disorder (OR=.81). Among self-reported psychiatric issues within unadjusted models for older veterans, a previous psychiatric hospitalization (OR=.81), receiving VA general medical or psychiatric care within the past six months (OR=.91), trouble controlling violent behavior (OR=.80), and being prescribed psychological medication (OR=.92) were statistically significant negative predictors of program completion. When unadjusted logistic regression models included all veterans, those psychiatric variables remained significant predictors, and additional psychiatric variables that were significant predictors included current psychiatric or emotional problems (OR=.94), serious depression (OR=.93), hallucinations (OR=.89), and serious thoughts of suicide (OR=.95).
After adjustment for potential confounders or moderators among older homeless veterans only, significant skin problem (OR=1.16) and significant trauma (OR=.89) were the only variables that remained statistically significant predictors of program completion among self-reported health problems. Among psychiatric issues, only previous psychiatric hospitalizations (OR=.82), trouble controlling violent behavior (OR=.84), and prescribed medication for a psychological problem (OR=.92) remained statistically significant predictors of program completion.
When adjusted logistic regression models included all veterans, all self-reported health issues significantly predicted program completion, with seizure disorder (OR=.82) and significant trauma (OR=.91) as the most predictive. Among psychiatric issues, all issues were significantly associated with program completion. Among the strongest predictors were prior psychiatric hospitalization (OR=.84) and trouble controlling violent behavior (OR=.86).

Discussion

In one of the largest studies to date to assess the effects of homelessness and aging, the most significant findings were the differences in race and the number of serious general medical problems found among older veterans. Of interest is that the study covered a period of economic downturn, which may have influenced why some veterans were more inclined to enter the GPD program. However, homelessness in this period was found to decrease slightly, likely due to substantial investment by the federal government to prevent homelessness and help those who were homeless to find housing (21).
As in previous studies (16), older homeless veterans were more likely than younger homeless veterans to be white. This may simply be a reflection of generational differences within the U.S. Armed Forces; a systemic issue within the VA homelessness program, such as a failure to provide adequate services to nonwhite homeless veterans; or a lack of voluntary participation within this group for services such as these.
The U.S. armed forces have often been referred to as the most integrated institution within the United States. Current estimates suggest that racial-ethnic minority populations are significantly larger within the armed forces compared with the civilian population, accounting for approximately one-third of the military; but this was not always the case, and a vast majority of older veterans (>80%) are white. Our observed racial disparity may simply reflect an insufficient amount of time to demonstrate change. It is possible that the difference in racial groups using the GPD program is a more systemic issue in that the program is not tailored to the needs or preferences of nonwhite veterans, particularly those of older age. After conducting a survey of homeless assistance programs, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development reported that 59% of homeless individuals were from racial-ethnic minority groups (40% black), but no racial-ethnic differences were observed among individuals currently homeless versus previously homeless (http://homeless.samhsa.gov).
However, among homeless people in general, the age of death for people from racial-ethnic minority groups compared with whites is substantially lower, particularly for black homeless persons (22), which may have an impact on the study findings. In addition, veteran participation in the GPD program is voluntary, and nonwhite veterans may be less inclined to take advantage of the services provided by the GPD program, perhaps because they are not aware of them, prefer alternative community services, have additional family support, or the program does not meet their needs.
In these data, older homeless veterans were less likely than younger veterans to complete the program, perhaps reflecting a mix of services offered by community providers that may be more tailored to younger veterans. Compared with younger veterans, older veterans reported on average one more significant general medical problem. In addition, older veterans were 34% more likely to report at least one serious medical problem. The greater prevalence of general medical issues among older homeless veterans appears to be driven by the number of oral or dental, hypertension, heart or cardiovascular, and orthopedic problems. The prevalence of oral and severe dental problems among homeless individuals and those in poverty has been documented (23). Dental problems place older homeless veterans at an increased risk of nutritional deficits, pain, infections, and other negative health outcomes (23,24). Increased age has been associated with an increased risk of hypertension (25) and cardiovascular issues (26), as has diminished access to health care (27) in conjunction with other health issues (28).
Between 2003 and 2009, the number of general medical conditions reported by homeless veterans increased by approximately 24%, regardless of age. Further, the percentage of homeless veterans reporting at least one serious medical condition increased 7% during the study period. These increases have been driven mainly by oral and dental, hypertension, and orthopedic conditions. In addition, although some conditions decreased slightly from 2003 to 2009 among homeless veterans under age 55, all general medical conditions except significant skin problems increased for homeless veterans age 55 and older.
The proportion of homeless veterans agreeing to the question “Do you think that you have any current psychiatric or emotional problem(s) other than alcohol or drug?” increased approximately 20% from 2003 to 2009. Both younger and older homeless veterans reported similar rates of psychiatric conditions for each year and trends over time. A slight increase for both groups was observed with the exception of thoughts of suicide, which decreased by 10%. However, the reported use of prescribed medication increased markedly (24%) for both age groups during the study period. In addition, older homeless veterans with psychiatric issues were significantly less likely than other veterans to complete the program, indicating the need to improve delivery of services and better engage this population in mental health care.
Potential limitations with this project were those associated with any use of secondary analyses and interviews utilizing convenience sample and self-report techniques. Limitations associated with secondary analyses include potential coding and data entry errors, lack of specificity to a targeted population, and relevance at time of final analysis. Limitations associated with the use of data generated from Forms X and D may result from the data collection methodology. Data from homeless veterans agreeing to participate and provide self-reported information via Form X may not generalize to other homeless veterans but rather the subset of homeless veterans participating in the GPD program compared with homeless veterans who participate in non-VA community-based programs. In addition, Form X and Form D data do not allow for the comparison of older homeless veterans with nonhomeless veterans to determine differences or similarities in general medical and health needs. Further, this study may not generalize to homeless nonveterans or veterans in other countries. The format of Form X and Form D items limit the comprehensiveness of the admission and outcome evaluations, using primarily self-report (Form X) and observation (Form D) formats, often with simple dichotomous response options.

Conclusions

Homelessness amplifies existing vulnerabilities and places older adults at increased risk of morbidity, mortality, and other adverse events, such as theft and violence. Older homeless veterans are at increased risk of serious medical issues (including orthopedic and cardiovascular problems). Although homelessness has been more prevalent among younger adults, recent data reveal that homelessness among older adults is steadily increasing (18). Current data regarding the homeless veteran population suggest an increasing proportion of the homeless population consists of individuals over 55. Coupled with their increasing needs for both general medical and mental health services over time, this older age group is especially vulnerable to experiencing negative consequences related to homelessness. VA programs and services may require tailoring to meet older veterans’ cumulative and complex needs.

Acknowledgments

The research was funded by contract VA248-P-1661 from the VA National Center for Homelessness. The authors gratefully acknowledge Julie Kuhn for her valuable assistance and support of this research.
The authors report no financial relationships with commercial interests.

References

1.
The State of Aging and Health in America 2007. Whitehouse Station, NJ, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Merck Foundation, 2007
2.
McLaughlin SJ, Jette AM, Connell CM: An examination of healthy aging across a conceptual continuum: prevalence estimates, demographic patterns, and validity. Journals of Gerontology. Series A, Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences 67:783–789, 2012
3.
Aging can increase vulnerability to problems; in Improving Our Response to Older Adults With Substance Use, Mental Health and Gambling Problems: A Guide for Supervisors, Managers and Clinical Staff. Toronto, Ontario, Canada, Center for Addiction and Mental Health. Available at www.camh.net/Publications/Resources_for_Professionals/Improving_Our_Response/aging_vulnerability_problems.html
4.
Cawthone A: The Not-So-Golden Years. Confronting Elderly Poverty and Improving Seniors’ Economic Security. Washington, DC, Center for American Progress, Sept 27, 2010. Available at www.giaging.org/documents/not_so_golden_years.pdf
5.
Potter B, Rindfleisch K, Kraus CK: Management of active tuberculosis. American Family Physician 72:2225–2232, 2005
6.
Levitt AJ, Culhane DP, DeGenova J, et al: Health and social characteristics of homeless adults in Manhattan who were chronically or not chronically unsheltered. Psychiatric Services 60:978–981, 2009
7.
Frencher SK, Jr, Benedicto CM, Kendig TD, et al: A comparative analysis of serious injury and illness among homeless and housed low income residents of New York City. Journal of Trauma Injury Infection and Critical Care 69(suppl):S191–S199, 2010
8.
Kramer CB, Gibran NS, Heimbach DM, et al: Assault and substance abuse characterize burn injuries in homeless patients. Journal of Burn Care and Research 29:461–467, 2008
9.
Gelberg L, Stein JA, Neumann CG: Determinants of undernutrition among homeless adults. Public Health Reports 110:448–454, 1995
10.
Wolgemuth JC, Myers-Williams C, Johnson P, et al: Wasting malnutrition and inadequate nutrient intakes identified in a multiethnic homeless population. Journal of the American Dietetic Association 92:834–839, 1992
11.
Kazis LE, Selim A, Rogers W, et al: Dissemination of methods and results from the Veterans Health Study: final comments and implications for future monitoring strategies within and outside the veterans healthcare system. Journal of Ambulatory Care Management 29:310–319, 2006
12.
Poulin SR, Maguire M, Metraux S, et al: Service use and costs for persons experiencing chronic homelessness in Philadelphia: a population-based study. Psychiatric Services 61:1093–1098, 2010
13.
Garibaldi B, Conde-Martel A, O’Toole TP: Self-reported comorbidities, perceived needs, and sources for usual care for older and younger homeless adults. Journal of General Internal Medicine 20:726–730, 2005
14.
Hecht L, Coyle B: Elderly homeless: a comparison of older and younger adult emergency shelter seekers in Bakersfield, California. American Behavioral Scientist 45:66–79, 2001
15.
Stergiopoulos V, Herrmann N: Old and homeless: a review and survey of older adults who use shelters in an urban setting. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry 48:374–380, 2003
16.
Tessler R, Rosenheck R, Gamache G: Homeless veterans of the mil-volunteer force: a social selection perspective. Armed Forces and Society 29:509–524, 2003
17.
Molinari VA, Brown LM, Frahm KA, et al: Perceptions of homelessness in older homeless veterans, VA homeless program staff liaisons, and housing intervention providers. Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved 24:487–498, 2013
18.
Sermons MW, Henry M: Demographics of Homelessness Series: The Rising Elderly Population. Washington, DC, National Alliance to End Homelessness, Homelessness Research Institute, April 2010. Available at www.endhomelessness.org/library/entry/demographics-of-homelessness-series-the-rising-elderly-population
19.
Cohen J: Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioural Sciences, 2nd ed. London, Routledge Academic, 1998
20.
Lipsey M, Wilson D: Practical Meta-Analysis. London, Sage, 2000
21.
The State of Homelessness in America 2012: A Research Report on Homelessness. Washington, DC, National Alliance to End Homelessness, Homelessness Research Institute, Jan 2012. Available at msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Sections/NEWS/z-pdf-archive/homeless.pdf
22.
Results from Los Angeles County 2000–2007. Washington, DC, National Coalition for the Homeless, 2011. Available at www.nationalhomeless.org/publications/dyingwithoutdignity/3.html
23.
Daly B, Newton T, Batchelor P, et al: Oral health care needs and oral health–related quality of life (OHIP-14) in homeless people. Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology 38:136–144, 2010
24.
Baggett TP, O’Connell JJ, Singer DE, et al: The unmet health care needs of homeless adults: a national study. American Journal of Public Health 100:1326–1333, 2010
25.
Lloyd-Jones DM, Evans JC, Levy D: Hypertension in adults across the age spectrum: current outcomes and control in the community. JAMA 294:466–472, 2005
26.
Booth GL, Kapral MK, Fung K, et al: Relation between age and cardiovascular disease in men and women with diabetes compared with non-diabetic people: a population-based retrospective cohort study. Lancet 368:29–36, 2006
27.
Cohen RA, Bloom B, Simpson G, et al: Access to health care: part 3: older adults. Vital and Health Statistics Series 10(198):1–32, 1997
28.
Case A, Deaton AS: Broken down by work and sex: how our health declines; in Analyses in the Economics of Aging. Edited by Wise D. Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 2005

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

Go to Psychiatric Services
Go to Psychiatric Services

Cover: In the Loge, by Mary Cassatt, circa 1879. Pastel and metallic paint on canvas prepared with a pastel ground. Gift of Mrs. Sargent McKean, 1950 (1950-52-1), the Philadelphia Museum of Art. Photo credit: the Philadelphia Museum of Art/Art Resources, New York.

Psychiatric Services
Pages: 33 - 40
PubMed: 25322253

History

Published ahead of print: 31 October 2014
Published in print: January 01, 2015
Published online: 2 January 2015

Authors

Details

Lisa M. Brown, Ph.D.
Dr. Brown and Dr. Frahm are with the School of Aging Studies, College of Behavioral and Community Sciences, University of South Florida, Tampa (e-mail: [email protected]). They are also with the Center of Innovation, James A. Haley Hospital, Tampa, where Dr. Barnett is affiliated. Dr. Schinka and Dr. Casey are with the National Center for Homelessness Among Veterans, Tampa. Dr. Schonfeld is with the Florida Mental Health Institute, College of Behavioral and Community Sciences, University of South Florida, Tampa.
Scott D. Barnett, Ph.D.
Dr. Brown and Dr. Frahm are with the School of Aging Studies, College of Behavioral and Community Sciences, University of South Florida, Tampa (e-mail: [email protected]). They are also with the Center of Innovation, James A. Haley Hospital, Tampa, where Dr. Barnett is affiliated. Dr. Schinka and Dr. Casey are with the National Center for Homelessness Among Veterans, Tampa. Dr. Schonfeld is with the Florida Mental Health Institute, College of Behavioral and Community Sciences, University of South Florida, Tampa.
Kathryn A. Frahm, Ph.D., M.S.W.
Dr. Brown and Dr. Frahm are with the School of Aging Studies, College of Behavioral and Community Sciences, University of South Florida, Tampa (e-mail: [email protected]). They are also with the Center of Innovation, James A. Haley Hospital, Tampa, where Dr. Barnett is affiliated. Dr. Schinka and Dr. Casey are with the National Center for Homelessness Among Veterans, Tampa. Dr. Schonfeld is with the Florida Mental Health Institute, College of Behavioral and Community Sciences, University of South Florida, Tampa.
John A. Schinka, Ph.D.
Dr. Brown and Dr. Frahm are with the School of Aging Studies, College of Behavioral and Community Sciences, University of South Florida, Tampa (e-mail: [email protected]). They are also with the Center of Innovation, James A. Haley Hospital, Tampa, where Dr. Barnett is affiliated. Dr. Schinka and Dr. Casey are with the National Center for Homelessness Among Veterans, Tampa. Dr. Schonfeld is with the Florida Mental Health Institute, College of Behavioral and Community Sciences, University of South Florida, Tampa.
Lawrence Schonfeld, Ph.D.
Dr. Brown and Dr. Frahm are with the School of Aging Studies, College of Behavioral and Community Sciences, University of South Florida, Tampa (e-mail: [email protected]). They are also with the Center of Innovation, James A. Haley Hospital, Tampa, where Dr. Barnett is affiliated. Dr. Schinka and Dr. Casey are with the National Center for Homelessness Among Veterans, Tampa. Dr. Schonfeld is with the Florida Mental Health Institute, College of Behavioral and Community Sciences, University of South Florida, Tampa.
Roger J. Casey, Ph.D.
Dr. Brown and Dr. Frahm are with the School of Aging Studies, College of Behavioral and Community Sciences, University of South Florida, Tampa (e-mail: [email protected]). They are also with the Center of Innovation, James A. Haley Hospital, Tampa, where Dr. Barnett is affiliated. Dr. Schinka and Dr. Casey are with the National Center for Homelessness Among Veterans, Tampa. Dr. Schonfeld is with the Florida Mental Health Institute, College of Behavioral and Community Sciences, University of South Florida, Tampa.

Funding Information

U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs10.13039/100000738: VA248-P-1661

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Citations

Export Citations

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.

For more information or tips please see 'Downloading to a citation manager' in the Help menu.

Format
Citation style
Style
Copy to clipboard

View Options

View options

PDF/EPUB

View PDF/EPUB

Get Access

Login options

Already a subscriber? Access your subscription through your login credentials or your institution for full access to this article.

Personal login Institutional Login Open Athens login
Purchase Options

Purchase this article to access the full text.

PPV Articles - Psychiatric Services

PPV Articles - Psychiatric Services

Not a subscriber?

Subscribe Now / Learn More

PsychiatryOnline subscription options offer access to the DSM-5-TR® library, books, journals, CME, and patient resources. This all-in-one virtual library provides psychiatrists and mental health professionals with key resources for diagnosis, treatment, research, and professional development.

Need more help? PsychiatryOnline Customer Service may be reached by emailing [email protected] or by calling 800-368-5777 (in the U.S.) or 703-907-7322 (outside the U.S.).

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share article link

Share