Factors associated with past and future SHS service use
Descriptive regression models were used to examine whether client characteristics or support experiences in the defining period were associated with receipt of SHS support in the prospective study period (ongoing service use) or, separately, in the retrospective period (historical service use). Information on interpreting regression models can be found in the section Understanding factors associated with past and future support.
Some bias is present in this outcome measure because some clients who required services in the future may not have been able to receive them (see the section on Bias within the SHSC longitudinal data).
What client characteristics are associated with using SHS services in the retrospective study period?
Some client characteristics or circumstances are associated with SHS support in the past (relative to the defining study period). However, variations in state-territory specific policy and service deliver models mean that the likelihood of a client using services in the future varies among states or territories. Therefore, in addition to a national model, separate regression models were created for each state or territory where there was sufficient sample size. The models are descriptive, that is, they are intended to describe the client variables that are associated with past or future service use without proposing or testing specific causal pathways.
The outcome variable (receipt of SHS support) was a binary measure (yes or no) and did not distinguish between clients that needed SHS services only once in the retrospective study period and clients that required frequent support.
Risk ratios were created to measure the association between the use of SHS services and a set of client characteristics (see Glossary entry on Relative Risk for how to interpret the results).
Model results are shown in Figure MH.6, which shows relative risk for having received SHS support in the past and, separately, in the future for chosen client variables. Separate models were created for each state or territory, as well as a national model. Results should be used with caution for states or territories where there were too few clients (less than 3,500) in the cohort for a meaningful model (Table MH.1). Data from these states or territories have been included in the national results, though it is important to recognise that the national data are mostly a reflection of the associations in the largest states. Therefore, while the national data are comprehensive and reflect the pathways of all clients in Australia, they are strongly influenced by the New South Wales and Victorian experience (which together account for 67% of clients) and insensitive to the situation in the smaller states or territories.
Although associations vary in magnitude between states and or territories, having owned a home was associated with reduced likelihood of having a history of SHS support (30% lower likelihood in the national data; Figure MH.6, Table MH1516.4.
Being an Indigenous Australian also had a strong association (16% greater likelihood) with past SHS support. This is partly due to the social and economic disadvantages faced by Indigenous Australians and a higher prevalence of health risk factors (POA 2014, AIHW 2020).
Most other factors, and especially not being employed (36% greater likelihood), having been homeless (16% greater likelihood), transitioning from custody or presenting for support alone at some time (14% greater likelihood), having problematic drug or alcohol issues (15%) or being female (7%) were associated with an increased likelihood of having a history of SHS support.