Military medicine
-
Military mental health personnel (MMHP) have increasingly engaged in deployment-related roles in closer proximity to combat environments. Although studies examining deployment-related outcomes among military health care personnel have found combat exposure (CE) positively related to psychological problems, no studies of MMHP have investigated CE or its association with psychological outcomes. This study seeks to provide descriptive data on CE and perceived impacts associated with deployment, as well as explore how CE, perceptions of preparedness for deployment, difficulties during deployment (DDD), and meaningful work during deployment relate to appraisal of problems after deployment (ie, sleep problems, interpersonal withdrawal, depressive symptoms, and work problems). ⋯ This is the first study of MMHP reporting CE rates and examining relationships between perceived outcomes and CE, deployment preparation, difficulties during deployment, and meaningful work. The vast majority of MMHP were exposed to more than one combat-related event; however, this rate of CE appears lower than what has been reported among a similar sample of military health care personnel. Although CE predicted difficulties, appraisals of difficulties during deployment experience predicted the highest rates of postdeployment difficulties, accounting for nearly a quarter or more of the outcome variance. The lack of relationship between deployment preparation and meaningful work is inconsistent with prior research and may be because of the limited response range in our sample. Additionally, other methodological limitations include: (1) cross-sectional study design, (2) lack of validated measures, and (3) the long-term retrospective nature of the assessment. Future research should incorporate more rigorous methodologies and assess constructs absent in this archival data set. Despite these limitations, this study provides important preliminary data to support future research development and funding. Additionally, the results may be used to normalize associated impacts and promote help seeking among MMHP.
-
Military Service Members (SMs) with upper limb (UL) amputation have unrestricted access to occupational therapy (OT) services. Identifying OT interventions used based on clinical rationale and patient needs can provide insight toward developing best practice guidelines. The purpose of this retrospective observational study was to identify preferred OT practice patterns for U.S. Military SMs treated in Military Treatment Facilities, who have sustained various levels of deployment-related UL amputation. ⋯ Findings of the current study suggest SMs with UL amputation utilize OT services often within the first year after injury and those who have sustained amputation proximal to the elbow received more therapy visits than their below elbow counterparts during months 4 to 12. Prosthetic training, therapeutic activities, and therapeutic exercise can be expected to be the highest used active interventions in the first year following UL amputation. Further research is needed to determine details on types and frequency of therapy utilization and recommended therapy strategies.
-
Any implicit and explicit biases that exist may alter our interpretation of people and events. Within the context of assessment, it is important to determine if biases exist and to decrease any existing biases, especially when rating student performance to provide meaningful, fair, and useful input. The purpose of this study was to determine if the experience and gender of faculty members contribute to their ratings of students in a military medical field practicum. This information is important for fair ratings of students. Three research questions were addressed: Were there differences between new versus experienced faculty raters? Were there differences in assessments provided by female and male faculty members? Did gender of faculty raters impact ratings of female and male students?. ⋯ The study revealed that there were no differences in ratings of student leader performance based on faculty experience. In addition, there were no differences in ratings of student leader performance based on faculty gender.
-
Airway obstruction is the second leading cause of preventable death on the battlefield. Most airway obstruction occurs secondary to traumatic disruptions of the airway anatomical structures. However, casualties may require airway interventions for other indications (e.g., depressed mental status). We describe casualties undergoing airway intervention in the prehospital, combat setting without apparent upper airway trauma. ⋯ In this subgroup analysis of casualties without apparent upper airway trauma, survival rates were lower when compared to our previous report. Higher quality data are necessary to better understand the resuscitation needs of this critically ill subset of combat casualties.
-
Because of the rigorous mental and physical health requirements for Naval Aviation, all applicants and designated personnel must meet physical standards, including initial and periodic screening for anemia. Most standards, including for accession to the U.S. Navy, use hemoglobin as the standard marker to screen for anemia. Moreover, previous literature generally supports the assertion that hemoglobin is more reliable and accurate than hematocrit. However, the U.S. Navy Aeromedical Reference and Waiver Guide uses a hematocrit standard for anemia screening. The purpose of this study was to determine whether hemoglobin or hematocrit correlates better with clinical anemia and evaluate which index is a more accurate indicator for anemia screening in Naval Aviation personnel. ⋯ This study found that hemoglobin correlates better with the diagnosis of anemia than hematocrit. When three samples are analyzed, hemoglobin is equally sensitive and more specific than hematocrit. Based on these results and the U.S. Navy accession standards using hemoglobin as the standard index for anemia, the U.S. Navy Aeromedical Reference and Waiver Guide should consider using hemoglobin instead of hematocrit to screen for anemia. Future research should focus on prospective research to determine whether hemoglobin or hematocrit is a better indicator of anemia in screening military personnel.