Article

Challenges associated with post-deployment screening for mild traumatic brain injury in military personnel.

University of British Columbia & British Columbia Mental Health & Addiction Services, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
The Clinical Neuropsychologist (Impact Factor: 1.58). 11/2009; 23(8):1299-314. DOI: 10.1080/13854040903153902
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT There is ongoing debate regarding the epidemiology of mild traumatic brain injury (MTBI) in military personnel. Accurate and timely estimates of the incidence of brain injury and the prevalence of long-term problems associated with brain injuries among active duty service members and veterans are essential for (a) operational planning, and (b) to allocate sufficient resources for rehabilitation and ongoing services and supports. The purpose of this article is to discuss challenges associated with post-deployment screening for MTBI. Multiple screening methods have been used in military, Veterans Affairs, and independent studies, which complicate cross-study comparisons of the resulting epidemiological data. We believe that post-deployment screening is important and necessary--but no screening methodology will be flawless, and false positives and false negatives are inevitable. Additional research is necessary to refine the sequential screening methodology, with the goal of minimizing false negatives during initial post-deployment screening and minimizing false positives during follow-up evaluations.

0 Followers
 · 
72 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We assessed the strength of the association of several mental health problems, childhood difficulties, and combat role with anger, as well as the contribution of these factors to explain anger assessed by population attributable fraction (PAF). A total of 9885 UK service personnel, some of them deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan, participated in the study. There was a strong or intermediate association between cases and subthreshold cases of symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder, psychological distress, multiple physical symptoms and alcohol misuse, having a combat role, childhood adversity, and childhood antisocial behavior with anger. The PAF for any mental health problem and combat role and childhood difficulties was 0.64 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.56-0.70) and increased to 0.77 (95% CI, 0.69-0.83) if subthreshold cases were included. Anger is a frequent component of mental disorders; health care professionals need to be aware of the interference of anger in the management of mental illness and that anger infrequently presents as an isolated phenomenon.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Estimates of the prevalence of mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) among military personnel and combat veterans rely almost exclusively on retrospective self-reports; however, reliability of these reports has received little attention. Aims To examine the consistency of reporting of mTBI over time and identify factors associated with inconsistent reporting. Method A longitudinal cohort of 948 US National Guard Soldiers deployed to Iraq completed self-report questionnaire screening for mTBI and psychological symptoms while in-theatre 1 month before returning home (time 1, T1) and 1 year later (time 2, T2). Results Most respondents (n = 811, 85.5%) were consistent in their reporting of mTBI across time. Among those who were inconsistent in their reports (n = 137, 14.5%), the majority denied mTBI at T1 and affirmed mTBI at T2 (n = 123, 89.8%). Respondents rarely endorsed mTBI in-theatre and later denied mTBI (n = 14, 10.2% of those with inconsistent reports). Post-deployment post-traumatic stress symptoms and non-specific physical complaints were significantly associated with inconsistent report of mTBI. Conclusions Military service members' self-reports of mTBI are generally consistent over time; however, inconsistency in retrospective self-reporting of mTBI status is associated with current post-traumatic stress symptoms and non-specific physical health complaints. Royal College of Psychiatrists.
    The British journal of psychiatry: the journal of mental science 01/2015; 206(3). DOI:10.1192/bjp.bp.114.149096 · 7.34 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective: To identify promising practices in educational service delivery. Methods: Consensus-building process with a multidisciplinary group of researchers, policy makers, and state Department of Education personnel. Results: This white paper presents the group's consensus on the essential components of a statewide educational infrastructure to support students with traumatic brain injury across the spectrum of injury severity: (a) identification, screening, and assessment practices; (b) systematic communication between medical and educational systems; (c) tracking of child's progress over time; and (d) professional development for school personnel. The white paper also presents key outcomes for measuring success and provides recommendations both for policy change and for furthering research in childhood brain injury. Key words: education, interventions, school children, special education, traumatic brain injury I N AUGUST 2011, the Summit on Childhood Brain Injury was held at State College, Pennsylvania, to develop recommendations for building statewide capac-ity to support students with brain injury in educational settings. The Health Resource Services Administration (HRSA) Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) Program within Author Affiliations:, and the National Children's Collaborative on Brain Injury.
    Intelligent Transportation Systems Journal 01/2014; 29(3):224-232.