What are the consequences of deployment to Iraq and Afghanistan on the mental health of the UK armed forces? A cohort study.

Academic Centre for Defence Mental Health, King's College London, London, UK.
The Lancet (Impact Factor: 39.21). 05/2010; 375(9728):1783-97. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60672-1
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Concerns have been raised about the psychological effect of continued combat exposure and of repeated deployments. We examined the consequences of deployment to Iraq and Afghanistan on the mental health of UK armed forces from 2003 to 2009, the effect of multiple deployments, and time since return from deployment.
We reassessed the prevalence of probable mental disorders in participants of our previous study (2003-05). We also studied two new randomly chosen samples: those with recent deployment to Afghanistan, and those who had joined the UK armed forces since April, 2003, to ensure that the final sample continued to be representative of the UK armed forces. Between November, 2007, and September, 2009, participants completed a questionnaire about their deployment experiences and health outcomes.
9990 (56%) participants completed the study questionnaire (8278 regulars, 1712 reservists). The prevalence of probable post-traumatic stress disorder was 4.0% (95% CI 3.5-4.5; n=376), 19.7% (18.7-20.6; n=1908) for symptoms of common mental disorders, and 13.0% (12.2-13.8; n=1323) for alcohol misuse. Deployment to Iraq or Afghanistan was significantly associated with alcohol misuse for regulars (odds ratio 1.22, 95% CI 1.02-1.46) and with probable post-traumatic stress disorder for reservists (2.83, 1.23-6.51). Regular personnel in combat roles were more likely than were those in support roles to report probable post-traumatic stress disorder (1.87, 1.26-2.78). There was no association with number of deployments for any outcome. There was some evidence for a small increase in the reporting of probable post-traumatic stress disorder with time since return from deployment in regulars (1.13, 1.03-1.24).
Symptoms of common mental disorders and alcohol misuse remain the most frequently reported mental disorders in UK armed forces personnel, whereas the prevalence of probable post-traumatic stress disorder was low. These findings show the importance of continued health surveillance of UK military personnel.
UK Ministry of Defence.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To evaluate the possible mental health impact of resistance training on UK Armed Forces personnel undergoing training and the psychological effects of delivering such training. British Military personnel (n = 42) completed a battery of self-report measures on anxiety, general mental health, post-traumatic stress disorder, resiliency and training outcomes 1 month before, on the first and last day of the course and at 1-month follow-up. Resistance Instructors (RIs) (n = 40) completed a battery of self-report measures on anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, alcohol use, sleep, burnout, leadership, and morale. Although student self-ratings of resiliency did not change, they reported significant improvements in their ability to use strategies to cope with captivity. There was no significant increase in anxiety between precourse and follow-up. Post-traumatic stress intrusive symptoms were elevated at 1-month postcourse but remained low. Prevalence rates of psychological distress among RIs were elevated compared to U.K. military personnel but views of professional efficacy, unit leadership and morale were broadly positive. Resistance training demonstrates some benefit to students but was associated with increase in traumatic stress symptoms at follow-up, whereas the mental health of RI appears modestly worse than the rest of the Armed Forces population. Reprint & Copyright © 2015 Association of Military Surgeons of the U.S.
    Military medicine 02/2015; 180(2):168-177. DOI:10.7205/MILMED-D-14-00285 · 0.77 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Units deployed to armed conflicts are at high risk for exposure to combat events. Many battle casualties (BCs) have been reported in the recent deployment to Afghanistan. The long-term impact of these combat injuries, at their five-year end point, is currently unknown. To date, no systematic inventory has been performed of an identified group of BCs in comparison to non-injured service members from the same operational theatre. Observational cross-sectional cohort study. Open online survey among Dutch BCs that deployed to Afghanistan (2006-2010). The Dutch BCs (n = 62) were compared to two control groups of non-injured combat groups (battle exposed [n = 53], and non-battle exposed [n = 73]). Participants rated their impact of trauma exposure (Impact of Events [IES]), post deployment reintegration (Post Deployment Reintegration Scale [PDRS]), general symptoms of distress (Symptom Checklist 90 [SCL-90]), as well as their current perceived quality of life (EuroQol-6D [EQ-6D]). Also cost effectiveness (Short From health survey [SF-36]) and care consumption were assessed (Trimbos/iMTA questionnaire). Over 90% of BCs were still in active duty. The mean scores of all questionnaires (IES, EQ-6D, SF-36, and SCL-90) of the BC group were significantly higher than in the control groups (p<0.05). The PDRS showed a significantly lower (p<0.05) outcome in the negative subscales. The mean consumption of care was triple that of both control groups. A lower score on quality of life was related to higher levels of distress and impact of trauma exposure. This study showed a clear long-term impact on a wide range of scales that contributes to a reduced quality of life in a group of BCs. Low perceived cost effectiveness matched with high consumption of care in the BC group in comparison to the control groups. These results warrant continuous monitoring of BCs.
    PLoS ONE 01/2015; 10(2):e0115119. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0115119 · 3.53 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Civilian trauma literature suggests sexual dimorphism in outcomes after trauma. Because women represent an increasing demographic among veterans, the question remains if war trauma outcomes, like civilian trauma outcomes, differ between genders. (1) Do women service members develop different conditions resulting in long-term disability compared with men service members after injuries sustained during deployment? (2) Do women service members have more or less severe disability after deployment injury compared with men service members? (3) Are men or women more likely to return to duty after combat injury? The Department of Defense Trauma Registry was queried for women injured during deployment from 2001 to 2011. The subjects were then queried in the Physical Evaluation Board database to determine each subject's return-to-duty status and what disabling conditions and disability percentages were assigned to those who did not return to duty. Frequency of disabling conditions, disability percentages, and return-to-duty rates for 368 women were compared with a previously published cohort of 450 men service members, 378 of whom had orthopaedic injuries. Women who were unable to return to duty had a higher frequency of arthritic conditions (58% [48 of 83] of women versus 35% [133 of 378] of men, p = 0.002; relative risk [RR], 1.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.307-2.067) and lower frequencies of general chronic pain (1% [one of 83] of women versus 19% [59 of 378] of men, p < 0.001; RR, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.011-0.549) and neurogenic pain disorders (1% [one of 83] of women versus 7% [27 of 378] of men, p = 0.0410; RR, 0.169; 95% CI, 0.023-1.224). Women had more severely rated posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) compared with men (38% ± 23% versus 19% ± 17%). Forty-eight percent (64 of 133) of battle-injured women were unable to return to active duty, resulting in a lower return-to-duty rate compared with men (34% [450 of 1333]; p = 0.003). After deployment-related injury, women have higher rates of arthritis, lower rates of pain disorders, and more severely rated PTSD compared with men. Women are unable to return to duty more often than men injured in combat. These results suggest some difference between men's and women's outcomes after deployment injury, important information for military and Veterans Administration providers seeking to minimize postdeployment disability. Level III, prognostic study.
    Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 02/2015; DOI:10.1007/s11999-015-4180-6 · 2.88 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
May 20, 2014