Predictors of Likelihood and Intensity of Past-Year Mental Health Service Use in an Active Canadian Military Sample

Objective: This study examined associations between sociodemographic, military, and psychiatric need variables and past-year mental health service use among active Canadian military members. The likelihood and intensity of services were examined across two provider types— mental health providers and medical providers. Methods: Data were drawn from the first epidemiological survey of mental health in the Canadian Forces, conducted by Statistics Canada in 2002. Survey instruments included the Composite International Diagnostic Interview, which was used to assess mental health and service use. Results: Of the 8,441 military members who participated in the survey, 14.5% (N=1,220) met criteria for having a mental disorder in the past year. However, of the 8,441 only 9.1% (N=767) contacted a mental health provider in the past year for mental health problems; even fewer (N=539, 6.4%) contacted a medical provider. Across the two provider types, the majority of those seeing a provider reported five or fewer mental health visits in the past year. In univariate and multivariate analyses across the two provider types, psychiatric need variables were consistently associated with both greater service use likelihood and intensity. In multivariate analyses, lower military rank was consistently associated with both greater service use likelihood and intensity. Conclusions: Of the entire military sample, only a small percentage used mental health services. The observed associations between military and psychiatric need variables and mental health service use in this study should be used by military health care providers and administrators to increase mental health service use among those most at risk of not using services

Psychological responses after a major fatal earthquake: The effect of preitraumatic dissociation and posttraumatic stress symptoms on anxiety and depression.

Following trauma, most people with initial symptoms of stress recover, but it is important to identify those at risk for continuing difficulties so resources are allocated appropriately. There has been limited investigation of predictors of posttraumatic stress disorder following natural disasters. This study assessed psychological difficulties experienced in 101 adult treatment seekers following exposure to a significant earthquake. Peritraumatic dissociation, posttraumatic stress symptoms, anxiety, depression, and emotional support were assessed. Path analysis was used to determine whether the experience of some psychological difficulties predicted the experience of other difficulties. As hypothesized, peritraumatic dissociation was found to predict posttraumatic stress symptoms and anxiety. Posttraumatic stress symptoms then predicted anxiety and depression. Depression and anxiety were highly correlated. Contrary to expectations, emotional support was not significantly related to other psychological variables. These findings justify the provision of psychological support following a natural disaster and suggest the benefit of assessing peritraumatic dissociation and posttraumatic stress symptoms soon after the event to identify people in need of monitoring and intervention

Aripiprazole Augmentation in the Treatment of Military-Related PTSD with Major Depression: a retrospective chart review

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In this chart review, we attempted to evaluate the benefits of adding aripiprazole in veterans with military-related PTSD and comorbid depression, who had been minimally or partially responsive to their existing medications.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A retrospective chart review of patients who received an open-label, flexible-dose, 12- week course of adjunctive aripiprazole was conducted in 27 military veterans meeting DSM-IV criteria for PTSD and comorbid major depression. Concomitant psychiatric medications continued unchanged, except for other antipsychotics which were discontinued prior to initiating aripiprazole. The primary outcome variable was a change from baseline in the PTSD checklist-military version (PCL-M) and the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>PTSD severity (Total PCL scores) decreased from 56.11 at baseline to 46.85 at 12-weeks (p < 0.0001 from Wilcoxon signed rank test) and the depression severity decreased from 30.44 at baseline to 20.67 at 12-weeks (p < 0.0001 from Wilcoxon signed rank test). Thirty seven percent (10/27) were considered responders, as defined by a decrease in total PCL scores of at least 20 percent and 19% (5/27) were considered as responders as defined by a decrease in total BDI score of at least 50%.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The addition of aripiprazole contributed to a reduction in both PTSD and depression symptomatology in a population that has traditionally demonstrated poor pharmacological response. Further investigations, including double-blind, placebo-controlled studies, are essential to confirm and further demonstrate the benefit of aripiprazole augmentation in the treatment of military related PTSD.</p

Addressing moral injury in the military

Moral injury is a relatively new, but increasingly studied, construct in the field of mental health, particularly in relation to current and ex-serving military personnel. Moral injury refers to the enduring psychosocial, spiritual or ethical harms that can result from exposure to high-stakes events that strongly clash with one’s moral beliefs. There is a pressing need for further research to advance understanding of the nature of moral injury; its relationship to mental disorders such as posttraumatic stress disorder and depression; triggering events and underpinning mechanisms; and prevalence, prevention and treatment. In the meantime, military leaders have an immediate need for guidance on how moral injury should be addressed and, where possible, prevented. Such guidance should be theoretically sound, evidence-informed and ethically responsible. Further, the implementation of any practice change based on the guidance should contribute to the advancement of science through robust evaluation. This paper draws together current research on moral injury, best-practice approaches in the adjacent field of psychological resilience, and principles of effective implementation and evaluation. This research is combined with the military and veteran mental health expertise of the authors to provide guidance on the design, implementation and evaluation of moral injury interventions in the military. The paper discusses relevant training in military ethical practice, as well as the key roles leaders have in creating cohesive teams and having frank discussions about the moral and ethical challenges that military personnel face.</jats:p

Addressing moral injury in the military

Moral injury is a relatively new, but increasingly studied, construct in the field of mental health, particularly in relation to current and ex-serving military personnel. Moral injury refers to the enduring psychosocial, spiritual or ethical harms that can result from exposure to high-stakes events that strongly clash with one's moral beliefs. There is a pressing need for further research to advance understanding of the nature of moral injury; its relationship to mental disorders such as posttraumatic stress disorder and depression; triggering events and underpinning mechanisms; and prevalence, prevention and treatment. In the meantime, military leaders have an immediate need for guidance on how moral injury should be addressed and, where possible, prevented. Such guidance should be theoretically sound, evidence-informed and ethically responsible. Further, the implementation of any practice change based on the guidance should contribute to the advancement of science through robust evaluation. This paper draws together current research on moral injury, best-practice approaches in the adjacent field of psychological resilience, and principles of effective implementation and evaluation. This research is combined with the military and veteran mental health expertise of the authors to provide guidance on the design, implementation and evaluation of moral injury interventions in the military. The paper discusses relevant training in military ethical practice, as well as the key roles leaders have in creating cohesive teams and having frank discussions about the moral and ethical challenges that military personnel face.</p