scholarly journals A Burden and Prevalence Analysis of Chronic Pain by Distinct Case Definitions among Active Duty U.S. Military Service Members, 2018

2020 ◽  
Vol 5;23 (9;5) ◽  
pp. E429-E439
Author(s):  
Hunter Jackson Smith

Background: Chronic pain is a growing problem in the military, and the methods by which we have to perform epidemiologic surveillance are insufficient. It represents both a public health and military readiness concern, as those who suffer from it experience adverse impacts on work productivity, physiological health, and quality of life. Objectives: This study was designed to assess the prevalence of chronic pain among active component military service members utilizing 2 distinct, published case definitions. It sought to describe the demographics and military characteristics of those receiving chronic pain diagnoses. The study also aimed to provide improved granularity regarding military chronic pain patients’ pain severity and its impacts on their job performance. Study Design: Cross-sectional analysis for 2018. Setting: This analysis utilized data available from the Defense Medical Surveillance System, a database containing longitudinal data on service members. Methods: Patients: The surveillance population consisted of all active component service members from the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines of all grades serving at any point during the surveillance period of January 1, 2018 through December 31, 2018. Measurement: Diagnoses were ascertained from the administrative records of all medical encounters of individuals who received care through the Military Health System or civilian referrals. Data from patients’ Periodic Health Assessment (PHA) encounters were also utilized to derive more granular data regarding their experiences of pain. Results: Case Definition 1, more specific for identifying chronic pain, identified a more severe subset of chronic pain patients when compared against Case Definition 2, a more comprehensive method for identifying potential chronic pain patients. Case Definition 1 found a higher prevalence of impactful pain (CD1: 36.7% vs. CD2: 23.5%), and Case Definition 1 patients are more likely to be on limited duty and require treatment related to their pain. Several demographic groups were also found to be at increased risk of chronic pain diagnosis, including women, black non-Hispanic, Army, older age, and enlisted. Limitations: First, in utilizing administrative data, this allows for the possibility of misclassification bias. Second, some deployment data still used ICD-9 coding even in 2018, resulting in a minor underestimation by approximately 30 patients and approximately 60 encounters. Third, the prevalence estimates for the demographics were not adjusted for potential confounders. Conclusions: Chronic pain has been difficult to define via administrative and screening data, and as such its burden and prevalence estimates can vary considerably depending on which case definition is used. This is of particular importance in the U.S. military, as these estimates can significantly impact our calculations for force readiness and the protection of our national security. To our knowledge, this study is the first of its kind to examine chronic pain across the entirety of the U.S. armed forces and to utilize granular, annually collected PHA data in this way. The results of this exploratory analysis could be used as a template to better characterize the burden of chronic pain from a populationbased perspective and monitor the effectiveness of pain management strategies. Key words: Chronic pain, military, case definition, surveillance, epidemiology

2020 ◽  
pp. 0095327X2091839
Author(s):  
Robert Ralston ◽  
Matthew Motta ◽  
Jennifer Spindel

Are Americans aware and concerned about White nationalism in the U.S. Military? Our large and demographically representative survey suggests that while most Americans suspect at least some presence of White nationalism in the military, many do not view it as a serious problem; particularly self-identified conservatives and respondents who hold highly favorable views toward military service members. However, in a between-/within-subjects experiment embedded in our survey, we show that providing information about the issue of White nationalism in the U.S. Military increases the public’s overall concern about White nationalism in the U.S. Military.


Author(s):  
Andrew Goodhart ◽  
Jami K. Taylor

For most of its history, the U.S. military has maintained a policy of exclusion toward lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people serving in uniform. The justifications for these exclusions have included the view that being homosexual or transgender is a psychological disorder, that it undermines military morale and effectiveness, and a fear that LGBT people would be vulnerable to foreign espionage. Explicit policies banning consensual homosexual sex—and excluding from service those who engage in it—date to the period between World Wars I and II, but de facto efforts at exclusion have existed since the early days of the republic. Regulations governing homosexuals in the military came under pressure in the 1970s and 1980s as societal views toward lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) people changed, and those LGB service members discharged under the policy increasingly challenged their treatment in court. (Public pressure to change regulations governing transgender people in the military arose mostly in the 2000s, though litigation efforts date to the 1970s.) In addition to general shifts in public and legal opinion, the debate over LGB people serving in the U.S. military was affected by the experience of foreign militaries that allow LGB people to serve. United States law began to loosen formal restrictions on LBG people serving in uniform with the passage of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) in 1994, but it still required LGB people to serve in secret. Changing public perceptions of LGB people and problems implementing the ban galvanized support for eliminating such restrictions. In 2010, President Obama signed legislation repealing DADT and removing all restrictions on LGB people serving in the military. However, transgender people do not enjoy the same rights. The Trump administration has revised Obama-era rules on transgender service members to enable greater exclusion. The issue is being contested in the courts and appears ripe for further political and legal dispute.


2005 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 235-242 ◽  
Author(s):  
Astrid von Bueren Jarchow ◽  
Bogdan P. Radanov ◽  
Lutz Jäncke

Abstract: The aim of the present study was to examine to what extent chronic pain has an impact on various attentional processes. To measure these attention processes a set of experimental standard tests of the “Testbatterie zur Aufmerksamkeitsprüfung” (TAP), a neuropsychological battery testing different levels of attention, were used: alertness, divided attention, covert attention, vigilance, visual search, and Go-NoGo tasks. 24 chronic outpatients and 24 well-matched healthy control subjects were tested. The control subjects were matched for age, gender, and education. The group of chronic pain patients exhibited marked deficiencies in all attentional functions except for the divided attention task. Thus, the data supports the notion that chronic pain negatively influences attention because pain patients` attention is strongly captivated by the internal pain stimuli. Only the more demanding divided attention task has the capability to distract the focus of attention to the pain stimuli. Therefore, the pain patients are capable of performing within normal limits. Based on these findings chronic pain patients' attentional deficits should be appropriately evaluated and considered for insurance and work related matters. The effect of a successful distraction away from the pain in the divided attention task can also open new therapeutic aspects.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document