Do the Military’s Frontline Psychiatry/Combat Operational Stress Control Programs Benefit Veterans? Part Two: Systematic Review of the Evidence

Combat and operational stress programs and interventions: A scoping review using a tiered prevention framework

Beginning in 1999, Department of Defense policy directed the military services to develop Combat and Operational Stress Control (COSC) programs to address prevention, early identification, and management of the negative effects of combat and operational stress. The aim of this study is to provide a narrative review of COSC programs and organize them into a prevention framework to clarify gaps and future directions. A systematic search was conducted to identify studies between 2001 and 2020 in peer-reviewed articles or government-sponsored reports describing an evaluation of COSC programs. The target population of these programs was US service members who had participated in an intervention designed to address combat or operational stress in a deployed, operational, or field setting. These programs then were rated for level of evidence and categorized using a tiered prevention model. This search identified 36 published evaluations of 19 COSC programs and interventions from. Most programs were described as effective in addressing target outcomes, with behavioral health outcomes reported for 13 of the 19 identified programs; the remaining six focused on knowledge base and behavior changes. Delivery of these prevention programs also ranged from peer-based implementation to formal treatment, including programs at all prevention levels. COSC interventions show promise for helping service members manage stress, with more than half of the programs showing evidence from studies using randomized designs. Future iterations of COSC program evaluations should explore the development of a joint curriculum using existing content in a tiered prevention framework.

Outcome metrics utilized in evaluations of programs and interventions for combat and operational stress: A review of psychometric properties

The Department of Defense has mandated combat and operational stress control (COSC) efforts for the Services since 1999. Although several COSC-related programs have been implemented, few have undergone evaluation, and no standardized metrics have been established to assess their effectiveness and utility. The purpose of this review was to characterize the content and psychometrics of measures that have been utilized as outcome metrics in evaluations of COSC-related programs and interventions. Systematic literature searches were conducted for publications that: a) evaluated at least one measure from U.S. service members who participated in a program or intervention to prevent or reduce the adverse effects of combat and operational stress; and b) reported U.S. data on the internal consistency, test-retest reliability, convergent validity, and sensitivity/specificity of the identified measures. This process identified 15 measures for which psychometric properties were reviewed for acceptability based on recommended criteria. Identified measures varied from well-validated measures to newer instruments for which more data is needed on one or more of the target psychometric properties. Aside from internal consistency, psychometric data from U.S. military samples were sparse. Results further suggested that some measures might have reduced sensitivity in service members under certain conditions, such as large-scale screening. Additional studies are needed to validate COSC-relevant measures in service members. Future evaluations of programs and interventions for combat and operational stress should select measures that will increase the consistency of the literature, allow comparisons across studies, and ensure alignment with the objectives of identified programs.

Examining the development of PTSD symptoms in individuals who witness acute stress reaction on the battlefield

Adler et al describe an innovative perspective on battlefield posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms in response to an acute stress reaction (ASR), tracking not the individual experiencing ASR, but rather the service members who witness another team member experiencing an ASR. PTSD symptoms, reactions, observations and responses in the witness are assessed.

Considerations for Acute and Emergent Deployed Mental Health Patient Management and Theater Transports: A Scoping Review

Background

Although combat stress and psychiatric casualties of war have consistently contributed to the need for deployed patient transport to higher echelons of care, little is known regarding specific evidence-based strategies for providing psychological support and optimal transport interventions for warriors.

Study Objective

The purpose of this scoping review is to map existing literature related to considerations for deployed mental health patient transport. The review’s primary aims are to identify the existing scientific research evidence, determine research and training gaps, and recommend critical areas for future military research.

Methods

We used Arksey and O’Malley’s six-stage scoping review methodological framework (identify the research question, identify relevant studies, select studies, chart data, report results, and consultation). Using a systematic search strategy, we evaluated peer-reviewed literature from five databases (PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Embase) and gray literature from the Defense Technical Information Center. All publications were independently screened for eligibility by two researchers during three review rounds (title, abstract, and full text).

Results

We identified 1,384 publications, 61 of which met our inclusion criteria. Most publications and technical reports were level IV evidence and below, primarily retrospective cohort studies and epidemiologic surveillance reports. Few rigorously designed studies were identified. Eight research themes and a variety of research and critical training gaps were derived from the reviewed literature. Themes included (1) characterizing mental health patients aeromedically evacuated from theater; (2) in-flight sedation medications; (3) need for aeromedical evacuation (AE) in-theater education, training, and guidelines for staff; (4) epidemiological surveillance of AE from theater; (5) mental health management in deployed settings; (6) suicide-related event management; (7) transport issues for mental health patients; and (8) psychological stressors of AE. Research is needed to establish clinical practice guidelines for mental health condition management in theater and throughout the continuum of en route care.