Comparison of mental health between aircrew and ground crew at ratio of 1:1 among 122 army airmen / 中国组织工程研究

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The training task for aircrew of army airmen is very heavy, the evaluation of flight personnel on psychological diathesis is performed to early discover and deal with corresponding questions.OBJECTIVE: To compare the difference of mental health between aircrew and ground crew of army airmen and provide reference data for implementing corresponding norms.DESIGN: Chester sampling investigation and paired design were applied.SETTING: the 71687 Force of Chinese PLA, the 71521 Force of Chinese PLA, Department of Epidemiology, Fourth Military Medical University of Chinese PLAPARTICIPANTS: By chester sampling, 122 aircrew and 122 ground crew of one army airmen in one stationed training troop were randomized in February 2001. The pairs were made at ratio of 11 according to age difference less than 3 years and same sex and nationality. The investigated persons were all male, of Han and aged varied from 23 to 52 years.METHODS: Cornell health questionnaire was adopted respectively in investigation of aircrew and ground crew of army airmen. The investigated persons finished and handed in questionnaire independently on the spot in manner of secretion and centralized filling-up. Cornell health questionnaire is composed of 18 sections, including 195 questions, involving 4 aspects,named somatic symptoms, medial and family history, general health and habit and mental symptoms. The total score of Cornell health questionnaire ≥ 30 indicates somatic and mental disturbance and the score of mental section ≥ 10 indicates mental disturbance, both of which are taken as the criteria in comparison of psychological health in receptors of two groups.MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Every factor score and total score in somatic and mental sections in Cornell health questionnaire for aircrew and ground crew.RESULTS: The tested results of each 122 cases in either aircrew group or ground crew group entered result analysis. Evaluated results of somatic and mental symptoms in receptors of two groups the total score was low in Cornell health questionnaire (0-14 scores), of which, the total score in aircrew group was higher than that in ground crew group (81.5% and 59.8%,P ＜ 0.05); the score in mental section was low (0-9 scores), of which, that in aircrew group was higher remarkably than that in ground crew group (99.2% and 91.8%, P ＜ 0.01); the score for the receptors with somatic and mental disturbance (total score≥30, score in mental section ≥ 10) in aircrew group was lower than those in ground crew group (4.1% and 12.3%, P ＜ 0.05); the score for the receptors with mental disturbance (score in mental section≥ 10) in aircrew group was lower remarkably than ground crew group (0.8% and 8.2%, P ＜ 0.01). For somatic section in aircrew group, except the factors of muscle, skeleton and skin, their scores were higher than those in ground crew group (P ＞ 0.05), the scores of the rest factors were all lower than those in ground crew group, of which, the difference was significant in evaluation of factors of eye, ear, nervous system, urinary reproductive system and fatigue in comparison of two groups (P ＜ 0.05). The score of every factor in mental section of aircrew group was lower than those in ground crew group. Except tension factor, in comparison of the rest factors in two groups, the significant difference was present (P ＜ 0.05).CONCLUSION: Overall psychological health state in Cornell questionnaire of aircrew in army airmen was superior to ground crew. Aircrew still presents a part of psychological health questions, mainly in somatic section and inadaptability was the most positive response in mental section, suggesting that aircrew probably presents inadaptable phenomena.