Social Support and Social Stress Among Suicidal Inpatients at Military Treatment Facilities: A Multidimensional Investigation.

ABSTRACT: The associations between social support and stress with internalizing symptoms (depressive symptoms and hopelessness) and hazardous drinking were tested in an inpatient sample of suicidal military personnel. Baseline data from a randomized clinical trial were analyzed. Different sources of support and stressors in the social context of military personnel were differentially linked to internalizing symptoms and hazardous drinking. In the full sample ( n = 192), family and nonfamily support were both inversely associated with internalizing symptoms but not hazardous drinking. Family stress was positively associated with internalizing symptoms. In a subsample of service members who had a history of deployment ( n = 98), postdeployment social support was protective against internalizing symptoms, whereas deployment harassment was associated with increased odds of hazardous drinking. Results underscore the need for assessment of various dimensions of social support and stress to guide case formulation and optimize strategies to support patients' mental well-being and adaptive coping.

Association of Traumatic Brain Injury Severity and Self-Reported Neuropsychiatric Symptoms in Wounded Military Service Members.

The impact of traumatic brain injury (TBI) severity and loss of consciousness (LOC) on the development of neuropsychiatric symptoms was studied in injured service members (SMs; n = 1278) evacuated from combat settings between 2003 and 2012. TBI diagnoses of mild TBI (mTBI) or moderate-to-severe TBI (MS-TBI) along with LOC status were identified using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) codes and the Defense and Veterans Brain Injury Center Standard Surveillance Case Definition for TBI. Self-reported psychiatric symptoms were evaluated for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) with the PTSD Checklist, Civilian Version for PTSD, the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 for major depressive disorder (MDD), and the Patient Health Questionnaire-15 for somatic symptom disorder (SSD) in two time periods post-injury: Assessment Period 1 (AP1, 0.0-2.5 months) and Assessment Period 2 (AP2, 3-12 months). mTBI, but not MS-TBI, was associated with increased neuropsychiatric symptoms: PTSD in AP1 and AP2; MDD in AP1; and SSD in AP2. A subgroup analysis of mTBI with and without LOC revealed that mTBI with LOC, but not mTBI without LOC, was associated with increased symptoms as compared to non-TBI: PTSD in AP1 and AP2; MDD in AP1; and SSD in AP1 and AP2. Moreover, mTBI with LOC was associated with increased MDD symptoms in AP2, and SSD symptoms in AP1 and AP2, compared to mTBI without LOC. These findings reinforce the need for the accurate characterization of TBI severity and a multi-disciplinary approach to address the devastating impacts of TBI in injured SMs.

Somatic Symptom Severity, Not Injury Severity, Predicts Probable Posttraumatic Stress Disorder and Major Depressive Disorder in Wounded Service Members.

Although previous studies have reported an association between patient-reported somatic symptom severity and the development of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) or major depressive disorder (MDD) in injured military service members (SMs), conclusions from other studies regarding the association between clinician-determined injury severity and PTSD or MDD remain unclear. The present study investigated whether somatic symptoms or injury severity predict the development of probable PTSD or MDD in wounded SMs medically evacuated from combat areas. Data including SM demographic characteristics, clinician-determined injury severity (i.e., Injury Severity Score [ISS] and Abbreviated Injury Scale [AIS] values), and self-report assessments of PTSD (PTSD Checklist-Civilian Version), MDD (Patient Health Questionnaire [PHQ]-9), and somatic symptoms (PHQ-15) were analyzed. A total of 2,217 SMs completed at least one self-assessment between 2003 and 2014, with 425 having completed assessments at each assessment period (AP), conducted 1-75 (AP1), 76-165 (AP2), and 166-255 (AP3) days postinjury. Between AP1 and AP3, the rates of probable PTSD and MDD increased from 3.0% to 11.7% and from 2.8% to 9.2%, respectively. Somatic symptom severity at AP1 predicted probable PTSD and MDD at all three APs, odds ratios (ORs) = 3.5-11.5; however, ISS values did not predict probable PTSD or MDD at any AP, ORs = 0.6-0.9. This suggests that the initial severity of self-reported somatic symptoms rather than clinician-determined injury severity predicts the development of probable PTSD and MDD in wounded SMs.

Hospitalization for physical injury may contribute to recovery of invisible war wounds: Response to Peterson's (2021) commentary on Soumoff et al. (2021).

Peterson's (2021) commentary on our recently published manuscript (Soumoff et al., 2021) suggests that our findings are an example of visible, physical injuries of war facilitating communication with others, which, in turn, fosters recovery from invisible war wounds. We agree that in the proper context, the retelling of one's traumatic story can be important for recovery from and, perhaps, even the prevention of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and major depressive disorder (MDD). Participants in our study cohort differed from most others who experienced combat trauma in that while they were hospitalized, they experienced nearly daily visits from a behavioral health provider to address traumatic stress-related symptoms. It is likely that individuals who sustained more severe physical injury (i.e., higher Injury Severity Score [ISS] ratings) had longer hospital stays, received more support, and had more opportunities to retell their stories than those with less severe injuries, leading to decreases in PTSD and MDD symptoms. To note support of this supposition, in Table 5 of Soumoff et al. (2021), although not significant, the adjusted odds ratios (aORs) for PTSD and MDD were below 1 for service members with high (i.e., above 16) ISS ratings. The physical injury-related hospitalizations participants in our sample experienced fostered activities described by Peterson (2021) that likely contributed to the prevention and resolution of PTSD and MDD symptoms, benefits not received by most individuals who suffer only invisible wounds of war.

Ketamine Administration During Hospitalization Is Not Associated With Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Outcomes in Military Combat Casualties: A Matched Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Ketamine is routinely used within the context of combat casualty care. Despite early concerns that ketamine administration may be associated with elevated risk of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), more recent evidence suggests no relationship. Because PTSD occurs with regular frequency in Operation Iraqi Freedom/Operation Enduring Freedom (OIF/OEF) Service Members (SMs) and combat-related injuries are associated with higher likelihood of PTSD, it is important to investigate the relationship between ketamine exposure during inpatient medical and surgical care and PTSD symptoms in OIF/OEF SMs. METHODS: Medical record data from OIF/OEF SMs medically evacuated from combat (N = 1158) included demographic characteristics, injury severity, body areas injured, and PTSD Checklist (PCL) scores. The primary analysis assessed the association between ketamine versus nonketamine exposure on positive PTSD screen (logistic regression) and PCL scores (linear regression) after using 1:1 propensity score matching to adjust for available potential confounding variables. Because there were 2 primary outcomes, the binary positive PTSD screen (yes/no) and continuous PCL score, the significance level was set at P ≤ .025. In sensitivity analyses, propensity scores were used to match ketamine to nonketamine records in a 1:4 ratio, as well as to conduct inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW). Regressions examining the relationship between ketamine exposure and outcomes were repeated for unconditional, 1:4 matching, and IPTW models. RESULTS: In the sample, 107 received ketamine and 1051 did not. In the logistic regression, the probability of a positive PTSD screen was not significantly different between ketamine versus nonketamine patients (odds ratio [OR] = 1.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.48-3.47; P = .62). In the linear regression, PCL scores were not significantly different between ketamine versus nonketamine patients (mean difference = 1.98 [95% CI, -0.99 to 4.96]; P = .19). The results were consistent in the unconditional, 1:4 matching, and IPTW models. CONCLUSIONS: No differences in PTSD screening risk or symptom levels between ketamine exposed and nonexposed were found. Given the small sample size, wide CIs of the effects, and additional confounds inherent to retrospective studies, future studies are needed to examine the complex relationships between ketamine and psychological symptoms.