PTSD In Military Personnel ✓ Solved

Ptsd In Military Personnel

PTSD in Military personnel

PTSD in Military personnel 5 Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder in Military Personnel-Literature Review October 18, 2020 Literature Review of PTSD Psychology 503 Post-traumatic Stress Disorder in Military Personnel Literature review Even though the problem of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) is sometimes viewed as a relatively new topic in the military, as the name suggested as early as 1980, the disease has an unusually long history. This story was regularly associated with the historical context of the war, but the conflicts caused by catastrophic events, disasters and unintentional real injuries have also been widely described (1, 2010). The discovery was previously seen in official terminology when the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) - I was distributed in 1952 in response to a serious extension.

In the next issue of 1968, however, it was forgotten after a long period of relative time. When the DSM-III was created in the 1980s, the rise of the Vietnam War led to new reflections on this problem. PTSD was characterized as a stress problem resulting from many types of stress, including combat stress and regular citizen stress (Navid Ghaffarzadegan, 2016). Clinical psychiatry helped to bring out the importance of the specialty in terms of stressors. Its definition really raised important questions about the connection between a stressor, the individual with whom he or she lives, and his or her characteristics and side effects (Reisman, 2016).

PTSD not only effects military personnel, it also affects people from all walks of lives, from victims of crimes to simple things such as workplace stressors that happen on the job, such as those working in law enforcement. In fact, even family members of people who have been diagnosed with PTSD find themselves suffering from some of the same symptoms that their effected family member suffers from. Large healthcare industries, such as the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), and civilian health departments report large numbers of employees suffering from PTSD problems. Most of the PTSD diagnosis rules in the past concentrated on one domain, usually on just one side of stress, and did not validate the effects of multi-domain sides of stress.

Like other dynamic and extreme issues, for instance, there are long gaps between situation and logical outcomes. Despite more thought being given to the writing, there is a controversial occurrence of PTSD. The presentation of the procedures of sampling and the precision of the findings was both inaccurate. For instance, typical self-reported experiments are the screening methodology, and abstract answers may be deliberately flawed or inadequately answered to prevent social humiliation induced by the disease. (Incapacity for work) (MH, 2014). The review shows that patients get different results when they disclose their problems, for example: They are more reluctant to lose their job or break down in the work environment, low pay and recruitment difficulties, resident representatives and network bans are some of the social pressures they face.

Thus, the potential understanding of separation and the various consequences of being mentally ill can influence the behavior of people. Despite efforts to improve access to adequate mental health care, there are obstacles to many veterans accepting treatment for PTSD. As the VA assessment shows, the biggest obstacle to viable care is the lack of updated medical supplies from suppliers due to beau acracy and red tape. The severe shortage of VA mental health experts such as psychiatrist, psychologist, and other mental health technicians is especially a core component, coupled with the growing number of veterans seeking treatment. Iraqi and Afghan veterans and their families also have a significant impact on unrestricted access to healthcare in many parts of the United States.

According to the Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Rural Health, veterans from these areas are not as protected as veterans from huge urban communities. In order to access organizations that are passionate about the well-being of patients, more doctors and mental health personnel would have to be willing to work in rural and critical areas of need. The prevalence of PTSD in those who are not connected to the military is also a difficult problem. The National Resource Center on Sexual Violence found that half of rape victims are screened for measures regarding PTSD. Given the high rate of major issues regarding children and adults who have been hurt through assault, it is recommended that informed injury scenarios be used, including collaborative, and expertise-based interventions that address the inevitable impact of the injury (Prigerson HG, 2002).

Ongoing research has further highlighted the need to refine the concept of PTSD by realizing how central the word shame can play in its aspects. Discomfort has long been considered an external risk of PTSD, but it is common for some survivors, especially those with relationship brutality, to discover the obvious internal danger of embarrassment (Kessler RC, 2005). Compared to the problem of underdiagnoses of PTSD, many mental health experts can now typically provide government-funded training that gives stress relief. Their analysis of the DSM is that the expansion of symptomatic patterns of PTSD may have unintended consequences by pathological characteristic human responses to episodes that exceptionally interfere with them (Ginzburg K, 2010).

A problem is that many researchers seek out more surprising information on the wonder of post-traumatic development and suggest that most injury survivors achieve higher levels of individual development in the future. (Hendin H, 1991). However, new research has given us better treatments for those suffering from the condition, where they are not afraid to suffer in silence. They are now able to participate in new therapies that not only treat the symptoms but allows them the ability to seek therapy that will not only help them, but their families as well. References 1, N. C. (2010).

Sample Paper For Above instruction

Introduction to PTSD in Military Personnel

Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) has historically been associated with military conflicts, particularly experienced during wars like Vietnam and Iraq. Despite its long-standing recognition, understanding and diagnosing PTSD remain complex due to varying factors such as social stigma, diverse symptom presentation, and differences in individual resilience. This literature review aims to explore the historical development, prevalence, treatment approaches, and ongoing research challenges related to PTSD among military personnel.

Historical Perspective on PTSD

The recognition of PTSD dates back to the early 20th century, with formal terminologies appearing in the DSM-1952. The disorder was initially labeled as "battle fatigue" or "shell shock" during World War I and II, reflecting its connection to combat exposure. The diagnosis evolved with the DSM-III in the 1980s, influenced heavily by the Vietnam War, which brought renewed focus on trauma-related mental health issues among veterans. This period marked a significant shift, emphasizing PTSD as a stress disorder directly linked to traumatic events experienced in combat (Norris & S.L, 2013).

Prevalence of PTSD Among Military Personnel

Prevalence rates vary widely across different military populations. Studies report that between 11% and 30% of veterans from recent conflicts exhibit PTSD symptoms (Kilpatrick et al., 2013). Factors influencing prevalence include exposure severity, combat experiences, and individual resilience. Notably, veterans from rural or military service in Afghanistan and Iraq face additional barriers in accessing mental health care, potentially leading to underdiagnosis and untreated symptoms (Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Rural Health, 2016).

Challenges in Diagnosis and Treatment

Diagnosis of PTSD in military personnel is complicated by overlapping symptoms with other disorders, such as depression and anxiety, and the tendency among soldiers to avoid seeking help due to fear of stigma or negative career impact. Self-report measures, often used in clinical assessments, can be biased or underreported due to social pressures or shame (Kessler RC, 2005). Furthermore, treatment barriers include shortages of mental health specialists and bureaucratic hurdles in accessing care, especially in rural or underserved areas.

Advances in PTSD Treatment and Interventions

Recent advancements include evidence-based therapies such as Cognitive Processing Therapy (CPT), Prolonged Exposure (PE), and Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR), which have shown effectiveness in alleviating PTSD symptoms among veterans (Ginzburg K, 2010). Additionally, novel approaches utilizing virtual reality exposure therapy have emerged, providing immersive environments for trauma processing. Psychopharmacological options, including SSRIs, are also employed to manage symptoms, although they are often combined with psychotherapy for optimal results (Iribarren J et al., 2005).

Implications for Future Research and Policy

Ongoing research underscores the importance of understanding internal factors such as shame and guilt, which can hinder treatment engagement. Furthermore, addressing service disparities in rural areas requires policy initiatives aimed at expanding mental health workforce capacity and reducing bureaucratic barriers. Incorporating resilience-building programs and early intervention strategies during military service could also mitigate long-term PTSD development (Prigerson HG, 2002).

Conclusion

PTSD in military personnel remains a significant mental health concern with profound implications for individuals and military readiness. While progress has been made in understanding and treating the disorder, challenges persist relating to diagnosis, stigma, and healthcare access. Future efforts should focus on personalized interventions, policy reforms, and enhancing community-based support systems to improve outcomes for affected veterans.

References

• Ginzburg, K. (2010). Comorbidity of posttraumatic stress disorder, anxiety, and depression: a 20-year longitudinal study of war veterans. Journal of Affective Disorders.
• Hendin, H. (1991). Suicide and guilt as manifestations of PTSD. American Journal of Psychiatry.
• Kessler, R. C. (2005). Prevalence, severity, and comorbidity of 12-month DSM-IV disorders in the national comorbidity survey replication. Archives of General Psychiatry.
• Iribarren, J., P., & others. (2005). Post-traumatic stress disorder: evidence-based research for the third millennium. Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine.
• Kilpatrick, D. G., & R., H. (2013). National estimates of exposure to traumatic events and PTSD prevalence using DSM-IV and DSM-5 criteria. Journal of Traumatic Stress.
• National Resource Center on Sexual Violence. (2016). Addressing PTSD in sexual assault victims.
• Norris, F. H., & S. L. (2013). Understanding research on the epidemiology of trauma and PTSD. PTSD Research Quarterly.
• Prigerson, H. G., & M. P. (2002). Population attributable fractions of psychiatric disorders and behavioral outcomes associated with combat exposure among US men. American Journal of Public Health.
• Reisman, M. (2016). PTSD treatment for veterans: what’s working, what’s new, and what’s next. P T.
• Ghaffarzadegan, N. (2016). A dynamic model of post-traumatic stress disorder for military personnel and veterans. PLoS ONE.