Skip to main content

Military Health System

Brief Report: Direct Care Cost of Heat Illness to the Army, 2016–2018

Image of Thermometer. Thermometer (Photo credit: U.S. Army)

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Background

Heat injury surveillance in the Department of Defense (DOD) includes the more severe conditions, heat exhaustion and heat stroke.1 Hospitalization occurs more frequently among service members experiencing heat stroke; however, both conditions can result in hospitalization and may require follow-up medical care. Between 2014 and 2018, annual rates of heat illness have increased among U.S. active component members.This report describes the total direct medical cost to the Army associated with heat exhaustion and heat stroke from 2016 through 2018.

Methods

The Weather-Related Injury Repository (WRIR) contains clinical data and medical event reports for heat and cold weather injuries in Army soldiers.3 The WRIR health encounter and admission data used in this analysis were derived from DOD military medical treatment facility medical records and paid TRICARE claims for beneficiaries at civilian facilities. Heat illness was identified using International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10) codes for heat stroke (T67.0*) and heat exhaustion (T67.3*, T67.4*, T67.5*) in the primary or secondary diagnostic code positions.1For the purposes of this study, heat illness hospital admissions and outpatient encounters from 1 Jan. 2016 through 31 Dec. 2018 were extracted from the WRIR for Army active component and active and inactive National Guard and Reserve soldiers. Demographic characteristics were assigned according to the first encounter or admission during the analysis timeframe for each soldier.

Direct medical costs from the medical record and claims files were used to represent the cost of care paid for by the Military Health System (MHS). Variables for these costs have been included in the WRIR for each encounter since its implementation. For inpatient admissions to facilities owned and operated by the military, the direct cost of the care is captured in a variable identified as "full cost," which includes the cost of clinician salary, ancillary laboratory and radiology, ancillary salary, and intensive and surgical care units. For outpatient visits associated with these facilities, the direct cost of care captured in the same full cost variable includes clinician salary, professional salary, laboratory, radiology, pharmacy, ancillary, support, and other costs. For contracted care provided in civilian or network facilities, the direct medical cost represents the amount paid by TRICARE. This variable, tracked in the patient's medical record, has been used to estimate the total cost of each medical encounter in other reports evaluating medical costs for soldiers in the MHS.4–6

To determine the total direct medical cost, all hospital admission and outpatient encounter records with a heat exhaustion or heat stroke diagnosis meeting inclusion criteria were examined and the full cost and/or total amount paid for each heat illness encounter were summed by soldier and the date of care. Total direct medical care cost includes the cost of care associated with follow-up visits. The heat illness type was assigned based on the ICD-10 code in the primary or secondary position. The record was designated a heat stroke when either of the fields had a heat stroke diagnosis. Data were reported by clinical setting (outpatient and inpatient) and by heat illness type (heat exhaustion and heat stroke).

Results

During the study period, 5,291 soldiers—1,027 (19.4%) females and 4,264 (80.6%) males—had 1 or more clinical records associated with heat stroke or heat exhaustion events (Table 1). The majority were enlisted soldiers (88.1%) and younger than 35 years old (90.8%). Of the soldiers who received care for a heat illness, 1 in 4 were members of the National Guard/Reserve.

The 5,291 soldiers had 13,087 records of encounters for heat illnesses that resulted in an average of 2.5 medical encounters per soldier (Table 2). The majority of the soldiers' records indicated heat exhaustion diagnoses (69.3%), of which 98.0% were recorded during outpatient encounters. Similarly, 91.4% of heat stroke diagnoses were made during outpatient encounters. The number of heat stroke admissions was nearly double that of heat exhaustion; the number of hospital bed days associated with heat stroke admissions (786 bed days) was 3 times the number associated with heat exhaustion admissions (263 bed days) (data not shown).

The total Direct CareDirect care refers to military hospitals and clinics, also known as “military treatment facilities” and “MTFs.”direct care cost to the Army for heat stroke and heat exhaustion encounters was $7.3 million, or $559 per encounter. Even though approximately 70% of the medical encounters were related to heat exhaustion, cost was almost evenly divided between heat exhaustion and heat stroke encounters ($3.7 million and $3.6 million, respectively). The total cost of outpatient encounters was approximately 20% higher than the cost of inpatient admissions ($3.9 million and $3.3 million, respectively). An inpatient heat stroke encounter ($7,453/encounter) was more than 10-fold as costly as the aggregate cost per encounter ($559/encounter).

Editorial Comment

This is the first report in the literature summarizing the direct medical costs associated with heat illness diagnoses among U.S. Army soldiers. A major strength of this study is its inclusion of all active Army and active and inactive National Guard/Reserve soldiers diagnosed with heat illnesses in outpatient and inpatient settings at both military treatment and civilian facilities. For example, in 2015, DeGroot and colleagues7 found an overall treatment cost of $408,074 for heat injuries occurring among 128 of the 10,580 soldiers attending Army Ranger School, which is held at 1 military installation. The DeGroot and colleagues study, which included only Army Ranger trainees, found that the cost per encounter for heat exhaustion treated at the Ranger aid station ranged from $176 to $216 per encounter. The authors estimated that the cost per encounter ranged from $3,024 to $4,327 for heat exhaustion treated but not admitted to a hospital (outpatient), while the cost of an encounter for heat stroke, as indicated by a hospital admission (inpatient), ranged from $5,000 to $6,878 per encounter.7 Using more precise encounter and hospitalization data from 5,291 U.S. Army soldiers with a heat injury over a 3-year period, the current study found a total direct care cost of $7,321,719 for heat injuries. The cost per encounter was $410 for heat exhaustion and $897 per heat stroke encounter.

Direct medical costs are only a portion of the total cost associated with heat illness. Indirect costs of illness account for costs associated with absenteeism, lost productivity, and decreased performance.8–10 In the military, there are lost productivity costs to the Army in the form of 1) lost duty days (or absenteeism), where the soldier is paid but is not able to perform the relevant duties because of health-related reasons, such as hospitalization, and 2) limited duty days, in which a soldier performs the relevant duties but at diminished capacity following an illness or injury.4,6 This analysis notes a total of 1,049 bed days (or lost duty days) due to heat illness diagnoses. Based on average soldier pay for the study timeframe and assuming the loss of 8 hours per day, these lost duty days total $356,000 in lost cost to the Army.

While data for medical profiles associated with heat illness were not available, the indirect costs of the lost and limited duty time associated with medical profiles have been estimated at almost 80% of the total cost of other injuries.4,6 If we assume this cost ratio for heat illness, indirect costs could reach $36 million. A future analysis should incorporate lost and/or limited duty heat illness profile data in order to provide a better estimate of the total cost of these conditions to the Army.

There were 2 main limitations to the study. The surveillance period for this report covered the period 1 Jan. 2016 through 31 Dec. 2018, so it is possible that some initial costs occurring before Jan. 2016 and some follow-up and sequelae visits occurring after Dec. 2018 were not accounted for in the full care cost for each heat illness event. Additionally, the cost assigned by the MHS to heat injury as a primary diagnosis reflects the intensity and complexity of care for other illnesses or injuries (e.g., gastroenteritis, stress fracture) that may be present at the time of the encounter.11

Author affiliations: Armed Forces Health Surveillance Branch, Silver Spring, MD (Dr. Forrest, Dr. Maule, Ms. McCabe, Ms. Kebisek, Mr. Steelman, and Dr. Ambrose).

Disclaimer: The contents, views, or opinions expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Defense Health Agency or the Department of Defense.

References

  1. Armed Forces Health Surveillance Branch. Surveillance Case Definition. Heat illness. https://health.mil/Reference-Center/Publications/2019/10/01/Heat-Injuries. Accessed 20 Feb. 2020.
  2. Armed Forces Health Surveillance Branch. Update: Heat injures, active component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2018. MSMR. 2019;26(4):15–20.
  3. Barnes SR, Ambrose JF, Maule AL, et al. Incidence, timing, and seasonal patterns of heat illnesses during U.S. Army basic combat training, 2014–2018. MSMR. 2019;26(4):7–14.
  4. Hauschild VD, Lee T, Barnes S, Forrest L, Hauret K, Jones BH. The etiology of injuries in US Army initial entry training. US Army Med Dep J. 2018;(2-18):22–29.
  5. Bulzacchelli MT, Sulsky SI, Zhu L, Brandt S, Barenberg A. The cost of basic training injuries in the U.S. Army: injury-related medical care and risk factors. Final Technical Report. Fort Belvoir, VA: Defense Technical Information Center.
  6. Hauschild VD, Forrest LJ, Hirleman C, Pinyan EC, Grier T, Jones BH. Pectoralis major injuries in the Army, CY 2016 active duty Army. APHC PHIP No. 12-03-0719. Public Health Information Paper. Fort Belvoir, VA: Defense Technical Information Center.
  7. DeGroot DW, Kenefick RW, Sawka MN. Impact of arm immersion cooling during Ranger training on exertional heat illness and treatment costs. Mil Med. 2015;180(11):1178–1183.
  8. Johns G. Presenteeism in the workplace: a review and research agenda. J Organ Behav. 2010;31(4):519–542.
  9. Mitchell RJ, Bates P. Measuring health-related productivity loss. Popul Health Manag. 2011;14(2):93–98.
  10. Rice DP, Hodgson TA, Kopstein AN. The economic costs of illness: a replication and update. Health Care Financ Rev. 1985;7(1):61–80.
  11. Defense Health Agency. Uniform Business Office User Guide. May 2018. https://health.mil/Reference-Center/Reports/2018/09/27/DHA-UBO-User-Guide-May-2018. Accessed 14 April 2020.

TABLE 1. Demographic and military characteristics of soldiers with heat illness encounters, U.S. Army, 2016–2018

TABLE 2. Medical encounters and direct care costs associated with heat illness, U.S. Army, 2016–2018

You also may be interested in...

MSMR Vol. 29 No. 10 - October 2022

Report
10/1/2022

A monthly publication of the Armed Forces Health Surveillance Division. This issue of the peer-reviewed journal contains the following articles: Surveillance trends for SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory pathogens among U.S. Military Health System Beneficiaries, Sept. 27, 2020 – Oct. 2,2021; Establishment of SARS-CoV-2 genomic surveillance within the MHS during March 1 – Dec. 31 2020; Suicide behavior among heterosexual, lesbian/gay, and bisexual active component service members in the U.S. Armed Forces; Brief report: Phase I results using the Virtual Pooled Registry Cancer Linkage system (VPR-CLS) for military cancer surveillance.

Recommended Content:

Health Readiness & Combat Support | Public Health | Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Viral hepatitis C, active component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2011–2020

Article
10/1/2022
The Armed Services Blood Program (ASBP) is the official blood program of the U.S. military. It is a joint operation that collects, tests, stores, transports and distributes blood products to military locations around the world, wherever and whenever it’s needed most.

This study reports updated numbers and incidence rates of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection among active component members of the U.S. military using a revised case definition during a 10-year surveillance period between 2011 and 2020.

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Update: Contraception Among Active Component Service Women, U.S. Armed Forces, 2017–2021

Article
10/1/2022
JOINT BASE SAN ANTONIO-FORT SAM HOUSTON, Texas (Oct. 20, 2021) -- Brooke Army Medical Center now offers female service members a walk-in clinic for contraception on Wednesdays from noon to 2 p.m. in the Adolescent and Young Adult Medicine Clinic at the CPT Jennifer M. Moreno Clinic.

This report summarizes the annual prevalence of permanent sterilization, as well as use of long- and short-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs and SARCs, respectively), contraceptive counseling services, and use of emergency contraceptives from 2017 through 2021 among active component U.S. service women.

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Surveillance Snapshot: Influenza Immunization Among U.S. Armed Forces Healthcare Workers, August 2017–April 2022

Article
10/1/2022
Carl R. Darnall Army Medical Center, Fort Hood, Texas, Capt Claireisa Spencer prepares to administer a flu vaccine to a Fort Hood Army Exchange customer during CRDAMC’s celebration of National Influenza Vaccination Week.

Immunization Among U.S. Armed Forces Healthcare Workers

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

MSMR Vol. 29 No. 09 - September 2022

Report
9/1/2022

A monthly publication of the Armed Forces Health Surveillance Division. This issue of the peer-reviewed journal contains the following articles: Surveillance trends for SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory pathogens among U.S. Military Health System Beneficiaries, Sept. 27, 2020 – Oct. 2,2021; Establishment of SARS-CoV-2 genomic surveillance within the MHS during March 1 – Dec. 31 2020; Suicide behavior among heterosexual, lesbian/gay, and bisexual active component service members in the U.S. Armed Forces; Brief report: Phase I results using the Virtual Pooled Registry Cancer Linkage system (VPR-CLS) for military cancer surveillance.

Recommended Content:

Health Readiness & Combat Support | Public Health | Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Update: Routine Screening for Antibodies to Human Immunodeficiency Virus, U.S. Armed Forces, Active and Reserve Components, January 2017–June 2022

Article
9/1/2022
NAVAL MEDICAL CENTER CAMP LEJEUNE, North Carolina - As the leading petty officer for Naval Medical Center Camp Lejeune's Community Health Clinic, HM2 Kameron Jacobs is part of the first satellite team to treat service members living with HIV.

This report provides an update through June 2022 of routine screening results for antibodies to the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) among members of the active and reserve components of the U.S. Armed Forces. During the full 5 and 1/2-year surveillance period, the HIV seropositivity rates for active component service members were 0.21 positives per 1,000 members of the Army, 0.24 for the Navy, 0.16 for the Marine Corps, and 0.14 for the Air Force.

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Evaluation of the MSMR Surveillance Case Definition for Incident Cases of Hepatitis C

Article
9/1/2022
U.S. Marine Corps Lance Cpl. Angel Alvarado, a combat graphics specialist, donates blood for the Armed Services Blood Program (ASBP).

The validity of military hepatitis C virus (HCV) surveillance data is uncertain due to the potential for misclassification introduced when using administrative databases for surveillance purposes. The objectives of this study were to assess the validity of the surveillance case definition used by the Medical Surveillance Monthly Report (MSMR) for HCV, the over and underestimation of cases from surveillance data, and the true burden of HCV disease in the U.S. military.

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Letter to the Editor: Clarification of Hepatitis C Virus Screening with Case Definitions and Prevalence Among Trainees

Article
9/1/2022
ALBANY, Ga. (May 11, 2022) - Hospital Corpsman 2nd Class Leeanna Grzemski, a lab technician at Naval Branch Health Clinic Albany, takes a blood sample. Grzemski, a native of Weatherford, Texas, says, “Best part of my job is meeting and interacting with our patients.” (U.S. Navy photo by Deidre Smith, Naval Hospital Jacksonville/Released).

We read with interest the brief report regarding the prevalence of Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) infection in basic military trainee blood donors by Kasper and colleagues in the November 2021 issue of the Medical Surveillance Monthly Report (MSMR),1 an update of a previous similar report

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Brief Report: Menstrual Suppression Among U.S. Female Service Members in the Millennium Cohort Study

Article
9/1/2022
U.S. Marine Corps Lance Cpl. Bobby Brodeur, a Gilford, New Hampshire, native and machine gunner with 3rd Battalion, 6th Marine Regiment, 2d Marine Division, conducts gun drills at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, Oct. 13, 2022. Brodeur is currently serving as a machine gunner with 3/6 and is one of three female infantry Marines in Kilo Co. She has demonstrated an unwavering commitment to 3/6 through her high physical fitness scores and leading by example within the platoon. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Lance Cpl. Megan Ozaki)

Menstrual suppression allows for the control or complete suppression of menstrual periods through hormonal contraceptive methods. In addition to preventing pregnancy, suppression can alleviate medical conditions and symptoms associated with menstruation such as iron deficiency anemia,1 eliminate logistical hygiene-related challenges, and improve quality of life.

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

MSMR Vol. 29 No. 08 - August 2022

Report
8/1/2022

A monthly publication of the Armed Forces Health Surveillance Division. This issue of the peer-reviewed journal contains the following articles: Surveillance trends for SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory pathogens among U.S. Military Health System Beneficiaries, Sept. 27, 2020 – Oct. 2,2021; Establishment of SARS-CoV-2 genomic surveillance within the MHS during March 1 – Dec. 31 2020; Suicide behavior among heterosexual, lesbian/gay, and bisexual active component service members in the U.S. Armed Forces; Brief report: Phase I results using the Virtual Pooled Registry Cancer Linkage system (VPR-CLS) for military cancer surveillance.

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Musculoskeletal Injuries During U.S. Air Force Special Warfare Training Assessment and Selection, Fiscal Years 2019–2021.

Article
8/1/2022
U.S. Air Force Capt. Hopkins, 351st Special Warfare Training Squadron, Instructor Flight commander and Chief Combat Rescue Officer (CRO) instructor, conducts a military free fall equipment jump from a DHC-4 Caribou aircraft in Coolidge, Arizona, July 17, 2021. Hopkins is recognized as the 2020 USAF Special Warfare Instructor Company Grade Officer of the Year for his outstanding achievement from January 1 to December 31, 2020.

Musculoskeletal (MSK) injuries are costly and the leading cause of medical visits and disability in the U.S. military.1,2 Within training envi­ronments, MSK injuries may lead to a loss of training, deferment to a future class, or voluntary disenrollment from a training pipeline, all of which are impediments to maintaining full levels of manpower and resources for the Department of Defense.

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Brief Report: Pain and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Screening Outcomes Among Military Personnel Injured During Combat Deployment.

Article
8/1/2022
U.S. Air Force Airman 1st Class Miranda Lugo, right, 18th Operational Medical Readiness Squadron mental health technician and Guardian Wingman trainer, and Maj. Joanna Ho, left, 18th OMRS director of psychological health, discuss the suicide prevention training program, Guardian Wingman, at Kadena Air Base, Japan, Aug. 20, 2021. Guardian Wingman aims to promote wingman culture and early help-seeking behavior. (U.S. Air Force photo by Airman 1st Class Anna Nolte)

The post-9/11 U.S. military conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan lasted over a decade and yielded the most combat casualties since the Vietnam War. While patient survivability increased to the high­est level in history, a changing epidemiology of combat injuries emerged whereby focus shifted to addressing an array of long-term sequelae, including physical, psychologi­cal, and neurological issues.

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Prevalence and Distribution of Refractive Errors Among Members of the U.S. Armed Forces and the U.S. Coast Guard, 2019.

Article
8/1/2022
Ophthamologist Air Force Maj. Thuy Tran evaluates a patient during an eye exam. (U.S. Air Force photo by Tech. Sgt. John Hughel)

During calendar year 2019, the estimated prevalence of myopia, hyperopia, and astigmatism were 17.5%, 2.1%, and 11.2% in the active component of the U.S. Armed Forces and 10.1%, 1.2%, and 6.1% of the U.S. Coast Guard, respectively.

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

MSMR Vol. 29 No. 07 - July 2022

Report
7/1/2022

A monthly publication of the Armed Forces Health Surveillance Division. This issue of the peer-reviewed journal contains the following articles: Surveillance trends for SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory pathogens among U.S. Military Health System Beneficiaries, Sept. 27, 2020 – Oct. 2,2021; Establishment of SARS-CoV-2 genomic surveillance within the MHS during March 1 – Dec. 31 2020; Suicide behavior among heterosexual, lesbian/gay, and bisexual active component service members in the U.S. Armed Forces; Brief report: Phase I results using the Virtual Pooled Registry Cancer Linkage system (VPR-CLS) for military cancer surveillance.

Recommended Content:

Health Readiness & Combat Support | Public Health | Medical Surveillance Monthly Report

Establishment of SARS-CoV-2 Genomic Surveillance Within the Military Health System During 1 March–31 December 2020.

Article
7/1/2022
Dr. Peter Larson loads an Oxford Nanopore MinION sequencer in support of COVID-19 sequencing assay development at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases, Fort Detrick, Maryland. (Photo by John Braun Jr., USAMRIID.)

This report describes SARS-CoV-2 genomic surveillance conducted by the Department of Defense (DOD) Global Emerging Infections Surveillance Branch and the Next-Generation Sequencing and Bioinformatics Consortium (NGSBC) in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Samples and sequence data were from SARS-CoV-2 infections occurring among Military Health System (MHS) beneficiaries from 1 March to 31 December 2020.

Recommended Content:

Medical Surveillance Monthly Report
<< < 1 2 3 4 5  ... > >> 
Showing results 1 - 15 Page 1 of 14
Refine your search
Last Updated: October 24, 2022
Follow us on Instagram Follow us on LinkedIn Follow us on Facebook Follow us on Twitter Follow us on YouTube Sign up on GovDelivery