Skip to main content

Military Health System

Test of Sitewide Banner

This is a test of the sitewide banner capability. In the case of an emergency, site visitors would be able to visit the news page for addition information.

Surveillance of Mental and Behavioral Health Care Utilization and Use of Telehealth, Active Component, U.S. Armed Forces, 1 January 2019–30 September 2020

Image of Surveillance of Mental and Behavioral Health Care Utilization and Use of Telehealth, Active Component, U.S. Armed Forces, 1 January 2019–30 September 2020. Surveillance of Mental and Behavioral Health Care Utilization and Use of Telehealth, Active Component, U.S. Armed Forces, 1 January 2019–30 September 2020

What are the New Findings?

During the first 6 months of the COVID-19 pandemic, health care utilization for mental and behavioral health generally declined during March and April but rebounded by June 2020. During the same period, telehealth usage increased during the early pandemic and was on average 25% higher during the period between March and September 2020 as compared to the previous year.

What is the Impact on Readiness and Force Health Protection?

During the first 6 months of the COVID-19 pandemic, health care utilization for mental and behavioral health generally declined during March and April but rebounded by June 2020. During the same period, telehealth usage increased during the early pandemic and was on average 25% higher during the period between March and September 2020 as compared to the previous year.

Abstract

This analysis of population-level health care utilization data evaluates changes in monthly counts and rates of medical encounters for mental and behavioral health (MH/BH) conditions and the proportion of care delivered via telehealth among active component military members of the U.S. Armed Forces during the first 6 months (March–September 2020) of the COVID-19 pandemic. Comparisons are also made to the same time period in the previous year (2019). Telehealth usage increased during the early pandemic and was on average 25% higher during March–September 2020 as compared to the previous year. In contrast, MH/BH outpatient visit rates declined modestly between March and May 2020 before rebounding in June and remaining stable through September 2020. The number of bed days attributable to MH/BH conditions also declined during March and April 2020 and was on average 30% lower during March–September 2020 as compared to the same period in the prior year.  Continued surveillance is warranted to track MH/BH health care utilization during the later months of the pandemic to ensure that sufficient resources continue to be directed towards MH/BH care to support the health and readiness of active component service members.

Background

The World Health Organization declared the spread of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) an international pandemic on March 11, 2020. Subsequently, 2 national emergency declarations related to the pandemic were issued in the U.S. on March 13. Between 1 March and 31 May 2020, 42 U.S. states and territories issued mandatory stay-at-home orders as a mitigation strategy to reduce the spread of COVID-19.1 The resulting unprecedented and multi-dimensional disruptions to daily life contributed to social isolation, fear and worry about being infected with COVID-19, economic stress, and other factors which can affect mental and behavioral health (MH/BH).

Multiple studies have reported on the negative MH impacts of the pandemic. A  systematic review revealed elevated rates of stressors and symptoms of anxiety and depression across 8 countries during the pandemic as compared to the prior year.2 In the U.S., the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported considerable increases in symptoms of anxiety and depressive disorders between April and June of 20203,4 and elevated rates of suicidal ideation, substance abuse, and other adverse mental health conditions in June 20205 when compared to the previous year.

Concomitant with these negative consequences, the COVID-19 pandemic forced many health care institutions to embrace the use of telehealth to efficiently provide quality care to patients.  Several large health care systems in the U.S. reported dramatic increases in the use of telehealth with commensurate declines for in-person medical care.6–8 In addition to the overall shift from in-person to telehealth medical services, health care systems reported increased use of telehealth specifically for mental health care. For example, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs experienced an increase of over 500% in telehealth visits for mental and behavioral health care between 11 March and 22 April 2020.9 Similar patterns for MH/BH visits and telehealth were observed among TRICARE beneficiaries during the COVID-19 pandemic as compared to the same time period in 2019.10

However, estimates of the magnitude of change in the utilization of MH/BH health care and telehealth use by active component members of the U.S. Armed Forces have not been published. This surveillance analysis of population-level health care utilization data evaluates changes in monthly counts and rates of medical encounters for MH/BH conditions among active component military members of the U.S. Armed Forces during the first 6 months (March–September 2020) of the COVID-19 pandemic. This analysis also assesses and reports the proportion of MH/BH encounters delivered via telehealth during the surveillance period. Finally, counts and rates of MH/BH encounters during the first 6 months of the pandemic are compared to the same time period in the previous year (2019).

Methods

The surveillance period for this analysis was 1 January 2019 through 30 September 2020. This retrospective surveillance analysis evaluated health care utilization for MH/BH conditions including outpatient encounters, hospitalizations, and telehealth usage for all active component service members in the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps during the surveillance period. The data used in this analysis were derived from administrative medical records routinely maintained in the Defense Medical Surveillance System (DMSS) consisting of encounters rendered at military treatment facilities (MTFs) and civilian facilities if reimbursed through the Military Health System (MHS) worldwide.

For the surveillance period, monthly summaries of health care utilization for specific MH/BH conditions were quantified using methods consistent with those used in the annual Medical Surveillance Monthly Report (MSMR) burden analysis.11 Standard surveillance case definitions developed by the Armed Forces Health Surveillance Division were used to identify International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10) codes corresponding to the MH/BH conditions of interest (Table 1) All medical encounters for active component service members with an ICD-10 code for a MH/BH condition of interest in the primary (first-listed) diagnostic position were identified. The specific MH/BH conditions evaluated for this analysis included the following: adjustment disorders, alcohol-related disorders, anxiety disorders, depressive disorders, substance-related disorders, suicidal ideation, psychosocial circumstances (e.g., problems related to family circumstances; problems related to other psychosocial circumstances), and insomnia. ICD-10 code F10.11 was not included because this code represents alcohol abuse in remission. Although not specifically a MH/BH diagnosis, insomnia was included in this analysis as it is a common comorbidity with other MH/BH conditions and increases in the frequency of sleep problems have been reported during the COVID-19 pandemic.12

Telehealth encounters were defined as outpatient encounters that contained a Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code for a telehealth encounter (i.e., health care delivered via telephone or video) or that were coded as a telehealth encounter in a DMSS variable identifying appointment type.

All medical encounters identified using the criteria specified above were included in this analysis and no sampling strategy was utilized. Because this analysis represents population-level data and the goal of the analysis was not to generalize these findings to other populations or time periods, no inferential statistics were employed.13

Counts of outpatient medical encounters, the number of unique individuals receiving care, and the numbers of bed days were calculated and reported for each month of the surveillance period for MH/BH conditions overall and for each specific MH/BH condition assessed. Monthly MH/BH outpatient encounter rates were calculated by dividing the number of outpatient encounters (including telehealth encounters) in a given month by the number of service members serving at least 1 day during that month and reported as the number of encounters per 100 service members. The number of bed days attributable to insomnia and psychological circumstances were not reported because there were few hospitalizations for these conditions.

Results

During January and February 2020 (the months prior to the declaration of the pandemic), the MH/BH outpatient visit rate and the number of bed days attributable to MH/BH conditions averaged 12 and 13% higher, respectively, than in the same period in the previous year. (Table 2, Figures 1a, 1b). In contrast, telehealth usage during this period was similar (approximately 1% lower) to the same period in 2019 (Table 2, Figure 1c). During March 2020, the MH/BH outpatient visit rate remained 6% higher than in 2019 (Table 2, Figure 1a). However, the number of bed days attributable to MH/BH conditions during March 2020 (n=10,842) represented a 19% decrease from February 2020 and an 11% decrease compared to February 2019 (Table 2).

Between March and April 2020, the outpatient visit rate for MH/BH encounters declined by 15% to 10.6 visits per 100 service members; this outpatient visit rate was stable through May (Table 2, Figure 2). During this same period, the percentage of outpatient encounters delivered via telehealth increased an additional 22%, after increasing 48% between February and March 2020.

By June 2020, the declining trend in health care utilization for MH/BH conditions reversed with an 11% increase in the outpatient visit rate to 11.8 encounters per 100 service members (Table 2, Figure 2). Similarly, the number of bed days attributable to MH/BH conditions increased by 17% in June as compared to the prior month (Table 2). In contrast, from May through June 2020, telehealth usage declined by 14%.

During the remainder of the surveillance period (July–September 2020), the outpatient visit rate was relatively stable and varied by 3% or less while the number of bed days attributable to MH/BH conditions declined in each remaining month of the surveillance period (Table 2, Figure 2). Overall, the number of bed days attributable to all MH/BH conditions in September was 29% lower than in August and 46% lower than in September of the prior year.

Telehealth use for MH/BH conditions peaked in April 2020. Subsequently, telehealth use declined during May–August 2020 although telehealth use remained consistently higher every month between March and September 2020 than during the same period in the prior year (2019) (Figure 1c).

Generally, patterns of health care utilization for specific MH/BH conditions (e.g., adjustment disorders, anxiety disorders, depressive disorders) were similar to patterns identified in the summary of conditions overall (Tables 3–10 [See Appendix]). For example, all conditions included in this analysis except insomnia, psychosocial circumstances, and suicidal ideation exhibited the same declines in outpatient visit rates during April and May 2020 and a rebound, or increase in outpatient visit rates, in June 2020. The 3 conditions that did not follow this pattern still showed a decline in outpatient visit rates in April but demonstrated an earlier rebound in outpatient visit rates in May instead of June 2020.

Similarly, while most specific MH/BH conditions demonstrated generally lower outpatient visit rates during June–September 2020 as compared to the previous year, 3 conditions (adjustment disorders, anxiety disorders, psychosocial circumstances) had, on average, higher outpatient visit rates than the same period in 2019. Average visit rates were slightly elevated for adjustment disorders (5% higher) and psychosocial circumstances (2% higher), while outpatient visit rates for anxiety disorders averaged 13% higher from June through September 2020 as compared to the same time period in 2019 (Tables 3, 5, 8).

Telehealth usage for 8 out of 10 specific MH/BH conditions also followed a pattern in which the percentage of outpatient care delivered via telehealth increased in March and April 2020 but declined in May 2020. Exceptions to this trend were seen for anxiety disorders and suicidal ideation (Tables 5, 10). In March 2020, the percentage of outpatient care delivered by telehealth related to anxiety disorders increased by 53%, but declined over the remainder of the surveillance period while telehealth use for suicidal ideation spiked in April 2020 and subsequently declined through September 2020.

Editorial Comment

 In this analysis of MH/BH health care utilization prior to and during the first 6 months of the pandemic, telehealth usage increased during the early pandemic and was on average 25% higher during March–September 2020 as compared to the previous year. In contrast, MH/BH outpatient visit rates declined modestly between March and May 2020 before rebounding in June and remaining stable for the remainder of the surveillance period. The number of bed days attributable to MH/BH conditions also declined during March and April 2020 and was on average 30% lower during March–September 2020 as compared to the same period in the prior year.  The pattern of decreased health care utilization and increased telehealth usage was almost universal across all conditions surveyed during March and April 2020, although for most MH/BH conditions, health care utilization had rebounded by June of that year.

Notably, even after health care utilization for mental and behavioral health conditions had begun to rebound in June 2020, outpatient visit rates for anxiety disorders, adjustment disorders, and psychosocial circumstances were higher than rates during the previous year. 

There are few published studies of population-level health care utilization data with which to compare these findings. Patel et al. reported similar trends in outpatient care delivery and telehealth usage in a large, commercially insured population and, like this MSMR analysis, also demonstrated pronounced declines in the rate of in-person outpatient visits beginning in March 2020.14 Patel et al. also documented increases in telehealth usage during the same period with marked increases in the rate of telehealth usage beginning during the week of March 17 (coinciding with the expansion of Medicare reimbursement for telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic).14

Data from the CDC’s National Syndromic Surveillance System Program (which represents approximately 70% of U.S. emergency department [ED] visits) were used in a cross-sectional study of ED visits for mental health before and during the pandemic.13 This study reported declines in overall ED visit volume after the implementation of stay-at-home orders in March which persisted through October 2020. However, visit rates for mental health, suicide attempts, drug overdoses, intimate partner violence and child abuse were higher in mid-March-October 2020 as compared to the same period during the prior year.13

The finding that telehealth usage for MH/BH conditions increased (albeit modestly) during the early period of the pandemic, as well as its usage prior to the pandemic, demonstrates that the Military Health System (MHS) was prepared to deliver mental health services via telehealth and to increase telehealth services when needed. In fact, a recent analysis of telehealth usage for all ambulatory encounters in 2020 reported telehealth accounted for 19.2% of ambulatory encounters in active component service members.16 This is likely a reflection of the Defense Health Agency's (DHA's) ongoing expansion and standardization of telehealth service capabilities.17 The TRICARE Health Plan already covered most mental health care when provided via telehealth prior to the pandemic. Regional contractors for TRICARE had also established a network of telemental health service providers.18 In response to COVID-19, TRICARE also began reimbursement for audio-only care, loosened cross-state licensure requirements, and began waiving copays and cost shares for telehealth services for the duration of the public health emergency.10 TRICARE also began allowing more providers to offer telemedicine services.18 In addition the MHS developed Health Protection Condition-linked guidance to standardize behavioral health operations during the COVID-19 response including support services for active component service members and their families.10

While many studies have reported increased levels of anxiety, depression, alcohol and substance misuse, and suicidal ideation in response to the pandemic, many of these studies relied on self-report data collected via survey.3–5 In contrast, this analysis used health care claims data to quantify health care utilization for specific MH/BH conditions which were identified via ICD-10 codes listed in the primary diagnostic position. To be included in this analysis, a service member would have to seek medical care and have that medical care documented in the electronic health record by a medical provider. Mental or behavioral health symptoms which did not result in a health care encounter would not be captured in this analysis and is a limitation of this analysis.

There are likely active component members who experienced symptoms of anxiety, depression or other mental and behavioral health issues who are not represented in this analysis because they chose not to seek care related to these symptoms. Service members may have been able to cope with their symptoms using resources other than medical care (e.g., chaplain, family, community, or command  support). Service members may also have chosen to defer care due to the pandemic. An estimated 40.9% of adults in the U.S. have avoided medical care during the pandemic with 31.5% forgoing routine care.6

A significant strength of this study is the ability to include the entire population of interest in the analysis. The DMSS captures virtually 100% of health care encounters for active component service members and includes both Direct CareDirect care refers to military hospitals and clinics, also known as “military treatment facilities” and “MTFs.”direct care (provided at military treatment facilities) and outsourced care (paid for by TRICARE).

MH/BH conditions can negatively affect service member readiness. Offering alternative methods to in-person care for these conditions, such as telehealth, facilitates access to care which can help mitigate adverse impacts to health, well being, and readiness. Continued surveillance is warranted to track MH/BH health care utilization during the later months of the pandemic to ensure that sufficient resources continue to be directed towards MH/BH care to support the health and readiness of active component service members.

Acknowledgements: The authors thank Maisha Toussaint, PhD (U.S. Army Public Health Center) for contributions including conceptual contributions during initial study design and critical review and feedback on the manuscript.

Disclaimer: The contents, views or opinions expressed in this publication or presentation are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect official policy or position of the Defense Health Agency, the Department of Defense (DOD), or Departments of the Army, Navy, or Air Force.  The mention of any non-federal entity and/or its products is not to be construed or interpreted, in any manner, as federal endorsement of that non-federal entity or its products.

References

  1. Moreland A, Herlihy C, Tynan MA, et al. Timing of state and territorial COVID-19 stay-at-home orders and changes in population movement – United States, March 1–May 31, 2020. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2020; 69(35): 1198–1203.
  2. Xiong J, Lipsitz O, Nasri F, et al. Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on mental health in the general population: A systematic review. J Affect Disord. 2020 Dec 1;277:55–64.
  3. CDC, National Center for Health Statistics. Indicators of anxiety or depression based on reported frequency of symptoms during the last 7 days. Household Pulse Survey. Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health and Human Services, CDC, National Center for Health Statistics; 2020. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/covid19/pulse/mental-health.htm
  4. CDC, National Center for Health Statistics. Early release of selected mental health estimates based on data from the January–June 2019 National Health Interview Survey. Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health and Human Services, CDC, National Center for Health Statistics; 2020. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhis/earlyrelease/ERmentalhealth-508.pdf
  5. Czeisler MÉ, Lane RI, Petrosky E, et al. Mental health, substance use, and suicidal ideation during the COVID-19 pandemic - United States, June 24–30, 2020. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2020 Aug 14;69(32):1049–1057.
  6. Czeisler MÉ, Marynak K, Clarke KEN, et al. Delay or avoidance of medical care because of COVID-19-related concerns - United States, June 2020. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2020 Sep 11;69(36):1250–1257.
  7.  Hoyer C, Ebert A, Szabo K, Platten M, Meyer-Lindenberg A, Kranaster L. Decreased utilization of mental health emergency service during the COVID-19 pandemic. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2020 Jun 9:1–3.
  8. Verma S. Early Impact of CMS Expansion of medicare telehealth during COVID-19. Health Affairs Blog. Published July 15, 2020. Accessed May 10, 2021. https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hblog20200715.454789/full
  9. Connolly SL, Stolzmann KL, Heyworth L, Weaver KR, Bauer MS, Miller CJ. Rapid increase in telemental health within the Department of Veterans Affairs during the COVID-19 pandemic [published online ahead of print, 2020 Sep 14]. Telemed J E Health. 2020;10.
  10. Bradford C. Department of Defense (DoD) mental health response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Oral presentation at: AMSUS The Society of Federal Health Professionals Annual Meeting; December, 2020; Virtual.
  11. Armed Forces Health Surveillance Division. Absolute and relative morbidity burdens attributable to various illnesses and injuries, active component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2020. MSMR. 2021; 28(5): 2–9.
  12. Mandelkorn U, Genzer S, Choshen-Hillel S, et al. Escalation of sleep disturbances amid the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional international study. J Clin Sleep Med. 2021;17(1):45–53. 
  13. Alexander N. What's more general than a whole population? Emerg Themes Epidemiol. 2015;12:11.
  14. Patel SY, Mehrotra A, Huskamp HA, Uscher-Pines L, Ganguli I, Barnett ML. Trends in outpatient care delivery and telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic in the US. JAMA Intern Med. 2021;181(3):388–391.
  15. Holland KM, Jones C, Vivolo-Kantor AM, et al. Trends in US Emergency Department visits for mental health, overdose, and violence outcomes before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. JAMA Psychiatry. 2021;78(4):372–379.
  16. Armed Forces Health Surveillance Division. Ambulatory visits, active component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2020. MSMR. 2021; 28(5): 18–25.
  17. Defense Health Board. Modernization of the TRICARE benefit. Published 2020. Accessed Aug. 13, 2021. https://health.mil/Reference-Center/Reports/2020/11/05/Modernization-of-the-TRICARE-Benefit 
  18. Telemental Health Services. Accessed August 13, 2021. Updated 6/18/2020. https://tricare.mil/CoveredServices/IsItCovered/TelementalHealth

FIGURE 1a. Mental and behavioral health outpatient visit rates: 2019 vs 2020

FIGURE 1b. The number of bed days attributable to mental and behavioral healthcare: 2019 vs 2020

FIGURE 1c . Percentages of mental and behavioral outpatient care delivered by telehealth: 2019 vs 2020

FIGURE 2. Monthly outpatient visit rates and the percentage of visits delivered via telehealth for all mental and behavioral health conditions, active component, U.S. Armed Forces, January–September 2020

TABLE 1. Diagnostic ICD-10 codes used to identify medical encounters for mental and behavioral health disorders

TABLE 2. Healthcare utilization attributable to all mental and behavioral health conditions, U.S. Armed Forces, January 2019–September 2020

TABLE 3. Healthcare utilization attributable to adjustment disorder, U.S. Armed Forces, January 2019–September 2020

TABLE 4. Healthcare utilization attributable to alcohol use disorders, U.S. Armed Forces, January 2019–September 2020

TABLE 5. Healthcare utilization attributable to anxiety disorders, U.S. Armed Forces, January 2019–September 2020

TABLE 6. Healthcare utilization attributable to depressive disorders, active component, U.S. Armed Forces, January 2019–September 2020

 TABLE 7. Heathcare utilization attributable to insomnia, active component, U.S. Armed Forces, January 2019–September 2020

TABLE 8. Healthcare utilization attributable to psychosocial circumstances, active component, U.S. Armed Forces, January 2019–September 2020

TABLE 9. Healthcare utilization attributable to substance use disorders, active component, U.S. Armed Forces, January 2019–September 2020

TABLE 10. Healthcare utilization attributable to suicidal ideation, active component, U.S Armed Forces, January 2019–September 2020

You also may be interested in...

Hospitalizations, active component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2018

Article
5/1/2019
Cover 2

As in prior years, mental health disorders, pregnancy-related conditions, and injury/poisoning accounted for the majority (59.8%) of all hospitalizations among active component service members in 2018. However, the hospitalization rate for all causes was the lowest rate in the past 10 years.

Absolute and relative morbidity burdens attributable to various illnesses and injuries, non-service member beneficiaries of the Military Health System, 2018

Article
5/1/2019
Cover 4

In 2018, mental health disorders accounted for the largest proportions of the morbidity and healthcare burdens that affected the pediatric and younger adult beneficiary age groups. Among adults aged 45–64 years, musculoskeletal diseases accounted for the most morbidity and health care burdens, and among adults aged 65 years or older, cardiovascular diseases accounted for the most.

Absolute and relative morbidity burdens attributable to various illnesses and injuries, active component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2018

Article
5/1/2019
Cover 1

In 2018, mental health disorders accounted for the largest proportions of the morbidity and healthcare burdens that affected the pediatric and younger adult beneficiary age groups. Among adults aged 45–64 years, musculoskeletal diseases accounted for the most morbidity and healthcare burdens, and among adults aged 65 years or older, cardiovascular diseases accounted for the most.

Surveillance Snapshot: Illness and Injury Burdens, Reserve Component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2018

Article
5/1/2019
Cover 2

Surveillance Snapshot: Illness and Injury Burdens, Recruit Trainees, Active Component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2018

Article
5/1/2019
Cover 2

Morbidity burdens attributable to various illnesses and injuries, deployed active and reserve component service members, U.S. Armed Forces, 2018

Article
5/1/2019
Cover 1

Among service members deployed during 2018, injury/poisoning, musculoskeletal diseases, and signs/symptoms accounted for more than half of the total health care burden while deployed. Compared to the distribution of major burden of disease categories documented in garrison, a relatively greater proportion of in-theater medical encounters due to respiratory infections, skin diseases, infectious/parasitic diseases, and digestive diseases was documented.

Ambulatory visits, active component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2018

Article
5/1/2019
Cover 1

Musculoskeletal disorders and mental health disorders accounted for more than half (52.6%) of all illness- and injury-related ambulatory encounters among active component service members in 2018. Since 2014, the number of ambulatory visits for mental health disorders has decreased, while the numbers of ambulatory visits for musculoskeletal system/connective tissue disorders, nervous system and sense organ disorders, and respiratory system disorders have increased.

Modeling Lyme Disease Host Animal Habitat Suitability, West Point, New York

Article
4/1/2019
A deer basks in the morning sun at Joint Base San Antonio-Fort Sam Houston, Texas.  (Photo Courtesy: U.S. Air Force)

As the most frequently reported vector-borne disease among active component U.S. service members, with an incidence rate of 16 cases per 100,000 person-years in 2011, Lyme disease poses both a challenge to health care providers in the Military Health System and a threat to military readiness. Spread through the bite of an infected blacklegged tick, infection with the bacterial cause of Lyme disease can have lasting effects that may lead to medical discharge from the military. The U.S. Military Academy at West Point is situated in a highly endemic area in New York State. To identify probable areas where West Point cadets as well as active duty service members stationed at West Point and their families might contract Lyme disease, this study used Geographic Information System mapping methods and remote sensing data to replicate an established spatial model to identify the likely habitat of a key host animal—the white-tailed deer.

Incidence, Timing, and Seasonal Patterns of Heat Illnesses During U.S. Army Basic Combat Training, 2014–2018

Article
4/1/2019
U.S. Marines participate in morning physical training during a field exercise at Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, California. (Photo Courtesy: U.S. Marine Corps)

Risk factors for heat illnesses (HIs) among new soldiers include exercise intensity, environmental conditions at the time of exercise, a high body mass index, and conducting initial entry training during hot and humid weather when recruits are not yet acclimated to physical exertion in heat. This study used data from the Defense Health Agency’s–Weather-Related Injury Repository to calculate rates and to describe the incidence, timing, and geographic distribution of HIs among soldiers during U.S. Army basic combat training (BCT). From 2014 through 2018, HI events occurred in 1,210 trainees during BCT, resulting in an overall rate of 3.6 per 10,000 BCT person-weeks (p-wks) (95% CI: 3.4–3.8). HI rates (cases per 10,000 BCT p-wks) varied among the 4 Army BCT sites: Fort Benning, GA (6.8); Fort Jackson, SC (4.4); Fort Sill, OK (1.8); and Fort Leonard Wood, MO (1.7). Although the highest rates ofHIs occurred at Fort Benning, recruits in all geographic areas were at risk. The highest rates of HI occurred during the peak training months of June through Sept., and over half of all HI cases affected soldiers during the first 3 weeks of BCT. Prevention of HI among BCT soldiers requires relevant training of both recruits and cadre as well as the implementation of effective preventive measures.

Update: Exertional Hyponatremia, Active Component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2003–2018

Article
4/1/2019
Drink water the day before and during physical activity or if heat is going to become a factor. (Photo Courtesy: U.S. Air Force)

From 2003 through 2018, there were 1,579 incident diagnoses of exertional hyponatremia among active component service members, for a crude overall incidence rate of 7.2 cases per 100,000 person-years (p-yrs). Compared to their respective counterparts, females, those less than 20 years old, and recruit trainees had higher overall incidence rates of exertional hyponatremia diagnoses. The overall incidence rate during the 16-year period was highest in the Marine Corps, intermediate in the Army and Air Force, and lowest in the Navy. Overall rates during the surveillance period were highest among Asian/Pacific Islander and non-Hispanic white service members and lowest among non-Hispanic black service members. Between 2003 and 2018, crude annual incidence rates of exertional hyponatremia peaked in 2010 (12.7 per 100,000 p-yrs) and then decreased to 5.3 cases per 100,000 p-yrs in 2013 before increasing in 2014 and 2015. The crude annual rate in 2018 (6.3 per 100,000 p-yrs) represented a decrease of 26.5% from 2015. Service members and their supervisors must be knowledgeable of the dangers of excessive water consumption and the prescribed limits for water intake during prolonged physical activity (e.g., field training exercises, personal fitness training, and recreational activities) in hot, humid weather.

Update: Exertional Rhabdomyolysis, Active Component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2014–2018

Article
4/1/2019
U.S. Marines sprint uphill during a field training exercise at Marine Corps Air Station Miramar, California. to maintain contact with an aviation combat element, teaching and sustaining their proficiency in setting up and maintaining communication equipment.  (Photo Courtesy: U.S. Marine Corps)

Among active component service members in 2018, there were 545 incident diagnoses of rhabdomyolysis likely due to exertional rhabdomyolysis, for an unadjusted incidence rate of 42.0 cases per 100,000 person-years. Subgroup-specific rates in 2018 were highest among males, those less than 20 years old, Asian/Pacific Islander service members, Marine Corps and Army members, and those in combat-specific or “other/unknown” occupations. During 2014–2018, crude rates of exertional rhabdomyolysis increased steadily from 2014 through 2016 after which rates declined slightly in 2017 before increasing again in 2018. Compared to service members in other race/ethnicity groups, the overall rate of exertional rhabdomyolysis was highest among non-Hispanic blacks in every year except 2018. Overall and annual rates were highest among Marine Corps members, intermediate among those in the Army, and lowest among those in the Air Force and Navy. Most cases of exertional rhabdomyolysis were diagnosed at installations that support basic combat/recruit training or major ground combat units of the Army or the Marine Corps. Medical care providers should consider exertional rhabdomyolysis in the differential diagnosis when service members (particularly recruits) present with muscular pain or swelling, limited range of motion, or the excretion of dark urine (possibly due to myoglobinuria) after strenuous physical activity, particularly in hot, humid weather.

Update: Heat Illness, Active Component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2018

Article
4/1/2019
Drink water the day before and during physical activity or if heat is going to become a factor. (Photo Courtesy: U.S. Air Force)

In 2018, there were 578 incident diagnoses of heat stroke and 2,214 incident diagnoses of heat exhaustion among active component service members. The overall crude incidence rates of heat stroke and heat exhaustion diagnoses were 0.45 cases and 1.71 cases per 1,000 person-years, respectively. In 2018, subgroup-specific rates of incident heat stroke diagnoses were highest among males and service members less than 20 years old, Asian/Pacific Islanders, Marine Corps and Army members, recruit trainees, and those in combat-specific occupations. Subgroup-specific incidence rates of heat exhaustion diagnoses in 2018 were notably higher among service members less than 20 years old, Asian/Pacific Islanders, Army and Marine Corps members, recruit trainees, and service members in combat-specific occupations. During 2014–2018, a total of 325 heat illnesses were documented among service members in Iraq and Afghanistan; 8.6% (n=28) were diagnosed as heat stroke. Commanders, small unit leaders, training cadre, and supporting medical personnel must ensure that the military members whom they supervise and support are informed about the risks, preventive countermeasures, early signs and symptoms, and first-responder actions related to heat illnesses.

Vasectomy and Vasectomy Reversals, Active Component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2000–2017

Article
3/1/2019
Sperm is the male reproductive cell  Photo: iStock

During 2000–2017, a total of 170,878 active component service members underwent a first-occurring vasectomy, for a crude overall incidence rate of 8.6 cases per 1,000 person-years (p-yrs). Among the men who underwent incident vasectomy, 2.2% had another vasectomy performed during the surveillance period. Compared to their respective counterparts, the overall rates of vasectomy were highest among service men aged 30–39 years, non-Hispanic whites, married men, and those in pilot/air crew occupations. Male Air Force members had the highest overall incidence of vasectomy and men in the Marine Corps, the lowest. Crude annual vasectomy rates among service men increased slightly between 2000 and 2017. The largest increases in rates over the 18-year period occurred among service men aged 35–49 years and among men working as pilots/air crew. Among those who underwent vasectomy, 1.8% also had at least 1 vasectomy reversal during the surveillance period. The likelihood of vasectomy reversal decreased with advancing age. Non-Hispanic black and Hispanic service men were more likely than those of other race/ethnicity groups to undergo vasectomy reversals.

Testosterone Replacement Therapy Use Among Active Component Service Men, 2017

Article
3/1/2019
Testosterone

This analysis summarizes the prevalence of testosterone replacement therapy (TRT) during 2017 among active component service men by demographic and military characteristics. This analysis also determines the percentage of those receiving TRT in 2017 who had an indication for receiving TRT using the 2018 American Urological Association (AUA) clinical practice guidelines. In 2017, 5,093 of 1,076,633 active component service men filled a prescription for TRT, for a period prevalence of 4.7 per 1,000 male service members. After adjustment for covariates, the prevalence of TRT use remained highest among Army members, senior enlisted members, warrant officers, non-Hispanic whites, American Indians/Alaska Natives, those in combat arms occupations, healthcare workers, those who were married, and those with other/unknown marital status. Among active component male service members who received TRT in 2017, only 44.5% met the 2018 AUA clinical practice guidelines for receiving TRT.

Brief Report: Male Infertility, Active Component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2013–2017

Article
3/1/2019
Sperm is the male reproductive cell  Photo: iStock

Infertility, defined as the inability to achieve a successful pregnancy after 1 year or more of unprotected sexual intercourse or therapeutic donor insemination, affects approximately 15% of all couples. Male infertility is diagnosed when, after testing both partners, reproductive problems have been found in the male. A male factor contributes in part or whole to about 50% of cases of infertility. However, determining the true prevalence of male infertility remains elusive, as most estimates are derived from couples seeking assistive reproductive technology in tertiary care or referral centers, population-based surveys, or high-risk occupational cohorts, all of which are likely to underestimate the prevalence of the condition in the general U.S. population.

Page 14 of 15 , showing items 196 - 210
First < ... 11 12 13 14 15 > Last 
Refine your search
Last Updated: October 05, 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