4.6 Article

Understanding sequelae of injury mechanisms and mild traumatic brain injury incurred during the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan: Persistent postconcussive symptoms and posttraumatic stress disorder

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
Volume 167, Issue 12, Pages 1446-1452

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwn068

Keywords

Afghanistan; brain injuries; Iraq; post-concussion syndrome; stress disorders; post-traumatic; veterans; war; wounds and injuries

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A cross-sectional study of military personnel following deployment to conflicts in Iraq or Afghanistan ascertained histories of combat theater injury mechanisms and mild traumatic brain injury (TBI) and current prevalence of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and postconcussive symptoms. Associations among injuries, PTSD, and postconcussive symptoms were explored. In February 2005, a postal survey was sent to Iraq/Afghanistan veterans who had left combat theaters by September 2004 and lived in Maryland; Washington, DC; northern Virginia; and eastern West Virginia. Immediate neurologic symptoms postinjury were used to identify mild TBI. Adjusted prevalence ratios and 95% confidence intervals were computed by using Poisson regression. About 12% of 2,235 respondents reported a history consistent with mild TBI, and 11% screened positive for PTSD. Mild TBI history was common among veterans injured by bullets/shrapnel, blasts, motor vehicle crashes, air/water transport, and falls. Factors associated with PTSD included reporting multiple injury mechanisms (prevalence ratio = 3.71 for three or more mechanisms, 95% confidence interval: 2.23, 6.19) and combat mild TBI (prevalence ratio = 2.37, 95% confidence interval: 1.72, 3.28). The strongest factor associated with postconcussive symptoms was PTSD, even after overlapping symptoms were removed from the PTSD score (prevalence ratio = 3.79, 95% confidence interval: 2.57, 5.59).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available