Drue H. Barrett

Is there a Persian Gulf War syndrome? Evidence from a large population-based survey of veterans and nondeployed controls.

PURPOSE Concerns have been raised about whether veterans of the Gulf War have a medical illness of uncertain etiology. We surveyed veterans to look for evidence of an illness that was unique to those deployed to the Persian Gulf and was not seen in comparable military controls. SUBJECTS AND METHODS A population-based sample of veterans (n = 1,896 from 889 units) deployed to the Persian Gulf and other Gulf War-era controls (n = 1799 from 893 units) who did not serve in the Gulf were surveyed in 1995-1996. Seventy-six percent of eligible subjects, including 91% of located subjects, answered questions about commonly reported and potentially important symptoms. We used factor analysis, a statistical technique that can identify patterns of related responses, on a random subset of the deployed veterans to identify latent patterns of symptoms. The results from this derivation sample were compared with those obtained from a separate validation sample of deployed veterans, as well as the nondeployed controls, to determine whether the results were replicable and unique. RESULTS One half (50%) of the deployed veterans and 14% of the nondeployed controls reported health problems that they attributed to military service during 1990-1991. Compared with the nondeployed controls, the deployed veterans had significantly greater prevalences of 123 of 137 (90%) symptoms; none was significantly lower. Factor analysis identified three replicable symptom factors (or patterns) in the deployed veterans (convergent correlations > or =0.85). However, these patterns were also highly replicable in the nondeployed controls (convergent correlations of 0.95 to 0.98). The three factors also accounted for similar proportions of the common variance among the deployed veterans (35%) and nondeployed controls (30%). CONCLUSIONS The increased prevalence of nearly every symptom assessed from all bodily organ systems among the Gulf War veterans is difficult to explain pathophysiologically as a single condition. Identification of the same patterns of symptoms among the deployed veterans and nondeployed controls suggests that the health complaints of Gulf War veterans are similar to those of the general military population and are not consistent with the existence of a unique Gulf War syndrome.

Gulf War veterans with anxiety: Prevalence, comorbidity, and risk factors

Background: Veterans of the first Gulf War have higher rates of medical and psychiatric symptoms than nondeployed military personnel. Methods: To assess the prevalence of and risk factors for current anxiety disorders in Gulf War veterans, we administered a structured telephone interview to a population-based sample of 4886 military personnel from Iowa at enlistment. Participants were randomly drawn from Gulf War regular military, Gulf War National Guard/Reserve, non-Gulf War regular military, and non-Gulf War National Guard/Reserve. Medical and psychiatric conditions were assessed through standardized interviews and questionnaires in 3695 subjects (76% participation). Risk factors were assessed using multivariate logistic regression models. Results: Veterans of the first Gulf War reported a markedly higher prevalence of current anxiety disorders than nondeployed military personnel (5.9% vs. 2.8%; odds ratio = 2.1; 95% confidence interval = 1.3–3.1), and their anxiety disorders are associated with co-occurring psychiatric disorders. Posttraumatic stress disorder, panic disorder, and generalized anxiety disorder were each present at rates nearly twice expected. In our multivariate model, predeployment psychiatric treatment and predeployment diagnoses (posttraumatic stress disorder, depression, or anxiety) were independently associated with current anxiety disorder. Participation in Gulf War combat was independently associated with current posttraumatic stress disorder, panic disorder, and generalized anxiety disorder. Conclusions: Current anxiety disorders are relatively frequent in a military population and are more common among Gulf War veterans than nondeployed military personnel. Predeployment psychiatric difficulties are robustly associated with the development of anxiety. Healthcare providers and policymakers need to consider panic disorder and generalized anxiety disorder, in addition to posttraumatic stress disorder, to ensure their proper assessment, treatment, and prevention in veteran populations.

Quality of life and health-services utilization in a population-based sample of military personnel reporting multiple chemical sensitivities.

We sought to assess quality of life and health-services utilization variables in persons with symptoms suggestive of multiple chemical sensitivity/idiopathic environmental intolerance (MCS/IEI) among military personnel. We conducted a cross-sectional telephone survey of a population-based sample of Persian Gulf War (PGW) veterans from Iowa and a comparison group of PGW-era military personnel. A complex sample survey design was used, selecting subjects from four domains: PGW active duly, PGW National Guard/Reserve, non-PGW active duty, and non-PGW National Guard/Reserve. Each domain was substratified by age, gender, race, rank, and military branch. The criteria for MCS/IEI were developed by expert consensus and from the medical literature. In the total sample, 169 subjects (4.6%) of the 3695 who participated (76% of those eligible) met our criteria for MCS/IEI. Persons who met the criteria for MCS/IEI more often reported the following than did other subjects: more than 12 days in bed due to disability, Veterans Affairs disability status, Veterans Affairs disability compensation, medical disability, and unemployment. MCS/IEI cases also had higher outpatient rates of physician visits, emergency department visits, and inpatient hospital stays. Subjects who met the criteria for MCS/IEI more often reported impaired functioning on each Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short Form subscale, compared with those who did not meet the criteria. We concluded that although the diagnosis of MCS/IEI remains controversial, the persons who met our criteria for the disorder are functionally impaired.

Serum dioxin and cognitive functioning among veterans of Operation Ranch Hand

We used the Halstead-Reitan neuropsychological test battery, the Wechsler adult intelligence scale-revised, the Wechsler memory scale, and the wide range achievement test to assess cognitive functioning among Air Force veterans exposed to Agent Orange and its contaminant, 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (dioxin), during the Vietnam war The index subjects were veterans of Operation Ranch Hand (N = 937), the unit responsible for aerial herbicide spraying in Vietnam from 1962 to 1971. A comparison group of other Air Force veterans (N= 1,052), who served in Southeast Asia during the same period but were not involved with spraying herbicides served as referents. Cognitive functioning was assessed in 1982, and dioxin levels were measured in 1987 and 1992. We assigned each Ranch Hand veteran to the background, low, or high dioxin exposure category on the basis of a measurement of dioxin body burden. Although we found no global effect of dioxin exposure on cognitive functioning, we did find that several measures of memory functioning were decreased among veterans with the highest dioxin exposure. These results became more distinct when we restricted the analysis to enlisted personnel, the subgroup with the highest dioxin levels. An analysis based on dioxin quintiles in the combined cohort produced consistent results, with veterans in the fifth quintile exhibiting reduced verbal memory function. Although statistically significant, these differences were relatively small and of uncertain clinical significance.

Improving Competencies for Public Health Emergency Legal Preparedness

This paper is one of the four interrelated action agenda papers resulting from the National Summit on Public Health Legal Preparedness (Summit) con-vened in June 2007 by the Centers for Disease Con-trol and Prevention, and multi-disciplinary partners. Each of the action agenda papers deals with one of the four core elements of legal preparedness: laws and legal authorities; competency in using those laws; and coordination of law-based public health actions; and information. This action agenda offers options for consideration by those responsible for or interested in ensuring that public health professionals, their legal counsels, and relevant partners understand the legal framework in which they operate and are competent in applying legal authorities to public health emergency preparedness. Competencies are critical to an individual’s ability to make effective legal response to all-hazards public emergencies. The accompanying assessment paper outlines the state of existing competencies in public health legal preparedness by discussing the develop-ment of public health emergency competencies and public health law competencies and identifies gaps in competencies that detract from attainment of the goal of full legal preparedness for public health emer-gencies.

Public Health Ethics: Global Cases, Practice, and Context

Introducing public health ethics poses two special challenges. First, it is a relatively new field that combines public health and practical ethics. Its unfamiliarity requires considerable explanation, yet its scope and emergent qualities make delineation difficult. Moreover, while the early development of public health ethics occurred in a western context, its reach, like public health itself, has become global. A second challenge, then, is to articulate an approach specific enough to provide clear guidance yet sufficiently flexible and encompassing to adapt to global contexts. Broadly speaking, public health ethics helps guide practical decisions affecting population or community health based on scientific evidence and in accordance with accepted values and standards of right and wrong. In these ways, public health ethics builds on its parent disciplines of public health and ethics. This dual inheritance plays out in the definition the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) offers of public health ethics: “A systematic process to clarify, prioritize, and justify possible courses of public health action based on ethical principles, values and beliefs of stakeholders, and scientific and other information” (CDC 2011). Public health ethics shares with other fields of practical and professional ethics both the general theories of ethics and a common store of ethical principles, values, and beliefs. It differs from these other fields largely in the nature of challenges that public health officials typically encounter and in the ethical frameworks it employs to address these challenges. Frameworks provide methodical approaches or procedures that tailor general ethical theories, principles, values, and beliefs to the specific ethical challenges that arise in a particular field. Although no framework is definitive, many are useful, and some are especially effective in particular contexts. This chapter will conclude by setting forth a straightforward, stepwise ethics framework that provides a tool for analyzing the cases in this volume and, more importantly, one that public health practitioners have found useful in a range of contexts. For a public health practitioner, knowing how to employ an ethics framework to address a range of ethical challenges in public health—a know-how that depends on practice—is the ultimate take-home message.

Public Health Research

Having a scientific basis for the practice of public health is critical. Research leads to insight and innovations that solve health problems and is therefore central to public health worldwide. For example, in the United States research is one of the ten essential public health services (Public Health Functions Steering Committee 1994). The s of the Ethical Practice of Public, developed by the Public Health Leadership Society (2002), emphasizes the value of having a scientific basis for action. Principle five specifically calls on public health to seek the information needed to carry out effective policies and programs that protect and promote health.