There is significant variation in the way individuals react and respond to extreme stress and adversity. While some individuals develop psychiatric conditions such as posttraumatic stress disorder or major depressive disorder, others recover from stressful experiences without displaying significant symptoms of psychological ill-health, demonstrating stress-resilience. To understand why some individuals exhibit characteristics of a resilient profile, the interplay between neurochemical, genetic, and epigenetic processes over time needs to be explained. In this review, we examine the hormones, neuropeptides, neurotransmitters, and neural circuits associated with resilience and vulnerability to stress-related disorders. We debate how this increasing body of knowledge could also be useful in the creation of a stress-resilient profile. Additionally, identification of the underlying neurobiological components related to resilience may offer a contribution to improved approaches toward the prevention and treatment of stress-related disorders.
Perceived stigma and organizational barriers to care (stigma/BTC) can influence the decision to seek help for military personnel when they are suffering from mental health problems. We examined the relationship between stigmatizing beliefs, perceived BTC, and probable post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in 23,101 UK military personnel deployed to Afghanistan and Iraq both during and after deployment; and in a smaller group some six months later. Overall, our results suggest that stigma/BTC perceptions were significantly, and substantially higher during deployment than when personnel are returning home; however, within the smaller follow-up group, the rates climbed significantly over the first six-months post-deployment although they still remained lower than during-deployment levels. Male personnel, those who reported higher levels of PTSD symptoms and/or greater combat exposure were significantly more likely to endorse more stigma/BTC at both sampling points. Rates of stigma/BTC on deployment are substantially higher than rates measured when personnel are in less threatening environments. We suggest that the considerable efforts that military forces make to encourage effective help seeking should take account of the fluctuating levels of stigma/BTC. Commanders should be aware that encouraging help seeking may be more difficult in operational environments than when personnel have returned home.
The association of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptom clusters with combat and other operational experiences among United Kingdom Armed Forces (UK AF) personnel who deployed to Afghanistan in 2009 were examined. Previous studies suggest that the risk of developing PTSD rises as combat exposure levels increase. To date, no UK research has investigated how specific classes of combat and operational experiences relate to PTSD symptom clusters. The current study was a secondary analysis of data derived from a two-arm cluster, randomized-controlled trial of a postdeployment operational stress-reduction intervention in deployed UK AF personnel. 2510 UK AF personnel provided combat exposure data and completed the PTSD checklist (civilian version) immediately post-deployment while 1635 of the original cohort completed further followed-up measures four to six months later. A 14-item combat experience scale was explored using principle component analysis, which yielded three main categories of experience: (1) violent combat, (2) proximity to wounding or death and (3) encountering explosive devices. The association of combat experience classes to PTSD 5-factor "dysphoric arousal" model (re-experiencing, avoidance, numbing, dysphoric-arousal and anxious-arousal symptoms) was assessed. Greater exposure to violent combat was predictive of re-experiencing and numbing symptoms, while proximity to wounding or death experiences were predictive of re-experiencing and anxious-arousal symptoms. Explosive device exposure was predictive of anxious-arousal symptoms. The present study suggests that categories of combat experience differentially impact on PTSD symptom clusters and may have relevance for clinicians treating military personnel following deployment.
Stigmatizing beliefs about seeking help for mental health conditions and perceived barriers to care (BTC) may influence the decision to seek support and treatment in U.K. military personnel. Many coalition partners, including the U.K. Armed Forces (UKAF), have made considerable efforts to reduce stigma/BTC although the impact of these efforts over time has not been assessed. We surveyed a total of 23,101 UKAF personnel who deployed to Afghanistan and Iraq between 2008 and 2011 and examined whether stigma/BTC levels changed during this time. The results suggested that stigma, including the fear of being treated differently by commanders and loss of trust among peers, was greater than perceived BTC. The likelihood of reporting stigma/BTC, although significantly greater during deployment than postdeployment, reduced significantly over the survey period. A similar reduction was less apparent during postdeployment phase. These findings support the notion that UKAF's anti-stigma campaigns may have had some positive effects, particularly among deployed personnel. However, we suggest that stigma still plays a part in inhibiting help-seeking, particularly during deployment when stigma rates are higher, and that a careful balance must be struck between encouraging help-seeking and maintaining the operational effectiveness of deployed personnel.
The prevalence of PTSD in the study sample is low, but PTSD symptoms are significantly related to physical health complaints and reported illnesses and explain the variance in physical symptoms. This fact should be considered by clinical support services, and military personnel with physical complaints should be screened for PTSD. These Portuguese results obtained from participants belonging to a well-prepared Special Operations Forces group contribute to a better understanding of the physical and mental impact of the war in Afghanistan.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.