ObjectivePhantom limb pain (PLP) is prevalent in patients post-amputation and is difficult to treat. We assessed the efficacy of mirror therapy in relieving PLP in unilateral, upper extremity male amputees.MethodsFifteen participants from Walter Reed and Brooke Army Medical Centers were randomly assigned to one of two groups: mirror therapy (n = 9) or control (n = 6, covered mirror or mental visualization therapy). Participants were asked to perform 15 min of their assigned therapy daily for 5 days/week for 4 weeks. The primary outcome was pain as measured using a 100-mm Visual Analog Scale.ResultsSubjects in the mirror therapy group had a significant decrease in pain scores, from a mean of 44.1 (SD = 17.0) to 27.5 (SD = 17.2) mm (p = 0.002). In addition, there was a significant decrease in daily time experiencing pain, from a mean of 1,022 (SD = 673) to 448 (SD = 565) minutes (p = 0.003). By contrast, the control group had neither diminished pain (p = 0.65) nor decreased overall time experiencing pain (p = 0.49). A pain decrement response seen by the 10th treatment session was predictive of final efficacy.ConclusionThese results confirm that mirror therapy is an effective therapy for PLP in unilateral, upper extremity male amputees, reducing both severity and duration of daily episodes.RegistrationNCT0030144 .

The results have serious implications for selection of HPDs, HPEDs, and TCAPS for applications where preservation of auditory situational awareness via the fundamental detection and identification tasks are essential.

Background: Eye health has garnered increased attention since the COVID-19 pandemic. This Round Table explored the impact mask wearing, delays in eye examinations, and increased screen time have on vision and ultimately the worker. Methods: Leading experts in the areas of occupational health, risk management, eye health, and communication were identified and invited to participate in a Round Table discussion. Questions posed to experts were based on literature that addressed eye health, such as mask wearing, communication and managing expectations when accessing professional eye health appointments, and increased screen time. Findings: Experts agreed that eye health considerations must be in place. These considerations should address not only clinical care of the patient but ways to protect workers from occupational injury associated with the eye. Conclusion/Application to practice: The occupational health professional is a key resource for assessment and training that pertains to eye health.

Introduction The standard issue clear or sun Military Combat Eye Protection (MCEP) is often inadequate in visually challenging training or combat environment. Intermediate-tinted lenses may offer a viable option for warfighters operating in dynamic visual conditions such as moving rapidly from bright sunny areas to darker building interiors in combat. Because the use of intermediate-tinted lenses has been delayed as a result of a potential negative impact on vision performance such as color perception, this investigation evaluated several commercially available intermediate-tinted lenses for operation performance during a U.S. military field training. Test lenses complied with all the requirements of the current MCEP except for the visible light transmittance (VLT) values that ranged between 32 and 62%. Materials and Methods Study subjects consisted of 22 service members who attended a military Close Combat and Marksmanship training course in May 2019. Visual and pistol marksmanship performance of three intermediate-tinted lenses (Eye Safety Systems [ESS] Copper [32% VLT], Oakley Prizm TR45 [44% VLT], and ESS Bronze [62% VLT]) was compared to that of a standard issue MCEP, ESS Clear (90% VLT). Quick contrast sensitivity function test was used to assess quality vision (AULCSF, area under a log contrast sensitivity function) and visual acuity (CSF Acuity). Color vision was assessed by Cone Contrast Test. Pistol marksmanship (Bill Drill) was used for performance testing. A pre-survey inquired about MCEP use, and a MCEP survey during the pistol marksmanship testing inquired about lens performance and ranking. Results AULCSF and CSF Acuity were significantly affected by the lenses (general linear model, repeated measures, P < .05). Bonferroni post hoc test showed a significant reduction of binocular AULCSF from ESS Clear to Oakley Prizm TR45 (P = .003) and ESS Copper (P < .001) and a significant reduction in binocular CSF Acuity from ESS Clear to ESS Copper (P = .001). Color vision and pistol marksmanship performance were not significantly affected by wearing different lenses (P > .05). Subjectively, there were no statistically significant differences among study lenses in perceived “clarity of vision,” “ability to clearly identify the target,” or “overall performance” (Friedman test and Wilcoxon signed-rank post hoc test with Bonferroni adjustment, P > .017). Participants ranked Prizm TR45 (44% VLT) and ESS Bronze (62% VLT) lenses significantly more favorably than EES Clear (P = .001 and P = .009). Conclusions Quality of vision and visual acuity decreased with darker lenses; however, the study lenses had insignificant impacts on pistol marksmanship and subjective acceptance. Our surveys indicated that Intermediate-tinted lenses were operationally acceptable and preferred over a standard issue MCEP. While more evaluations for color vision deficient subjects are needed, overall results suggest that commercially available intermediate-tinted lenses may be a viable option to enhance protection and performance in a visually dynamic combat environment.