Christian Ditlev Gabriel Stoltenberg, Mia Sadowa Vedtofte, Anni Brit Sternhagen Nielsen, Søren Bo Andersen, Volkert Siersma, Kaj Sparle Christensen, Merete Osler
{"title":"丹麦退役军人及其文职人员的心理保健使用情况:一项队列研究。","authors":"Christian Ditlev Gabriel Stoltenberg, Mia Sadowa Vedtofte, Anni Brit Sternhagen Nielsen, Søren Bo Andersen, Volkert Siersma, Kaj Sparle Christensen, Merete Osler","doi":"10.1080/20008066.2023.2296188","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Prior studies comparing the mental healthcare utilisation (MHU) of Danish formerly deployed military personnel (FDP) with the general population have not included data on psychotherapy through the Defence or talking therapy with the general practitioner. This study included these and several other data sources in a comprehensive comparison of MHU between Danish FDP and civilians.<b>Methods:</b> First-time deployed military personnel (<i>N</i> = 10,971) who had returned from a mission to Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq or Lebanon between January 2005 and July 2017 were included. A sex and birth-year-matched civilian reference group was randomly drawn from the entire Danish non-deployed population (<i>N</i> = 253,714). Furthermore, a sub-cohort, including male FDP and civilians deemed eligible for military service, was defined. These cohorts were followed up in military medical records and registers covering the primary and secondary civilian health sectors from 2005 to 2018, and the rates of MHU were compared.<b>Results:</b> Approximately half of the initial help-seeking for FDP took place through the Defence (49.4%), and the remainder through the civilian healthcare system. When help-seeking through the Defence was not included, MHU was significantly lower among FDP in the main cohort during the first two years (IRR = 0.84, 95% CI: [0.77, 0.92]) compared to civilians. When help-seeking through the Defence was included, MHU was significantly higher among FDP compared to civilians both in the first two years of follow-up (IRR = 2.01, 95% CI: [1.89, 2.13]) and thereafter (IRR = 1.18, 95% CI: [1.13, 1.23]). In the sub-cohort, these differences were even more pronounced both in the first two years of follow-up and thereafter.<b>Conclusions:</b> MHU was higher among Danish FDP compared to civilians only when data from the Defence was included. The inclusion of data on both civilian and military healthcare services is necessary to evaluate the full impact of deployment on MHU among Danish FDP.</p>","PeriodicalId":12055,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Psychotraumatology","volume":"15 1","pages":"2296188"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10795587/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mental healthcare utilisation among Danish formerly deployed military personnel and their civilian counterparts: a cohort study.\",\"authors\":\"Christian Ditlev Gabriel Stoltenberg, Mia Sadowa Vedtofte, Anni Brit Sternhagen Nielsen, Søren Bo Andersen, Volkert Siersma, Kaj Sparle Christensen, Merete Osler\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/20008066.2023.2296188\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Prior studies comparing the mental healthcare utilisation (MHU) of Danish formerly deployed military personnel (FDP) with the general population have not included data on psychotherapy through the Defence or talking therapy with the general practitioner. This study included these and several other data sources in a comprehensive comparison of MHU between Danish FDP and civilians.<b>Methods:</b> First-time deployed military personnel (<i>N</i> = 10,971) who had returned from a mission to Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq or Lebanon between January 2005 and July 2017 were included. A sex and birth-year-matched civilian reference group was randomly drawn from the entire Danish non-deployed population (<i>N</i> = 253,714). Furthermore, a sub-cohort, including male FDP and civilians deemed eligible for military service, was defined. These cohorts were followed up in military medical records and registers covering the primary and secondary civilian health sectors from 2005 to 2018, and the rates of MHU were compared.<b>Results:</b> Approximately half of the initial help-seeking for FDP took place through the Defence (49.4%), and the remainder through the civilian healthcare system. When help-seeking through the Defence was not included, MHU was significantly lower among FDP in the main cohort during the first two years (IRR = 0.84, 95% CI: [0.77, 0.92]) compared to civilians. When help-seeking through the Defence was included, MHU was significantly higher among FDP compared to civilians both in the first two years of follow-up (IRR = 2.01, 95% CI: [1.89, 2.13]) and thereafter (IRR = 1.18, 95% CI: [1.13, 1.23]). In the sub-cohort, these differences were even more pronounced both in the first two years of follow-up and thereafter.<b>Conclusions:</b> MHU was higher among Danish FDP compared to civilians only when data from the Defence was included. The inclusion of data on both civilian and military healthcare services is necessary to evaluate the full impact of deployment on MHU among Danish FDP.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12055,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Psychotraumatology\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"2296188\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10795587/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Psychotraumatology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/20008066.2023.2296188\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/16 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Psychotraumatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20008066.2023.2296188","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Mental healthcare utilisation among Danish formerly deployed military personnel and their civilian counterparts: a cohort study.
Background: Prior studies comparing the mental healthcare utilisation (MHU) of Danish formerly deployed military personnel (FDP) with the general population have not included data on psychotherapy through the Defence or talking therapy with the general practitioner. This study included these and several other data sources in a comprehensive comparison of MHU between Danish FDP and civilians.Methods: First-time deployed military personnel (N = 10,971) who had returned from a mission to Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq or Lebanon between January 2005 and July 2017 were included. A sex and birth-year-matched civilian reference group was randomly drawn from the entire Danish non-deployed population (N = 253,714). Furthermore, a sub-cohort, including male FDP and civilians deemed eligible for military service, was defined. These cohorts were followed up in military medical records and registers covering the primary and secondary civilian health sectors from 2005 to 2018, and the rates of MHU were compared.Results: Approximately half of the initial help-seeking for FDP took place through the Defence (49.4%), and the remainder through the civilian healthcare system. When help-seeking through the Defence was not included, MHU was significantly lower among FDP in the main cohort during the first two years (IRR = 0.84, 95% CI: [0.77, 0.92]) compared to civilians. When help-seeking through the Defence was included, MHU was significantly higher among FDP compared to civilians both in the first two years of follow-up (IRR = 2.01, 95% CI: [1.89, 2.13]) and thereafter (IRR = 1.18, 95% CI: [1.13, 1.23]). In the sub-cohort, these differences were even more pronounced both in the first two years of follow-up and thereafter.Conclusions: MHU was higher among Danish FDP compared to civilians only when data from the Defence was included. The inclusion of data on both civilian and military healthcare services is necessary to evaluate the full impact of deployment on MHU among Danish FDP.
期刊介绍:
The European Journal of Psychotraumatology (EJPT) is a peer-reviewed open access interdisciplinary journal owned by the European Society of Traumatic Stress Studies (ESTSS). The European Journal of Psychotraumatology (EJPT) aims to engage scholars, clinicians and researchers in the vital issues of how to understand, prevent and treat the consequences of stress and trauma, including but not limited to, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depressive disorders, substance abuse, burnout, and neurobiological or physical consequences, using the latest research or clinical experience in these areas. The journal shares ESTSS’ mission to advance and disseminate scientific knowledge about traumatic stress. Papers may address individual events, repeated or chronic (complex) trauma, large scale disasters, or violence. Being open access, the European Journal of Psychotraumatology is also evidence of ESTSS’ stand on free accessibility of research publications to a wider community via the web. The European Journal of Psychotraumatology seeks to attract contributions from academics and practitioners from diverse professional backgrounds, including, but not restricted to, those in mental health, social sciences, and health and welfare services. Contributions from outside Europe are welcome. The journal welcomes original basic and clinical research articles that consolidate and expand the theoretical and professional basis of the field of traumatic stress; Review articles including meta-analyses; short communications presenting new ideas or early-stage promising research; study protocols that describe proposed or ongoing research; case reports examining a single individual or event in a real‑life context; clinical practice papers sharing experience from the clinic; letters to the Editor debating articles already published in the Journal; inaugural Lectures; conference abstracts and book reviews. Both quantitative and qualitative research is welcome.