Posttraumatic Stress Disorder: The Misappropriation of Military Suicide Causation and Medication Treatment of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Dear Editor:I read with interest your September 2014 issue of The CJP. Brunet and Monson1 and Sareen2 deserve some compliment for shading light on suicides in the military and the treatment of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).PTSD is but one of the causes of suicides here but it carries far more political and media gravitas. The need to pay attention to psychological autopsies of individual suicides is a more rational approach and the golden road to solving the problem of suicides in the military.I write as someone who was on the front line treating veterans and soldiers during a period of 3 years in a remote Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) base, a time frame encompassing the war in Afghanistan and the Haiti earthquake disaster, but also treated veterans of the Rwandan genocide, the Oka riots in Quebec, and the Bosnian crisis. At this CAF base, for this time period, no Canadian soldier or veteran died by suicide.In the Medical Professional Technical Suicide Review Report of the National Defence published in September 2013,3 following a spate of soldier suicides, the authors identified the following reasons, with percentages, among completed suicides as the major causes: relationship failure and conflict (44.4%), financial problems (15.8%), chronic physical health problems (13.2%), legal disciplinary issues (10.5%), and mental health history that collectively accounted for 47.4%, of which, 21% suffered from depression, 18.5% suffered from PTSD, and 21.1% suffered from substance use disorder. In an original investigation of risk factors for suicides among American service men, LeardMann et al4, p 496 identified male sex, depression, manic depressive disorder, heavy or binge drinking, and alcoholrelated problems as factors. They failed to identify any deployment-related factors as risk factors, including PTSD.Effective management of suicidal and homicidal behaviours must be achieved in 2 sequential stages of assessment aiming to place the patient in 1 of 2 suicide risk groups: immediate suicide or a suicide flashpoint group where the psychache as enunciated by Edwin Shneidman5 is so overwhelming that suicide is the only act that can remove the pain; or chronic suicide risk group, which is the universal suicide risk of 1% plus the risk attached to individual psychiatric diagnosis. Most of the rash of suicides that occurred in the last couple of years, and particularly earlier this year, were the results of failures in the immediate or flashpoint group.From my personal experience, suicide flashpoint group was mostly comprised of relationship failures, conflict with chain of command, acute financial distress, angst against Veterans Affairs or disability and pension agencies over benefits and uncertainty over pension eligibility, intoxication, very severe depression with suicidal intention, panic or anxiety attacks, and so on. PTSD, per se, will not feature here except in the company of the above factors or where insomnia and nightmares have been so severe and poorly treated.Insomnia and nightmares are sentinel symptoms of PTSD. Failure to tackle these early and decisively will doom the patient to the extent that all the other PTSD symptoms will become worse.6Prazosin is the most effective medication management of nightmares today. It is not promoted as it should because it is long out of patent, dirt cheap, and not backed by big pharma.Daniel Chinedu Okoro, MD, DPM, LMCC,FRCPC, DABPN, FAPACalgary, AlbertaReferences1. Brunet A, Monson E. Suicide risk among active and retired Canadian soldiers: the role of posttraumatic stress disorder. Can J Psychiatry. 2014;59(9):457-459.2. Sareen J. Posttraumatic stress disorder in adults: impact, comorbidity, risk factors, and treatment. Can J Psychiatry. 2014;59(9):460-467.3. Collins R, Matheson H, Sedge P, et al. Medical professional technical suicide review report. Surgeon General Health Research Report. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,052 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,006 | 0,011 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,002 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».