More than 200,000 U.S. military personnel participated in atmospheric nuclear weapons tests between 1945 and the 1963 Limited Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. Questions persist, such as whether that test participation is associated with the timing and causes of death among those individuals. This is the report of a mortality study of the approximately 70,000 soldiers, sailors, and airmen who participated in at least one of five selected U.S. nuclear weapons test series1 in the 1950s and nearly 65,000 comparable nonparticipants, the referents. The investigation described in this report, based on more than 5 million person-years of mortality follow-up, represents one of the largest cohort studies of military veterans ever conducted.
In 1998, the Department of Defense (DoD) began a program of mandatory immunization against anthrax for all military personnel. As the program proceeded, however, some military personnel and their families raised concerns about the safety and efficacy of the anthrax vaccine. Acknowledging both the need to protect military personnel and the concerns about the anthrax vaccine, congress directed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to carry out a research program on its safety and efficacy. To assist in the development of this program, CDC requested the Institute of Medicine (IOM) to convene a committee to review the completeness and appropriateness of the research program. In An Assessment of the CDC Anthrax Vaccine Safety and Efficacy Research Program, the committee makes an overall assessment of the CDD research plan and reviews the specific studies proposed by CDC in the three areas of efficacy, safety and acceptability. The committee also notes additional research needs that became evident following the bioterrorist events of 2001 and makes recommendations about the leadership of the research program.
The Institute of Medicine carried out a study mandated by Congress and sponsored by the Department of Veterans Affairs to provide an assessment of several issues related to noise-induced hearing loss and tinnitus associated with service in the Armed Forces since World War II. The resulting book, Noise and Military Service: Implications for Hearing Loss and Tinnitus, presents findings on the presence of hazardous noise in military settings, levels of noise exposure necessary to cause hearing loss or tinnitus, risk factors for noise-induced hearing loss and tinnitus, the timing of the effects of noise exposure on hearing, and the adequacy of military hearing conservation programs and audiometric testing. The book stresses the importance of conducting hearing tests (audiograms) at the beginning and end of military service for all military personnel and recommends several steps aimed at improving the military services' prevention of and surveillance for hearing loss and tinnitus. The book also identifies research needs, emphasizing topics specifically related to military service.
This book contains papers presented at a conference which describe studies of a World War II hepatitis epidemic, a genetic analysis of substance use in veteran twins, hemorrhagic fever with renal syndrome, the psychological effects of military captivity, and dioxin in adipose tissue. Other papers discuss radiation risk studies in military populations and resources for epidemiologic research in Vietnam-era veterans. This volume should be of interest to epidemiologists, medical researchers, and others interested in public health.
Perspectives on the Department of Defense Global Emerging Infections Surveillance and Response System: A Program Review describes the capacity, quality, and effectiveness of the international and domestic facilities and programs that are a part of a DoD system to monitor and address emerging infectious diseases globally. The committee concludes that the goals of the system are in U.S. military, U.S. civilian, and global public health interests and that substantial progress has been made toward achieving system goals.
The vaccine used to protect humans against the anthrax disease, called Anthrax Vaccine Adsorbed (AVA), was licensed in 1970. It was initially used to protect people who might be exposed to anthrax where they worked, such as veterinarians and textile plant workers who process animal hair. When the U. S. military began to administer the vaccine, then extended a plan for the mandatory vaccination of all U. S. service members, some raised concerns about the safety and efficacy of AVA and the manufacture of the vaccine. In response to these and other concerns, Congress directed the Department of Defense to support an independent examination of AVA. The Anthrax Vaccine: Is It Safe? Does It Work? reports the study's conclusion that the vaccine is acceptably safe and effective in protecting humans against anthrax. The book also includes a description of advances needed in main areas: improving the way the vaccine is now used, expanding surveillance efforts to detect side effects from its use, and developing a better vaccine.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' Metropolitan Medical Response (MMRS) program has evolved from an idea originally developed in the Washington, D.C., area in 1995. Using the combined personnel and equipment resources from Washington, D.C., Arlington County in Virginia, and Montgomery and Prince Georges Counties in Maryland, the Metropolitan Medical Strike Team (MMST) received training, equipment, and supplies specifically designed to facilitate an effective response to a mass-casualty terrorism incident with a weapon of mass destruction (WMD). The first of its kind in the civilian environment, the MMST was intended to be capable of providing initial, on-site emergency health, medical, and mental health services after a terrorist incident involving chemical, biological, or radiological (CBR) materials. The team's mission includes CBR agent detection and identification, patient decontamination, triage and medical treatment, emergency transportation of patients to local hospitals, coordination of movement of patients to more distant hospitals via the National Disaster Medical System (NDMS), and planning for the disposition of nonsurvivors. Building from the initial efforts of the Washington, D.C., Metropolitan Area MMST, OEP provided funding for the development of a similar team in the city of Atlanta in preparation for the 1996 Summer Olympic Games. The U.S. Congress has subsequently authorized and provided funding for additional contracts with the 120 most populous U.S. cities. Tools for Evaluating the Metropolitan Medical REsponse System Program: Phase I Report identifies and develops performance measures and systems to assess the effectiveness of, and to identify barriers related to, the MMRS development process. This report identifies, recommends, and develops performance measures and systems to assess the effectiveness of, and identify barriers related to, the MMRS development process at the site, jurisdictional, and governmental levels.
In recent years, substantial efforts have been initiated to develop new drugs, vaccines, and other medical interventions against biological agents that could be used in bioterrorist attacks against civilian populations. According to a new congressionally mandated report from the Institute of Medicine and National Research Council of the National Academies, to successfully develop these drugs, vaccines, and other medical interventions against biowarfare agents, Congress should authorize the creation of a new agency within the Office of the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Defense. The committee recommended that Congress should improve liability protections for those who develop and manufacture these products, to stimulate willingness to invest in new research and development for biowarfare protection. Giving Full Measure to Countermeasures also identifies other challengesâ€"such as the need for appropriate animal models and laboratories equipped with high-level biosafety protectionsâ€"that will require attention if DoD efforts to develop new medical countermeasures are to be successful.
The Metropolitan Medical Response System (MMRS) program of the U. S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) provides funds to major U. S. cities to help them develop plans for coping with the health and medical consequences of a terrorist attack with chemical, biological, or radiological (CBR) agents. DHHS asked the Institute of Medicine (IOM) to assist in assessing the effectiveness of the MMRS program by developing appropriate evaluation methods, tools, and processes to assess both its own management of the program and local preparedness in the cities that have participated in the program. This book provides the managers of the MMRS program and others concerned about local capabilities to cope with CBR terrorism with three evaluation tools and a three-part assessment method. The tools are a questionnaire survey eliciting feedback about the management of the MMRS program, a table of preparedness indicators for 23 essential response capabilities, and a set of three scenarios and related questions for group discussion. The assessment method described integrates document inspection, a site visit by a team of expert peer reviewers, and observations at community exercises and drills.
Our nation faces the distinct possibility of a catastrophic terrorist attack using an improvised nuclear device (IND), according to international and U.S. intelligence. Detonation of an IND in a major U.S. city would result in tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of victims and would overwhelm public health, emergency response, and health care systems, not to mention creating unprecedented social and economic challenges. While preparing for an IND may seem futile at first glance, thousands of lives can be saved by informed planning and decision making prior to and following an attack. In 2009, the Institute of Medicine published the proceedings of a workshop assessing the health and medical preparedness for responding to an IND detonation. Since that time, multiple federal and other publications have added layers of detail to this conceptual framework, resulting in a significant body of literature and guidance. However, there has been only limited planning effort at the local level as much of the federal guidance has not been translated into action for states, cities and counties. According to an informal survey of community preparedness by the National Association of City and County Health Officials (NACCHO), planning for a radiation incident ranked lowest in priority among other hazards by 2,800 local health departments. The focus of Nationwide Response Issues After an Improvised Nuclear Device Attack: Medical and Public Health Considerations for Neighboring Jurisdictions: Workshop Summary is on key response requirements faced by public health and health care systems in response to an IND detonation, especially those planning needs of outlying state and local jurisdictions from the detonation site. The specific meeting objectives were as follows: - Understand the differences between types of radiation incidents and implications of an IND attack on outlying communities. -Highlight current planning efforts at the federal, state, and local level as well as challenges to the implementation of operational plans. -Examine gaps in planning efforts and possible challenges and solutions. -Identify considerations for public health reception centers: how public health and health care interface with functions and staffing and how radiological assessments and triage be handled. -Discuss the possibilities and benefits of integration of disaster transport systems. -Explore roles of regional health care coalitions in coordination of health care response.
Since 1992 the Department of Defense (DOD), through the U.S. Army Medical Research and Material Command, has received congressionally earmarked appropriations for programs of biomedical research on prostate, breast, and ovarian cancer; neurofibromatosis; tuberous sclerosis; and other health problems. Appropriations for these Congressionally Directed Medical Research Programs are used to support peer reviewed extramural research project, training, and infrastructure grants. Congress has become concerned about funding increases for these programs given current demands on the military budget. At the request of Congress, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) examined possibilities of augmenting program funding from alternative sources. The resulting IOM book, Strategies to Leverage Research Funding: Guiding DOD's Peer Reviewed Medical Research Programs, focuses on nonfederal and private sector contributions that could extend the appropriated funds without biasing the peer review project selection process.
In 1998, in response to the growing concerns that many returning Gulf War veterans began reporting numerous health problems that they believed to be associated with their service in the Persian Gulf, Congress passed two laws which directed the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to enter into a contract with the National Academy of Sciences. They were tasked to review and evaluate the scientific and medical literature regarding associations between illness and exposure to toxic agents, environmental or wartime hazards, and preventive medicines or vaccines associated with Gulf War service. In addition, the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences provided conclusions to these studies that were considered when making decisions about compensation to veterans. Gulf War and Health Volume 4: Health Effects of Serving in the Gulf War summarizes in one place the current status of health effects in veterans deployed to the Persian Gulf irrespective of exposure information. This book reviews, evaluates, and summarizes both peer-reviewed scientific and medical literature addressing the health status of Gulf War veterans.
Using the results from comprehensive medical examinations, this volume explores the prevalence of disease among former prisoners of war of World War II and the Korean conflict and the relationship between that prevalence and their decades-earlier treatment while in captivity.
Evidence-Based Medicine Guidelines fills the demand for a handbook discussing the diagnosis and treatment of a wide range of diseases and conditions encountered by health care professionals. The title was first published in Finland by the Finnish Medical Society, where it is now considered to be the single most important support tool for the physicians' decision making in their daily work. What sets EBM Guidelines apart from competing books? Provides physicians with fast and easy access to practice guidelines based on the best available research evidence Covers practically all medical conditions encountered in general practice Developed by over 300 experienced general practitioners and specialists worldwide Includes both diagnostic and therapeutic guidelines, and recommendations on diagnostic tests and drug dosage Presented in a user-friendly format with self contained chapters based on clinical subjects Clear and concise explanations of all available evidence results in the guideline for treatment The strength of evidence is graded from A-D making this title a quick and easy reference whenever and wherever you need it! Assumes no prior knowledge of EBM or statistics - all the work of searching and appraisal has been done for you! Seeks to include guidelines where clinical evidence is incomplete or unavailable Contains full-colour photographs and tables throughout Easy-to-read and fast support at the point of care - EBM Guidelines: Summarises the best available evidence - Cochrane reviews - DARE abstracts - Clinical Evidence topics - original articles in medical journals - abstracts in the Health Technology Assessment Database - NHS Economic Evaluation Evaluates and grades the strength of all individual evidence from A (Strong research-based evidence) to D (No scientific evidence) Suggests guidelines based on clinical evidence. If clinical evidence is inadequate or missing, an expert panel evaluate all other available information and suggests the appropriate guideline With over 1000 problem-orientated or disease-specific guidelines including reference to evidence summaries for all guidelines, this title is the most extensive collection of guidelines for primary care today. Here are just a few examples of the raving reviews for Evidence-Based Medicine Guidelines: "An excellent resource... quick to use, even during consultations...very helpful to check whether our preferred diagnostic and therapeutic methods are adequate...competent suggestions based on real evidence..." —Heinz Bhend, PRIMARY CARE "clinically useful answers...easy-to-read ...this resource is worth using..." —Carl Heneghan, Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, Oxford, UK, EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE Journal
This will help us customize your experience to showcase the most relevant content to your age group
Please select from below
Login
Not registered?
Sign up
Already registered?
Success – Your message will goes here
We'd love to hear from you!
Thank you for visiting our website. Would you like to provide feedback on how we could improve your experience?
This site does not use any third party cookies with one exception — it uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and to analyze traffic.Learn More.