Hughes Jamie G H Hacker, Earnshaw N Mark, Greenberg Neil, Eldridge Rod, Fear Nicola T, French Claire, Deahl Martin P, Wessely Simon
King's Centre for Military Health Research, King's College London, Weston Education Centre, Cutcombe Road, London, SE5 9RJ, U.K.
Mil Med. 2008 Jun;173(6):534-8. doi: 10.7205/milmed.173.6.534.
This article reviews the use of psychological decompression as applied to troops returning from active service in operational theaters. Definitions of the term are considered and a brief history is given. Current policies and practices are described and the question of mandatory decompression is considered. Finally, the evidence base for the efficacy of decompression is examined and some conclusions are drawn. This article highlights variations in the definition and practice of decompression and its use. Although there is, as yet, no evidence that decompression works, there is also no evidence to the contrary. Given the lack of knowledge as to the balance of risks and benefits of decompression and the absence of any definitive evidence that decompression is associated with improved mental health outcomes or that lack of decompression is associated with the reverse, it is argued that the use of decompression should remain a matter for discretion.
本文回顾了心理减压措施在从战区现役返回的部队中的应用。文中对该术语的定义进行了探讨,并给出了简要的历史。描述了当前的政策和做法,并考虑了强制减压的问题。最后,研究了减压效果的证据基础并得出了一些结论。本文强调了减压定义、实践及其应用方面的差异。虽然目前尚无证据表明减压措施有效,但也没有相反的证据。鉴于对减压措施风险与益处的权衡缺乏了解,且没有确凿证据表明减压与改善心理健康结果相关,或缺乏减压与相反情况相关,因此有人认为减压措施的使用应仍由酌情决定。