Persistent and reversible consequences of combat stress on the mesofrontal circuit and cognition

Contains fulltext : 103612.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access

Does hand skill asymmetry relate to creativity, developmental and health issues and aggression as markers of fitness?

A remarkable feature of human handedness at the population level is specialization of the hands, the right hand performing usually better than the left. This specialization might have an evolutionary advantage, because it provides the individual and population with a wider range of skill. We therefore investigated the relationships between hand skill asymmetry and potential markers of Darwinian fitness that have been hypothesized to explain the bias in hand preference: creativity, aggression and developmental and health problems. Over twenty thousand participants (56% left-handers) completed an online survey, including a finger-tapping task to measure hand skill asymmetry. Left-skilled individuals were overall more aggressive than right-skilled individuals and rated themselves as more artistically creative. However, when assessed with a questionnaire, they were less creative on problem solving and equally artistically creative compared to right-skilled individuals, who reported more health problems. Conclusion: we found some evidence for current selection on the direction of lateralization of hand skill although the effect sizes were rather low. Strength of lateralization of hand skill showed only a few associations with fitness proxies. We suggest that Darwinian selection on hand preference (Zickert, Feen, van der, Geuze, & Groothuis, 2018. Fitness costs and benefits associated with hand preference in humans: A large internet study in a Dutch sample. Evolution and Human Behavior, 39, 235-248) and hand skill asymmetry (present study) may be attenuated in modern society

Workplace mental health disclosure, sustainable employability and well-being at work:A cross-sectional study among military personnel with mental illness

Purpose Disclosure of mental illness to a supervisor can have positive (e.g. supervisor support) and negative consequences (e.g. stigma). However, research on the association between disclosure and sustainable employability and well-being at work is scarce. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between the disclosure decision (yes/no), experiences with the decision (positive/negative) and sustainable employment and well-being at work among military personnel with mental illness (N = 323). Methods A cross-sectional questionnaire study was conducted. Descriptive and regression (linear and ordinal) analyses were performed. Comparisons were made between those with positive and negative disclosure experiences. Results Disclosure decision (yes/no) was not significantly associated with any of the measures of sustainable employability and well-being at work. However, positive disclosure experiences were significantly associated with higher scores on almost all measures of sustainable employability and well-being at work. Those with negative disclosure experiences reported significantly more shame (M(pos) = 2.42, M(neg) = 2.78, p < .05) and discrimination (M(pos) = 1.70, M(neg) = 2.84, p < .001). Those with a positive disclosure experience, reported significantly more supervisor support (M(pos) = 3.20, M(neg) = 1.94, p < .001). Conclusion We did not find evidence that the disclosure decision itself is related to measures of sustainable employment and well-being at work. In contrast, how participants had experienced their (non-)disclosure decision was significantly related to almost all measures. This emphasizes the importance of the work environments reactions to disclosure and mental illness in the workplace. Future research and interventions should focus on increasing the likelihood of positive disclosure experiences through creating a more inclusive work environment, with more supervisor support and less stigma. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10926-022-10083-2

Lower cerebello-cortical functional connectivity in veterans with reactive aggression symptoms: A pilot study

A significant number of veterans experience irritability and aggression symptoms as a result of being exposed to extremely stressful and life-threatening situations. In addition to the well-established involvement of the brain's cortico-subcortical circuit in aggression-related behaviours, a role of the deep cerebellar nuclei (DCN) in reactive aggression has been suggested. In the present study, seed-based resting-state functional connectivity between the DCN and cortico-subcortical areas was explored in veterans with and without reactive aggression symptoms. Nineteen male veterans with reactive aggression symptoms and twenty-two control veterans without reactive aggression symptoms underwent 3T resting-state functional MRI scans. Region-of-interest (ROI) analyses that included the amygdala, hypothalamus and periaqueductal grey as ROIs did not yield significant group-related differences in resting-state functional connectivity with the DCN. However, exploratory whole-brain analysis showed that veterans with reactive aggression symptoms exhibited lower functional connectivity between the DCN and the orbitofrontal cortex compared to control veterans. Our findings provide preliminary evidence for the possible involvement of a cerebello-prefrontal pathway in reactive aggression in male veterans

Barriers and facilitators for treatment-seeking for mental health conditions and substance misuse:Multi-perspective focus group study within the military

Background Globally, millions are exposed to stressors at work that increase their vulnerability to develop mental health conditions and substance misuse (such as soldiers, policemen, doctors). However, these types of professionals especially are expected to be strong and healthy, and this contrast may worsen their treatment gap. Although the treatment gap in the military has been studied before, perspectives of different stakeholders involved have largely been ignored, even though they play an important role. Aims To study the barriers and facilitators for treatment-seeking in the military, from three different perspectives. Method In total, 46 people participated, divided into eight homogeneous focus groups, including three perspectives: soldiers with mental health conditions and substance misuse (n = 20), soldiers without mental health conditions and substance misuse (n = 10) and mental health professionals (n = 16). Sessions were audio-taped and transcribed verbatim. Content analysis was done by applying a general inductive approach using ATLAS.ti-8.4.4 software. Results Five barriers for treatment-seeking were identified: fear of negative career consequences, fear of social rejection, confidentiality concerns, the ‘strong worker’ workplace culture and practical barriers. Three facilitators were identified: social support, accessibility and knowledge, and healthcare within the military. The views of the different stakeholder groups were highly congruent. Conclusions Barriers for treatment-seeking were mostly stigma related (fear of career consequences, fear of social rejection and the ‘strong worker’ workplace culture) and this was widely recognised by all groups. Social support from family, peers, supervisors and professionals were identified as important facilitators. A decrease in the treatment gap for mental health conditions and substance misuse is needed and these findings provide direction for future research and destigmatising interventions

Effects of tDCS during inhibitory control training on performance and PTSD, aggression and anxiety symptoms: a randomized-controlled trial in a military sample

Background: Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), anxiety, and impulsive aggression are linked to transdiagnostic neurocognitive deficits. This includes impaired inhibitory control over inappropriate responses. Prior studies showed that inhibitory control can be improved by modulating the right inferior frontal gyrus (IFG) with transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in combination with inhibitory control training. However, its clinical potential remains unclear. We therefore aimed to replicate a tDCS-enhanced inhibitory control training in a clinical sample and test whether this reduces stress-related mental health symptoms. Methods: In a preregistered double-blind randomized-controlled trial, 100 active-duty military personnel and post-active veterans with PTSD, anxiety, or impulsive aggression symptoms underwent a 5-session intervention where a stop-signal response inhibition training was combined with anodal tDCS over the right IFG for 20 min at 1.25 mA. Inhibitory control was evaluated with the emotional go/no-go task and implicit association test. Stress-related symptoms were assessed by self-report at baseline, post-intervention, and after 3-months and 1-year follow-ups. Results: Active relative to sham tDCS neither influenced performance during inhibitory control training nor on assessment tasks, and did also not significantly influence self-reported symptoms of PTSD, anxiety, impulsive aggression, or depression at post-assessment or follow-up. Conclusions: Our results do not support the idea that anodal tDCS over the right IFG at 1.25 mA enhances response inhibition training in a clinical sample, or that this tDCS-training combination can reduce stress-related symptoms. Applying different tDCS parameters or combining tDCS with more challenging tasks might provide better conditions to modulate cognitive functioning and stress-related symptoms