Can a Psychologic Profile Predict Successful Return to Full Duty After a Musculoskeletal Injury?

BACKGROUND: Psychologic variables have been shown to have a strong relationship with recovery from injury and return to work or sports. The extent to which psychologic variables predict successful return to work in military settings is unknown. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: In a population of active duty soldiers, (1) can a psychologic profile determine the risk of injury after return to full duty? (2) Do psychologic profiles differ between soldiers sustaining injuries in the spine (thoracic or lumbar) and those with injuries to the lower extremities? METHODS: Psychologic variables were assessed in soldiers returning to full, unrestricted duty after a recent musculoskeletal injury. Most of these were noncombat injuries from work-related physical activity. Between February 2016 and September 2017, 480 service members who were cleared to return to duty after musculoskeletal injuries (excluding those with high-velocity collisions, pregnancy, or amputation) were enrolled in a study that tracked subsequent injuries over the following year. Of those, we considered individuals with complete 12-month follow-up data as potentially eligible for analysis. Based on that, approximately 2% (8 of 480) were excluded because they did not complete baseline surveys, approximately 2% (11 of 480) were separated from the military during the follow-up period and had incomplete injury data, 1% (3 of 480) were excluded for not serving in the Army branch of the military, and approximately 2% (8 of 480) were excluded because they were not cleared to return to full duty. This resulted in 450 soldiers analyzed. Individuals were 86% (385 of 450) men; 74% (331 of 450) had lower extremity injuries and 26% (119 of 450) had spinal injuries, including soft tissue aches and pains (for example, strains and sprains), fractures, and disc herniations. Time-loss injury within 1 year was the primary outcome. While creating and validating a new prediction model using only psychological variables, 19 variables were assessed for nonlinearity, further factor selection was performed through elastic net, and models were internally validated through 2000 bootstrap iterations. Performance was deciphered through calibration, discrimination (area under the curve [AUC]), R 2 , and calibration in the large. Calibration assesses predicted versus actual risk by plotting the x and y intersection of these values; the more similar predicted risk values are to actual ones, the closer the slope of the line formed by the intersection points of all subjects is to equaling "1" (optimal calibration). Likewise, perfect discrimination (predicted injured versus actual injured) presents as an AUC of 1. Perfect calibration in the large would equal 0 because it represents the average predicted risk versus the actual outcome rate. Sensitivity analyses stratified groups by prior injury region (thoracic or lumbar spine and lower extremity) as well as the severity of injury by days of limited duty (moderate [7-27 days] and severe [28 + days]). RESULTS: A model comprising primarily psychologic variables including depression, anxiety, kinesiophobia, fear avoidance beliefs, and mood did not adequately determine the risk of subsequent injury. The derived logistic prediction model had 18 variables: R 2 = 0.03, calibration = 0.63 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.30 to 0.97), AUC = 0.62 (95% CI 0.52 to 0.72), and calibration in the large = -0.17. Baseline psychologic profiles between body regions differed only for depression severity (mean difference 1 [95% CI 0 to 1]; p = 0.04), with greater mean scores for spine injuries than for lower extremity injuries. Performance was poor for those with prior spine injuries compared with those with lower extremity injuries (AUC 0.50 [95% CI 0.42 to 0.58] and 0.63 [95% CI 0.57 to 0.69], respectively) and moderate versus severe injury during the 1-year follow-up (AUC 0.61 [95% CI 0.51 to 0.71] versus 0.64 [95% CI 0.64 to 0.74], respectively). CONCLUSION: The psychologically based model poorly predicted subsequent injury. This study does not minimize the value of assessing the psychologic profiles of injured athletes, but rather suggests that models looking to identify injury risk should consider a multifactorial approach that also includes other nonpsychologic factors such as injury history. Future studies should refine the most important psychologic constructs that can add the most value and precision to multifactorial models aimed at identifying the risk of injury. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, prognostic study.

Barriers and facilitators to implementation of musculoskeletal injury mitigation programmes for military service members around the world: a scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: Musculoskeletal injury (MSK-I) mitigation and prevention programmes (MSK-IMPPs) have been developed and implemented across militaries worldwide. Although programme efficacy is often reported, development and implementation details are often overlooked, limiting their scalability, sustainability and effectiveness. This scoping review aimed to identify the following in military populations: (1) barriers and facilitators to implementing and scaling MSK-IMPPs; (2) gaps in MSK-IMPP research and (3) future research priorities. METHODS: A scoping review assessed literature from inception to April 2022 that included studies on MSK-IMPP implementation and/or effectiveness in military populations. Barriers and facilitators to implementing these programmes were identified. RESULTS: From 132 articles, most were primary research studies (90; 68.2%); the remainder were review papers (42; 31.8%). Among primary studies, 3 (3.3%) investigated only women, 62 (69%) only men and 25 (27.8%) both. Barriers included limited resources, lack of stakeholder engagement, competing military priorities and equipment-related factors. Facilitators included strong stakeholder engagement, targeted programme design, involvement/proximity of MSK-I experts, providing MSK-I mitigation education, low burden on resources and emphasising end-user acceptability. Research gaps included variability in reported MSK-I outcomes and no consensus on relevant surveillance metrics and definitions. CONCLUSION: Despite a robust body of literature, there is a dearth of information about programme implementation; specifically, barriers or facilitators to success. Additionally, variability in outcomes and lack of consensus on MSK-I definitions may affect the development, implementation evaluation and comparison of MSK-IMPPs. There is a need for international consensus on definitions and optimal data reporting elements when conducting injury risk mitigation research in the military.

Predicting Subsequent Injury after Being Cleared to Return to Work from Initial Lumbar or Lower Extremity Injury.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to develop a model to predict re-injury after being cleared to return to full duty from an initial injury. METHODS: This was a prediction model derivation cohort study. Military service members cleared for unrestricted full duty after sustaining a musculoskeletal injury were enrolled from three large military hospitals. Medical history, demographics, psychological profile, physical performance (Y-Balance Test™, Functional Movement Screen™, Selective Functional Movement Assessment, triple hop, closed chain ankle dorsiflexion, 2-mile run, 75% bodyweight carry time), and past injury history were assessed. Monthly text messages, medical records and limited duty databases were used to identify injuries resulting in time lost from work in the following year. RESULTS: Four hundred fifty participants (65 females), ages 18 to 45 yr were analyzed. Fifteen variables were included in the final model. The area under the curve was 0.74 (95% confidence interval, 0.69-0.80), indicating good performance. The calibration score of the model was 1.05 (95% confidence interval, 0.80-1.30) indicating very good performance. With an injury incidence in our cohort of 38.0%, the treat all net benefit was 0.000, and the net benefit of our predictive model was 0.251. This means 25 additional soldiers out of every 100 were correctly identified as high risk for injury compared with not using a prediction model at all. CONCLUSIONS: This multivariable model accurately predicted injury risk after returning for full duty and was better than not using a prediction model at all (an additional 25 of every 100 tactical athletes were correctly identified). This model provides guidance for proper decision making about when these individuals are not ready to return to full duty, with higher risk of a subsequent injury.

Physiology of Health and Performance: Enabling Success of Women in Combat Arms Roles.

INTRODUCTION: The modern female soldier has yet to be fully characterized as she steps up to fill new combat roles that have only recently been opened to women. Both U.S. and U.K. military operational research efforts are supporting a science-based evolution of physical training and standards for female warfighters. The increasing representation of women in all military occupations makes it possible to discover and document the limits of female physiological performance. METHOD: An informal Delphi process was used to synthesize an integrated concept of current military female physiological research priorities and emerging findings using a panel of subject matter experts who presented their research and perspectives during the second Women in Combat Summit hosted by the TriService Nursing Research Program in February 2021. RESULTS: The physical characteristics of the modern soldier are changing as women train for nontraditional military roles, and they are emerging as stronger and leaner. Capabilities and physique will likely continue to evolve in response to new Army standards and training programs designed around science-based sex-neutral requirements. Strong bones may be a feature of the female pioneers who successfully complete training and secure roles traditionally reserved for men. Injury risk can be reduced by smarter, targeted training and with attention directed to female-specific hormonal status, biomechanics, and musculoskeletal architecture. An "estrogen advantage" appears to metabolically support enhanced mental endurance in physically demanding high-stress field conditions; a healthy estrogen environment is also essential for musculoskeletal health. The performance of female soldiers can be further enhanced by attention to equipment that serves their needs with seemingly simple solutions such as a suitable sports bra and personal protective equipment that accommodates the female anatomy. CONCLUSIONS: Female physiological limits and performance have yet to be adequately defined as women move into new roles that were previously developed and reserved for men. Emerging evidence indicates much greater physical capacity and physiological resilience than previously postulated.

Cross-Cutting Lessons Learned During the COVID-19 Pandemic-the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research Experience.

INTRODUCTION: At the start of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, Walter Reed Army Institute of Research (WRAIR) mobilized to rapidly conduct medical research to detect, prevent, and treat the disease in order to minimize the impact of the pandemic on the health and readiness of U.S. Forces. WRAIR's major efforts included the development of the Department of Defense (DoD) COVID-19 vaccine candidate, researching novel drug therapies and monoclonal antibodies, refining and scaling-up diagnostic capabilities, evaluating the impact of viral diversity, assessing the behavioral health of Soldiers, supporting U.S. DoD operational forces overseas, and providing myriad assistance to allied nations. WRAIR personnel have also filled key roles within the whole of government response to the pandemic. WRAIR had to overcome major pandemic-related operational challenges in order to quickly execute a multimillion-dollar portfolio of COVID-19 research. Consequently, the organization learned lessons that could benefit other leaders of medical research organizations preparing for the next pandemic. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified lessons learned using a qualitative thematic analysis of 76 observation/recommendation pairs from across the organization. These lessons learned were organized under the Army's four pillars of readiness (staffing, training, equipping, and leadership development). To this framework, we added organizing and leading to best capture our experiences within the context of pandemic response. RESULTS: The major lessons learned for organizing were: (1) the pandemic created a need to rapidly pivot to new scientific priorities; (2) necessary health and safety precautions disrupted the flow of normal science and put programs at risk of missing milestones; (3) relationships with partners and allies facilitated medical diplomacy and advancement of U.S. national military and economic goals; and (4) a successful response required interoperability within and across multiple organizations. For equipping: (1) existing infrastructure lacked sufficient capacity and technical capability to allow immediate countermeasure development; (2) critical supply chains were strained; and (3) critical information system function and capacity were suddenly insufficient under maximum remote work. For staffing and training: (1) successful telework required rapid shifts in management, engagement, and accountability methods; and (2) organizational policies and processes had to adapt quickly to support remote staffing. For leading and leadership development (1) engaged, hopeful, and empathetic leadership made a difference; and (2) the workforce benefitted from concerted leadership communication that created a shared understanding of shifting priorities as well as new processes and procedures. CONCLUSIONS: An effective pandemic response requires comprehensive institutional preparedness that facilitates flexibility and surge capacity. The single most important action leaders of medical research organizations can take to prepare for the next pandemic is to develop a quick-reaction force that would activate under prespecified criteria to manage reprioritization of all science and support activities to address pandemic response priorities at the velocity of relevance.

Predictive models for musculoskeletal injury risk: why statistical approach makes all the difference.

Objective: Compare performance between an injury prediction model categorising predictors and one that did not and compare a selection of predictors based on univariate significance versus assessing non-linear relationships. Methods: Validation and replication of a previously developed injury prediction model in a cohort of 1466 service members followed for 1 year after physical performance, medical history and sociodemographic variables were collected. The original model dichotomised 11 predictors. The second model (M2) kept predictors continuous but assumed linearity and the third model (M3) conducted non-linear transformations. The fourth model (M4) chose predictors the proper way (clinical reasoning and supporting evidence). Model performance was assessed with R2, calibration in the large, calibration slope and discrimination. Decision curve analyses were performed with risk thresholds from 0.25 to 0.50. Results: 478 personnel sustained an injury. The original model demonstrated poorer R2 (original:0.07; M2:0.63; M3:0.64; M4:0.08), calibration in the large (original:-0.11 (95% CI -0.22 to 0.00); M2: -0.02 (95% CI -0.17 to 0.13); M3:0.03 (95% CI -0.13 to 0.19); M4: -0.13 (95% CI -0.25 to -0.01)), calibration slope (original:0.84 (95% CI 0.61 to 1.07); M2:0.97 (95% CI 0.86 to 1.08); M3:0.90 (95% CI 0.75 to 1.05); M4: 081 (95% CI 0.59 to 1.03) and discrimination (original:0.63 (95% CI 0.60 to 0.66); M2:0.90 (95% CI 0.88 to 0.92); M3:0.90 (95% CI 0.88 to 0.92); M4: 0.63 (95% CI 0.60 to 0.66)). At 0.25 injury risk, M2 and M3 demonstrated a 0.43 net benefit improvement. At 0.50 injury risk, M2 and M3 demonstrated a 0.33 net benefit improvement compared with the original model. Conclusion: Model performance was substantially worse in the models with dichotomised variables. This highlights the need to follow established recommendations when developing prediction models.

Recovery, Rehabilitation, and Return to Full Duty in a Military Population After a Recent Injury: Differences Between Lower-Extremity and Spine Injuries.

PURPOSE: To compare readiness to return to duty in soldiers following recent lower-extremity versus spine injury. The secondary purposes were to provide normative data for the Selective Functional Movement Assessment Top Tier movements (SFMA-TTM) and assess the association between SFMA-TTM scores and future injury occurrence, comparing injuries of the lower extremity and thoracic/lumbar spine. METHODS: SFMA was rated by trained assessors on 480 U.S. Army soldiers within 2 weeks of being cleared to return to duty after recent lower-extremity or lumbar/thoracic injury. Participants were followed for 1 year to determine incidence of subsequent time-loss injury. RESULTS: Only 74.4% of soldiers felt 100% mission capable when returning to full duty (73.6% lower-extremity; 76.5% spine). After 1 year, 37.9% had sustained a time-loss injury, and pain with movement at baseline was associated with higher odds for having an injury (odd ratio 1.53 95% confidence interval 1.04-2.24; P = .032). Almost all (99.8%) had at least 1 dysfunctional pattern, and 44.1% had pain with at least 1 movement (40.3% with previous lower-extremity injury; 54.6% with previous spine injury) after being cleared to return to duty. CONCLUSIONS: One in four patients did not feel 100% mission capable upon being cleared for full duty. Pain with movement was also associated with future injury. Regardless of recent injury type, 99.8% of soldiers returned to full unrestricted duty with at least 1dysfunctional movement pattern and 44.1% had pain with at least 1 of the SFMA-TTM movements. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative cohort study.

Challenges With Engaging Military Stakeholders for Clinical Research at the Point of Care in the U.S. Military Health System.

The DoD has a specific mission that creates unique challenges for the conduct of clinical research. These unique challenges include (1) the fact that medical readiness is the number one priority, (2) understanding the role of military culture, and (3) understanding the highly transient flow of operations. Appropriate engagement with key stakeholders at the point of care, where research activities are executed, can mean the difference between success and failure. These key stakeholders include the beneficiaries of the study intervention (patients), clinicians delivering the care, and the military and clinic leadership of both. Challenges to recruitment into research studies include military training, temporary duty, and deployments that can disrupt availability for participation. Seeking medical care is still stigmatized in some military settings. Uniformed personnel, including clinicians, patients, and leaders, are constantly changing, often relocating every 2-4 years, limiting their ability to support clinical trials in this setting which often take 5-7 years to plan and execute. When relevant stakeholders are constantly changing, keeping them engaged becomes an enduring priority. Military leaders are driven by the ability to meet the demands of the assigned mission (readiness). Command endorsement and support are critical for service members to participate in stakeholder engagement panels or clinical trials offering novel treatments. To translate science into relevant practice within the Military Health System, early engagement with key stakeholders at the point of care and addressing mission-relevant factors is critical for success.

How sleep can help maximize human potential: The role of leaders.

OBJECTIVE: During multi-domain operations (MDO), soldiers need the physical supremacy, cognitive dominance, and emotional resilience to help defend and win our nation's wars. Optimal sleep has been shown to boost physical performance and cognitive processing. This manuscript will discuss how recent advances in sleep science strongly argue for the integration of sleep planning into military operations. DESIGN: Review article. METHODS: We reviewed the current understanding of how sleep affects Soldier readiness, how sleep and pain are interrelated, and unique challenges to obtaining adequate sleep in military training environments. We then address solutions that can be implemented by leaders and individuals to manage warfighter fatigue and optimize unit performance. RESULTS: Since sleep is foundational to soldier health and readiness, improving warfighter fatigue management is a priority for leaders. CONCLUSION: To succeed in MDO, military personnel require physical supremacy, cognitive dominance, and emotional resilience to fight and win. Sleep science is a rapidly emerging field, and the clear implications for maximizing human performance argue strongly for more deliberate integration into military training and operations. Leaders that incorporate sleep and fatigue management into the planning and execution phases of operations will help facilitate mission priorities and prove a powerful force multiplier.

Move to health-a holistic approach to the management of chronic low back pain: an intervention and implementation protocol developed for a pragmatic clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of chronic pain conditions is growing. Low back pain was the primary cause of disability worldwide out of 156 conditions assessed between 1990 and 2016, according to the Global Burden of Disease Study. Conventional medical approaches have failed to identify effective and long-lasting approaches for the management of chronic pain, and often fail to consider the multiple domains that influence overall health and can contribute to the pain experience. Leading international organizations that focus on pain research have stated the importance of considering these other domains within holistic and multidisciplinary frameworks for treating pain. While the research behind the theoretical link between these domains and chronic pain outcomes has expanded greatly over the last decade, there have been few practical and feasible methods to implement this type of care in normal clinical practice. METHODS: The purpose of this manuscript is to describe an implementation protocol that is being used to deliver a complex holistic health intervention at multiple sites within a large government health system, as part of a larger multisite trial for patients with chronic low back pain. The Move to Health program developed by the US Army Medical Command was tailored for specific application to patients with low back pain and begins by providing an empirical link between eight different health domains (that include physical, emotional, social, and psychological constructs) and chronic low back pain. Through a six-step process, a health coach leverages motivational interviewing and information from a personal health inventory to guide the patient through a series of conversations about behavioral lifestyle choices. The patient chooses which domains they want to prioritize, and the health coach helps implement the plan with the use of SMART (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic, Time-bound) goals and a series of resources for every domain, triaged from self-management to specialist referral. DISCUSSION: Complex interventions described in clinical trials are often challenging to implement because they lack sufficient details. Implementation protocols can improve the ability to properly deliver trial interventions into regular clinical practice with increased fidelity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Implementation of this intervention protocol was developed for a clinical trial that was registered a priori (clinicaltrials.gov #NCT04172038).

Stakeholder Engagement in Pragmatic Clinical Trials: Emphasizing Relationships to Improve Pain Management Delivery and Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The NIH-DOD-VA Pain Management Collaboratory (PMC) supports 11 pragmatic clinical trials (PCTs) on nonpharmacological approaches to management of pain and co-occurring conditions in U.S. military and veteran health organizations. The Stakeholder Engagement Work Group is supported by a separately funded Coordinating Center and was formed with the goal of developing respectful and productive partnerships that will maximize the ability to generate trustworthy, internally valid findings directly relevant to veterans and military service members with pain, front-line primary care clinicians and health care teams, and health system leaders. The Stakeholder Engagement Work Group provides a forum to promote success of the PCTs in which principal investigators and/or their designees discuss various stakeholder engagement strategies, address challenges, and share experiences. Herein, we communicate features of meaningful stakeholder engagement in the design and implementation of pain management pragmatic trials, across the PMC. DESIGN: Our collective experiences suggest that an optimal stakeholder-engaged research project involves understanding the following: i) Who are research stakeholders in PMC trials? ii) How do investigators ensure that stakeholders represent the interests of a study's target treatment population, including individuals from underrepresented groups?, and iii) How can sustained stakeholder relationships help overcome implementation challenges over the course of a PCT? SUMMARY: Our experiences outline the role of stakeholders in pain research and may inform future pragmatic trial researchers regarding methods to engage stakeholders effectively.

A Sequential Multiple-Assignment Randomized Trial (SMART) for Stepped Care Management of Low Back Pain in the Military Health System: A Trial Protocol.

BACKGROUND: The Defense Health Agency has prioritized system-level pain management initiatives within the Military Health System (MHS), with low back pain as one of the key focus areas. A stepped care model focused on nonpharmacologic treatment to promote self-management is recommended. Implementation of stepped care is complicated by lack of information on the most effective nonpharmacologic strategies and how to sequence and tailor the various available options. The Sequential Multiple-Assignment Randomization Trial for Low Back Pain (SMART LBP) is a multisite pragmatic trial using a SMART design to assess the effectiveness of nonpharmacologic treatments for chronic low back pain. DESIGN: This SMART trial has two treatment phases. Participants from three military treatment facilities are randomized to 6 weeks of phase I treatment, receiving either physical therapy (PT) or Army Medicine's holistic Move2Health (M2H) program in a package specific to low back pain. Nonresponders to treatment in phase I are again randomized to phase II treatment of combined M2H + PT or mindfulness-based treatment using the Mindfulness-Oriented Recovery Enhancement (MORE) program. The primary outcome is the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System pain interference computer-adapted test score. SUMMARY: This trial is part of an initiative funded by the National Institutes of Health, Veterans Affairs, and the Department of Defense to establish a national infrastructure for effective system-level management of chronic pain with a focus on nonpharmacologic treatments. The results of this study will provide important information on nonpharmacologic care for chronic LBP in the MHS embedded within a stepped care framework.

Identification of Risk Factors Prospectively Associated With Musculoskeletal Injury in a Warrior Athlete Population.

BACKGROUND: Musculoskeletal injuries are a primary source of disability. Understanding how risk factors predict injury is necessary to individualize and enhance injury reduction programs. HYPOTHESIS: Because of the multifactorial nature of musculoskeletal injuries, multiple risk factors will provide a useful method of categorizing warrior athletes based on injury risk. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective observational cohort study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 2. METHODS: Baseline data were collected on 922 US Army soldiers/warrior athletes (mean age, 24.7 ± 5.2 years; mean body mass index, 26.8 ± 3.4 kg/m2) using surveys and physical measures. Injury occurrence and health care utilization were collected for 1 year. Variables were compared in healthy versus injured participants using independent t tests or chi-square analysis. Significantly different factors between each group were entered into a logistic regression equation. Receiver operating characteristic curve and accuracy statistics were calculated for regression variables. RESULTS: Of the 922 warrior athletes, 38.8% suffered a time-loss injury (TLI). Overall, 35 variables had a significant relationship with TLIs. The logistic regression equation, consisting of 11 variables of interest, was significant (adjusted R2 = 0.21; odds ratio, 5.7 [95% CI, 4.1-7.9]; relative risk, 2.5 [95% CI, 2.1-2.9]; area under the curve, 0.73). Individuals with 2 variables had a sensitivity of 0.89, those with 7 or more variables had a specificity of 0.94. CONCLUSION: The sum of individual risk factors (prior injury, prior work restrictions, lower perceived recovery from injury, asymmetrical ankle dorsiflexion, decreased or asymmetrical performance on the Lower and Upper Quarter Y-Balance test, pain with movement, slower 2-mile run times, age, and sex) produced a highly sensitive and specific multivariate model for TLI in military servicemembers. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: A better understanding of characteristics associated with future injury risk can provide a foundation for prevention programs designed to reduce medical costs and time lost.

Imaging with ultrasound in physical therapy: What is the PT's scope of practice? A competency-based educational model and training recommendations.

Physical therapists employ ultrasound (US) imaging technology for a broad range of clinical and research purposes. Despite this, few physical therapy regulatory bodies guide the use of US imaging, and there are limited continuing education opportunities for physical therapists to become proficient in using US within their professional scope of practice. Here, we (i) outline the current status of US use by physical therapists; (ii) define and describe four broad categories of physical therapy US applications (ie, rehabilitation, diagnostic, intervention and research US); (iii) discuss how US use relates to the scope of high value physical therapy practice and (iv) propose a broad framework for a competency-based education model for training physical therapists in US. This paper only discusses US imaging-not 'therapeutic' US. Thus, 'imaging' is implicit anywhere the term 'ultrasound' is used.

Promoting and Sustaining Positive Personal Health Behaviors - Putting the Person First.

Amidst the national debate on the future of health care, there must be a focus on how individuals, communities, and the system need to change to promote and sustain health rather than reactively treat sickness and disability. To transition from a health care system to a "System for Health", we need to move from a patient-focused to a person-focused position. A system that focuses on improving personal decisions related to activity, nutrition, sleep, and tobacco-free living could have a profound impact on health and well-being. The delivery of health, instead of just health care, entails more than just preventing sickness and disability; it requires focusing on building personal wellness, resilience, and endurance. Engaging the individual person to embrace a healthier lifestyle through education, incentives, and technology we can have a positive impact on reducing costs and improving health outcomes. The purpose of this commentary is three-fold: (1) to address the need to implement prescriptions for health, (2) advocate for the need for a person-centric model to help our health care system transition to a system for health, and (3) demonstrate how simple behavior changes can help drive the change to health.

Incidence of Musculoskeletal Injury in US Army Unit Types: A Prospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Musculoskeletal injuries during military service are a primary source of disability, resulting in 2.4 million annual health care visits and 25 million limited-duty days. While the injury incidence during basic training is well documented, there is little understanding of injury distribution by organization type in the US Army following initial training. OBJECTIVE: To compare injury incidence, distribution, and impact across various military units. METHODS: In this prospective observational cohort study, comprehensive injury data from subject questionnaires and medical chart reviews were collected over 12 months for 1430 initially healthy Army personnel, representing combat, combat support, combat service support, and ranger units. Health care utilization and time loss due to injury were also collected. RESULTS: Of 1430 soldiers, 481 (33.6%) had time-loss injury, 222 (15.5%) were injured without limited work, 60 (4.2%) reported an injury but did not seek medical care, and 667 (46.6%) were uninjured. Across the whole sample, injuries were responsible for 5.9 ±14.4 medical visits per soldier, 21 902 days of limited work, and $1 337 000 ($1901 ± $6535 per soldier) in medical costs. Considering only those reporting injury, each person averaged 36.3 ± 59.7 limited-work days. The injury incidence was highest in combat service support units (65.6%), with a risk ratio 1.60 times that of the reference group (combat, 41.1%). CONCLUSION: Combat support and combat service support personnel were more likely to have 1 or more injuries compared to rangers and combat personnel. The higher relative risk of injury in support units should be explored further. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2018;48(10):749-757. Epub 22 May 2018. doi:10.2519/jospt.2018.7979.

Developing predictive models for return to work using the Military Power, Performance and Prevention (MP3) musculoskeletal injury risk algorithm: a study protocol for an injury risk assessment programme.

BACKGROUND: Musculoskeletal injuries are a primary source of disability in the US Military, and low back pain and lower extremity injuries account for over 44% of limited work days annually. History of prior musculoskeletal injury increases the risk for future injury. This study aims to determine the risk of injury after returning to work from a previous injury. The objective is to identify criteria that can help predict likelihood for future injury or re-injury. METHODS: There will be 480 active duty soldiers recruited from across four medical centres. These will be patients who have sustained a musculoskeletal injury in the lower extremity or lumbar/thoracic spine, and have now been cleared to return back to work without any limitations. Subjects will undergo a battery of physical performance tests and fill out sociodemographic surveys. They will be followed for a year to identify any musculoskeletal injuries that occur. Prediction algorithms will be derived using regression analysis from performance and sociodemographic variables found to be significantly different between injured and non-injured subjects. DISCUSSION: Due to the high rates of injuries, injury prevention and prediction initiatives are growing. This is the first study looking at predicting re-injury rates after an initial musculoskeletal injury. In addition, multivariate prediction models appear to have move value than models based on only one variable. This approach aims to validate a multivariate model used in healthy non-injured individuals to help improve variables that best predict the ability to return to work with lower risk of injury, after a recent musculoskeletal injury. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02776930.

Criterion Validity of Ultrasound Imaging: Assessment of Multifidi Cross-Sectional Area in Older Adults With and Without Chronic Low Back Pain.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Ultrasound (US) imaging may be a cost-conscious alternative to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), which is the criterion standard for muscle cross-sectional area (CSA) assessment. Within the trunk, when compared with MRI, US has been shown to be valid for assessing lumbar multifidi CSA in younger, asymptomatic individuals. To date, there are no studies validating US for multifidi CSA assessment in older adults or individuals with low back pain. Given age- and pain-related muscle changes, validation of US is needed in these populations. If valid for multifidi CSA assessment, US may be used to evaluate short-term changes in muscle size in response to exercise-based interventions among older adults. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the validity of US for multifidi CSA assessment as compared with MRI in older adults with and without chronic low back pain (CLBP). The secondary objective was to determine whether a single US image was valid for assessment of multifidi CSA or whether the average of 3 US images should be recommended. METHODS: Twenty community-dwelling older adults (ie, 10 with and 10 without CLBP), ages 60 to 85 years, were recruited. US images and MRI slices of multifidi muscle were obtained and L4 multifidi CSAs were measured. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculated to assess agreement between MRI measures and a single US image and MRI measures and the average of 3 US images. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: ICC point estimates were excellent for older adults with CLBP for a single US image (ICCs = 0.90-0.97), but ICC point estimates for participants without CLBP ranged from fair to excellent (ICCs = 0.48-0.86). ICC point estimates for the average of 3 US images for both groups were better than for a single image (ICCs = 0.95-0.99). CONCLUSIONS: For assessment of L4 multifidi CSA, US is a valid alternative to MRI for older adults with and without CLBP. However, limitations of US, such as the inability to quantify intramuscular fat, which may be increased with aging and CLBP, should be considered. CSA measurement of 3 US images, rather than a single image, is recommended.

Association of Physical Inactivity, Weight, Smoking, and Prior Injury on Physical Performance in a Military Setting.

CONTEXT: Although inactivity, being overweight, smoking, and a history of injury are identified as risk factors for poor health and injury, few authors have examined their association on physical performance. Young adults may be more likely to adopt healthier lifestyles if they understand the effect of health behaviors on performance. OBJECTIVE: To determine the association of being overweight, smoking, inactivity, and a history of injury with physical performance. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Military population. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: Active-duty service members (N = 1466; 1380 men, 86 women; age = 24.7 ± 5.0 years; body mass index = 26.7 ± 3.4 kg/m2). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Participants performed 8 measures (the triple-crossover hop for distance, the 6-m timed-hop test, the Functional Movement Screen, the Lower Quarter Y-Balance Test, the Upper Quarter Y-Balance Test, and the 3-event Army Physical Fitness Test) for evaluation of endurance, strength, muscular endurance, power, agility, balance, and motor control. Participants were categorized based on the number of health risk factors present. Using an analysis of covariance, we assessed the relationship between risk factors and physical performance with age and sex as covariates. RESULTS: Compared with those who had no risk factors (27.9% of men, 34.9% of women), physical performance was worse in those who had 1, 2, or 3 to 4 risk factors present by 4.3%, 6.7%, and 10.3%, respectively. Decrements in performance for those with 3 to 4 risk factors ranged from 3.3% to 14.4%. CONCLUSIONS: An unhealthy lifestyle habit or a history of injury was negatively associated with physical performance. Physical performance decrements were associated with the number of risk factors present. Understanding how risk factors contribute to decreased physical performance may enable clinicians to improve compliance with injury-prevention programs in occupational settings in which a young and relatively healthy workforce may be more concerned about performance than health.