ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The standard issue clear or sun Military Combat Eye Protection (MCEP) is often inadequate in visually challenging training or combat environment. Intermediate-tinted lenses may offer a viable option for warfighters operating in dynamic visual conditions such as moving rapidly from bright sunny areas to darker building interiors in combat. Because the use of intermediate-tinted lenses has been delayed as a result of a potential negative impact on vision performance such as color perception, this investigation evaluated several commercially available intermediate-tinted lenses for operation performance during a U.S. military field training. Test lenses complied with all the requirements of the current MCEP except for the visible light transmittance (VLT) values that ranged between 32 and 62%. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Study subjects consisted of 22 service members who attended a military Close Combat and Marksmanship training course in May 2019. Visual and pistol marksmanship performance of three intermediate-tinted lenses (Eye Safety Systems [ESS] Copper [32% VLT], Oakley Prizm TR45 [44% VLT], and ESS Bronze [62% VLT]) was compared to that of a standard issue MCEP, ESS Clear (90% VLT). Quick contrast sensitivity function test was used to assess quality vision (AULCSF, area under a log contrast sensitivity function) and visual acuity (CSF Acuity). Color vision was assessed by Cone Contrast Test. Pistol marksmanship (Bill Drill) was used for performance testing. A pre-survey inquired about MCEP use, and a MCEP survey during the pistol marksmanship testing inquired about lens performance and ranking. RESULTS: AULCSF and CSF Acuity were significantly affected by the lenses (general linear model, repeated measures, P < .05). Bonferroni post hoc test showed a significant reduction of binocular AULCSF from ESS Clear to Oakley Prizm TR45 (P = .003) and ESS Copper (P < .001) and a significant reduction in binocular CSF Acuity from ESS Clear to ESS Copper (P = .001). Color vision and pistol marksmanship performance were not significantly affected by wearing different lenses (P > .05). Subjectively, there were no statistically significant differences among study lenses in perceived "clarity of vision," "ability to clearly identify the target," or "overall performance" (Friedman test and Wilcoxon signed-rank post hoc test with Bonferroni adjustment, P > .017). Participants ranked Prizm TR45 (44% VLT) and ESS Bronze (62% VLT) lenses significantly more favorably than EES Clear (P = .001 and P = .009). CONCLUSIONS: Quality of vision and visual acuity decreased with darker lenses; however, the study lenses had insignificant impacts on pistol marksmanship and subjective acceptance. Our surveys indicated that Intermediate-tinted lenses were operationally acceptable and preferred over a standard issue MCEP. While more evaluations for color vision deficient subjects are needed, overall results suggest that commercially available intermediate-tinted lenses may be a viable option to enhance protection and performance in a visually dynamic combat environment.
Subject(s)
Contrast Sensitivity , Vision Tests , Humans , Vision Disorders , Vision, Ocular , Visual AcuityABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Phantom limb pain (PLP) is prevalent in patients post-amputation and is difficult to treat. We assessed the efficacy of mirror therapy in relieving PLP in unilateral, upper extremity male amputees. METHODS: Fifteen participants from Walter Reed and Brooke Army Medical Centers were randomly assigned to one of two groups: mirror therapy (n = 9) or control (n = 6, covered mirror or mental visualization therapy). Participants were asked to perform 15 min of their assigned therapy daily for 5 days/week for 4 weeks. The primary outcome was pain as measured using a 100-mm Visual Analog Scale. RESULTS: Subjects in the mirror therapy group had a significant decrease in pain scores, from a mean of 44.1 (SD = 17.0) to 27.5 (SD = 17.2) mm (p = 0.002). In addition, there was a significant decrease in daily time experiencing pain, from a mean of 1,022 (SD = 673) to 448 (SD = 565) minutes (p = 0.003). By contrast, the control group had neither diminished pain (p = 0.65) nor decreased overall time experiencing pain (p = 0.49). A pain decrement response seen by the 10th treatment session was predictive of final efficacy. CONCLUSION: These results confirm that mirror therapy is an effective therapy for PLP in unilateral, upper extremity male amputees, reducing both severity and duration of daily episodes. REGISTRATION: NCT0030144 ClinicalTrials.gov.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To determine the effects of current hearing protection/enhancement devices (HPEDs) and tactical communications and protection systems (TCAPS) on auditory detection and identification of three critical military signals associated with potential "threats." DESIGN: Utilizing a 6 × 3 within-subject experimental design, 24 normal-hearing Virginia Tech Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) cadets and active duty soldiers participated. STUDY SAMPLE: Five HPEDS and TCAP devices plus the open ear were tested. On each trial, either wearing a device or with open ears, subjects walked along a 3000-foot line of discrete distance markers toward the auditory threat, which was not visible but still within line-of-sight over flat terrain, stopping to listen when instructed. On approach to the threat, the linear distance at first detection was measured, followed by a continued approach until positive identification occurred. Then the subject reversed direction, retreating away from the threat until detection was lost. RESULTS: ANOVA and post hoc tests were applied to determine statistically-significant differences among HPEDs, TCAPS, and the open ear on the objective detection and identification distance measures. CONCLUSIONS: The results have serious implications for selection of HPDs, HPEDs, and TCAPS for applications where preservation of auditory situational awareness via the fundamental detection and identification tasks are essential.