The mental health of UK military partners and the variability between stages of deployment
Creators: name: Bennett, Charlene
Publisher: name: University of Lincoln
Year: 2024
Subjects: C800 - Psychology

description: Objectives: The purpose of this study was to identify the prevalence of anxiety,depression, stress, perceived stress, and PTSD symptoms in a UK populationof military partners. It also aimed to identify the extent of any relationshipsbetween these mental health outcomes and individual differences in previouslyimplicated risk factors (including demographic characteristics and attachmentstyles) – as well as whether mental health outcomes vary by stage ofdeployment.Method: A cross-sectional cohort study (n=380) was performed on a sample ofUK military partners. A survey was developed and disseminated online whichincluded a number of validated questionnaires measuring constructs of distress(Depression Anxiety Stress Scale-42), perceived stress (Perceived StressScale-10), traumatic stress (Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Checklist-5) andattachment anxiety and avoidance (Experiences in Close Relationships-Revised). Measurement of defence mechanisms (DSQ-40) has been includedwithin the extended paper for secondary analysis.Results: The results indicate clinical levels of depression, anxiety, stress andperceived stress in military partners and significantly greater levels of distresswhen compared with prevalence rates in general adult and clinical populations.A number of demographic and deployment specific variables appear to beassociated with elevated levels of distress including age, length of relationship,a currently deployed partner and anxious and avoidant attachment styles.Analysis comparing the different stages of deployment found significantly higherdepression and stress scores ‘on’ deployment compared to ‘post’ deploymentand significantly higher perceptions of stress ‘post and pre’ stage of deploymentcompared to ‘post’ deployment. Attachment avoidance was also statisticallymore likely ‘post’ deployment compared to ‘on’ deployment. There were nosignificant differences on defence mechanisms according to stage of3deployment. Findings are discussed in relation to previous evidence and futuredirections of clinical practice and research.Conclusions: Findings indicate the need for more replicable research to provideevidence for the prevalence of mental health difficulties in a sample of UKmilitary partners. Longitudinal and repeated measure designs would provide amore reliable understanding and clarity of mental health across the stages ofdeployment. Qualitative accounts might provide a rich and in-depthunderstanding of the factors mediating and moderating the elevated levels ofdistress found in this study of military partners. Qualitative enquiry might alsoprovide opportunities to explore other processes underlying the varied levels ofdistress dependent on stage of deployment, found in this study, and theimplications of these. Future research might need to consider how to reducelimitations associated with sampling and study design, though at present, theresults provide preliminary support for more specialist and readily accessiblemental health services for military partners.Statement of ContributionOn completion of this project the majority of responsibility related to design,ethical approval, review of the literature, recruitment, the online survey tool,analysis and write-up has lay with the trainee clinical psychologist. Thesupervisors involved; Dr Rachel Sabin Farrell, Prof Nigel Hunt and Dr NimaMoghaddam gave advice and support regarding the project design, literaturereview, recruitment, analysis and write-up.Summative feedback regarding the study design, ethical approval, literaturereview and analysis was also given by academic tutors on the Trent Doctoratein Clinical Psychology, namely; Dr David Dawson and Dr Roshan Das Nairthrough their examination and feedback of the original research proposal. Otherethical and practical considerations were also discussed during a researchannual review involving Dr Hannah Meridian of the University of Lincoln.Regarding recruitment and the design of the online survey, the assistance ofmilitary personnel was invaluable in ensuring language was correct and pitchwas appropriate.Aim: This review examined the impact of deployment on military personnelpartners’ psychological wellbeing.Method: A systematic search of electronic databases, reference lists and Internetsources identified twelve studies for review. All of the studies assessed the impactof deployment on one or more element of psychological health of militarypartners. Only articles that were peer-reviewed, written in English language andadopting a quantitative design were included.Results: Outcomes from the studies suggested increased levels of depression,anxiety, stress and distress in partners of currently deployed personnel. Resultsfrom the methodological quality, however, shows outcomes are not supported byrobust research designs and analysis.Conclusion: Overall, the results suggest psychological difficulties in partners ofdeployed personnel are pertinent, however, conclusions are severely limited todraw any sound conclusions. Recommendations for future research are made.