Skip Navigation


Occupational Medicine Advance Access originally published online on July 28, 2009
Occupational Medicine 2009 59(6):428-433; doi:10.1093/occmed/kqp100
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
59/6/428    most recent
kqp100v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Misra, M.
Right arrow Articles by Glozier, N.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Misra, M.
Right arrow Articles by Glozier, N.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society of Occupational Medicine. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Psychological impact upon London Ambulance Service of the 2005 bombings

Monika Misra1, Neil Greenberg2, Chris Hutchinson3, Andrea Brain3 and Nick Glozier4

1 Employee Health and Performance, GlaxoSmithKline, 980 Great West Road, Brentford, Middlesex, TW8 9GS, UK
2 Academic Centre for Defence Mental Health, Academic Department of Psychological Medicine (IOP), Weston Education Centre, Cutcombe Road, London SE5 9RJ, UK
3 London Ambulance Service HQ, 220 Waterloo Road, London SE1 8SD, UK
4 Psychological Medicine, Missenden Unit (villa 92), C39 - Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, The University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia

Background This study was conducted following the London bombings of 7 July 2005.

Aims To assess the psychological impact of the 2005 London bombings on London Ambulance Service (LAS) personnel, risk factors for the development of psychological ill-health and employee awareness of post incident support.

Methods A total of 525 LAS personnel involved in the bombings, and a control group of uninvolved staff, were sent a questionnaire 2 months after the bombings. Main outcome measures were the presence of probable post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) measured using the Trauma Screening Questionnaire and substantial psychological distress using a tool identical to that used to assess the impact of these bombings on the population of London.

Results Fifty-six per cent of those who responded were involved in the bombings. Overall, including controls, the response rate was 32% (341). Four per cent of respondents reported probable PTSD and 13% reported substantial distress. Probable PTSD was more common in those involved in the bombings (6% overall), those working at the disaster scene and, in particular, at one of the incident locations (where 50% of all probable PTSD cases worked). The majority of staff were aware of the post incident support available and how to access this, particularly if personnel were involved in the bombings.

Conclusions The LAS did not report higher levels of probable PTSD and psychological distress than the rest of the London population; however, those more proximal to the incident were more likely to have been affected in spite of being aware of various staff support measures put in place.

Keywords      Emergency workers; London bombings; post-traumatic stress disorder; psychological distress; trauma


Correspondence to: Monika Misra, Employee Health and Performance, GlaxoSmithKline, 980 Great West Road, Brentford, Middlesex, TW8 9GS, UK. Tel: +44 (0)208 047 5100; fax +44 (0)208 047 6960; e-mail: mmisra{at}doctors.org.uk


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.