As many as three out of four respondents had one or more signs of moral injury. Men showed more signs than women. People in the middle ages group were more likely to show symptoms. Those who experienced more serious crime showed signs of more severe damage.
We conclude that moral injury is an important cause of psychological trauma that occurs in the military setting. Moral distress and trauma represent new approaches to the problems of the combat injured. We discuss the relevance of our findings to the discussion of mental health and trauma care in the military setting.
There are an estimated 1% of the population each year that report having been harmed by someone's moral failure or failing of that of another; they suffer 1.5 million cases of moral hurt in a year in the United States.
Recent findings of this study are promising and may provide clinical support for the concept of moral injury. Further research should explore the theoretical links between moral injury and moral reasoning and the implications for coping among youth in a variety of settings before this link is fully explored.
The concept of moral injury is useful across many disciplines with the aim of understanding and preventing harm across the medical, psychological and social fields. Our work has contributed to a greater understanding of the concept of mental illness. The conceptualization and implementation of our framework of moral injury (MI) may enable clinicians to use the best available evidence more efficiently when assisting individuals of all backgrounds and at all points across the lifespan. Future work to improve our understanding of the concept of MI is needed, in order to optimize the conceptual and practical application of MI as a tool.
The treatment of moral injury needs to move beyond a focus on immediate physical problems. Instead hospitals and other health care settings should focus on helping survivors understand their moral injuries' sources and on how they have impacted them. Findings from a recent study provides a practical and comprehensive overview of available treatment resources.
To encourage a greater understanding of this specific field of research, in this work this article highlights the clinical implications of these new findings and the importance of future research.
Moral injury in healthcare settings is a relatively new phenomenon. Thus, we lacked relevant and updated evidence for moral injury. As there is still a need to increase the knowledge and provide information for moral injury, we must [carry out research on moral injury in healthcare settings]. The data on ethical considerations and other types of knowledge about moral injury are also required to provide further insight into moral injuries in healthcare settings.
The definitions of serious injury differ around the world, and in some cases different injuries have similar seriousness profiles. This article is not intended to give specific numerical estimates of the frequency or severity of moral injury. The following definitions and criteria are used to guide the scope of this overview, and should not be applied beyond this scope. Moral injury appears to be an emerging injury. It is not included in official data collection schemes. The injury is not explicitly included in medical injury databases. In the UK, the NHS Inpatient Hospital Discharge Data for 1999–2000 gives the frequency of discharge with a diagnosis of "moral injury.
The cognitive processing therapy as part of case formulation has been conducted in a few clinical trials. While these trials demonstrate the positive impact of treatment with case formulation plus cognitive processing therapy on the treatment outcomes of the patients, no randomized clinical trial has been conducted to test the usefulness of this treatment in patients with posttraumatic stress disorder. This finding is relevant to the current interest in this area. In addition, case formulation plus cognitive processing therapy has been used in several clinical trials. However, it is evident that more research is required to verify its efficacy and to demonstrate its long-term effects.
Moral injury seems to be a direct cause of moral distress, and moral distress is associated with psychological distress, such as guilt, shame, and sadness. The present study confirms the association between moral injury and depression and other forms of psychological distress, such as hopelessness, anger and guilt after controlling for other factors. However, we did not find any direct association between moral injury and psychological distress. We argue that the primary cause of moral injury is the sense of being the victim of injustice. This sense of injustice is also associated with depression and other forms of psychological distress. For this reason, our results raise the possibility that moral injury directly relates to psychological distress more strongly than other factors.
The common side effects of CpT were nausea (33% of patients), headache (31%), and dizziness (31%). The most common symptom experienced by patients was fatigue (31% of patients). CpT was generally well tolerated when using only cognitive processing therapy.