Validation of two aircrew psychomotor tests.

Author(s):  
David F. McGrevy ◽  
Lonnie D. Valentine
Keyword(s):  
1965 ◽  
Vol 111 (474) ◽  
pp. 391-398 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew McGhie ◽  
James Chapman ◽  
J. S. Lawson

In the preceding paper the effect of experimental distraction was examined and the findings discussed. The present report is concerned with a similar study of the effect of distraction on tests which involve another aspect of schizophrenic performance, that of psychomotor ability. Earlier studies (Chapman and McGhie, 1961, 1962) produced both clinical and experimental evidence that auditory distraction disrupted the motor responses of some schizophrenic patients. As the previous experimental findings were based on two tests involving only very limited areas of psychomotor performance, it was necessary to examine patients on a wide range of psychomotor tests. A second aim of the present investigation was to assess any differential effects due to variation in the sensory modality of the distracting stimuli.


1945 ◽  
Vol 7 (6) ◽  
pp. 353-358 ◽  
Author(s):  
I. GRAHAM-BRYCE ◽  
A. K. BULLEN ◽  
W. H. FORBES
Keyword(s):  

1999 ◽  
Vol 90 (3) ◽  
pp. 718-726 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew L. Black ◽  
Joanna L. Hill ◽  
James P. Zacny

Background The subjective and psychomotor effects of remifentanil have not been evaluated. Accordingly, the authors used mood inventories and psychomotor tests to characterize the effects of remifentanil in healthy, non-drug-abusing volunteers. Alfentanil was used as a comparator drug. Methods Ten healthy volunteers were enrolled in a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, crossover trial in which they received an infusion of saline, remifentanil, or alfentanil for 120 min. The age- and weight-adjusted infusions (determined with STANPUMP, a computer modeling software package) were given to achieve three predicted constant plasma levels for 40 min each of remifentanil (0.75, 1.5, and 3 ng/ml) and alfentanil (16, 32, and 64 ng/ml). Mood forms and psychomotor tests were completed, and miosis was assessed, during and after the infusions. In addition, analgesia was tested at each dose level using a cold-pressor test. Results Remifentanil had prototypic micro-like opioid subjective effects, impaired psychomotor performance, and produced analgesia. Alfentanil at the dose range tested had more mild effects on these measures, and the analgesia data indicated that a 40:1 potency ratio, rather than the 20:1 ratio we used, may exist between remifentanil and alfentanil. A psychomotor test administered 60 min after the remifentanil infusion was discontinued showed that the volunteers were still impaired, although they reported feeling no drug effects. Conclusions The notion that the pharmacodynamic effects of remifentanil are extremely short-lived after the drug is no longer administered must be questioned given our findings that psychomotor effects were still apparent 1 h after the infusion was discontinued.


Author(s):  
Dominika M. Wilczyńska ◽  
Frank Abrahamsen ◽  
Agnieszka Popławska ◽  
Piotr Aschenbrenner ◽  
Marcin Dornowski

2004 ◽  
Vol 90 (3) ◽  
pp. 117-124
Author(s):  
A. J. Allsopp ◽  
A. Shariff

AbstractCandidates who wish to undertake Royal Marine recruit training, a physically strenuous course which now extends 32 weeks, must first of all successfully complete a Personal Qualities Assessment (PQA) and four psychomotor tests (Naval Recruiting Tests or RTs) before attending a three-day selection course at the Commando Training Centre, Lympstone, where their Physical capabilities are tested to the full. The effectiveness of theses procedures was untested until the Institute of Naval Medicine conducted a retrospective study during 1999-2000 from which the present study is taken.Data from 1232 recruits were examined to explore the relationship between the outcome of Commando training (pass or fail) with these various selection measures. Estimated aerobic power, time to complete the assault course and age were associated with outcome, as were PQA, RTs 1, 3, 4 and total RT score. A regression equation comprising aerobic fitness, assault course time, RT4 and age gave the best overall prediction of outcome (64%). It is suggested that this mathematical approach provides a scientifically valid and objective assessment tool for future selection strategies.


PEDIATRICS ◽  
1971 ◽  
Vol 48 (6) ◽  
pp. 990-992
Author(s):  
Sumner J. Yaffe ◽  
Chables W. Bierman ◽  
Howard M. Cann ◽  
Arthur P. Gold ◽  
Frederic M. Kenny ◽  
...  

The frequent use of marijuana by American youth has compelled the Committee on Drugs to explore the present methods of and recommendations for controlling marijuana. On October 15, 1970, the Executive Board of the American Academy of Pediatrics endorsed in principle a statement on marijuana which was prepared by the Massachusetts Chapter of the Academy and published in the Academy's Newsletter.1 This statement called for considering possession of marijuana as a misdemeanor rather than a felony, but it was against legalizing use of marijuana at the present time. On October 27, 1970, President Nixon signed into law the Comprehensive Drug Abuse, Prevention and Control Act of 1970 (P.L. 91-513). This law became effective May 1, 1971; it is the Federal Government's attempt to control drug abuse by scientific and medical measures (under control of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare) and by law enforcement activities (Department of Justice). The new Federal law has stopped short of legalizing marijuana, but it does allow a judge the discrelion to withhold criminal charges for the first offense of possession. The Massachusetts Chapter notes2 that marijuana is not a narcotic and does not produce addiction. Short-term physical effects are innocuous. However, impaired performance on simple intellectual and psychomotor tests is seen after individuals have smoked marijuana for the first time; but, such effects are not seen in regular users. There is no evidence to substantiate the common misconceptions that use of marijuana leads to crime or addiction to opiates. But, so little scientific information is available on the long-term use of marijuana that it should be considered a potentially harmful drug.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document