ALBERT

Description: Introduction: For every one hour spent performing extravehicular activity (EVA) in space, astronauts in the US space program spend approximately six to ten hours training in the EVA spacesuit at NASA-Johnson Space Center's Neutral Buoyancy Lab (NBL). In 1997, NASA introduced the planar hard upper torso (HUT) EVA spacesuit which subsequently replaced the existing pivoted HUT. An extra joint in the pivoted shoulder allows increased mobility but also increased complexity. Over the next decade a number of astronauts developed shoulder problems requiring surgical intervention, many of whom performed EVA training in the NBL. This study investigated whether changing HUT designs led to shoulder injuries requiring surgical repair. Methods: US astronaut EVA training data and spacesuit design employed were analyzed from the NBL data. Shoulder surgery data was acquired from the medical record database, and causal mechanisms were obtained from personal interviews Analysis of the individual HUT designs was performed as it related to normal shoulder biomechanics. Results: To date, 23 US astronauts have required 25 shoulder surgeries. Approximately 48% (11/23) directly attributed their injury to training in the planar HUT, whereas none attributed their injury to training in the pivoted HUT. The planar HUT design limits shoulder abduction to 90 degrees compared to approximately 120 degrees in the pivoted HUT. The planar HUT also forces the shoulder into a forward flexed position requiring active retraction and extension to increase abduction beyond 90 degrees. Discussion: Multiple factors are associated with mechanisms leading to shoulder injury requiring surgical repair. Limitations to normal shoulder mechanics, suit fit, donning/doffing, body position, pre-existing injury, tool weight and configuration, age, in-suit activity, and HUT design have all been identified as potential sources of injury. Conclusion: Crewmembers with pre-existing or current shoulder injuries or certain anthropometric body types should conduct NBL EVA training in the pivoted HUT.

Description: Since 2000, US astronauts have been supporting missions up to a six month duration on the International Space Station (ISS). Crewmembers have experienced fatigue for reasons similar to military deployments. Astronauts experience psychological stressors such as heavy workloads, extended duty periods, circadian misalignment, inadequate/ineffective sleep, and loss of the environmental cues of a gravity environment. Complicating the psychological stressors are environmental factors; distracting background noise, unexpected and variable mission schedules, unfavorable thermal control, elevated CO2 levels, and an unusual sleep environment with schedules that impinge on presleep periods. Physiological contributors to poor sleep and fatigue include a cephalad fluid shift and back pain. Restful sleep is further challenged due to a lack of gravityrelated proprioceptive cues and need for restraints. The term "space fog" has been used by astronauts to describe a phenomenon of forgetfulness, slowed reaction time and transient confusion while trying to complete tasks. There is a distinct temporal correlation with arrival on the Space Station and the onset of slowed cognitive skills and a spontaneous resolution that may take up to 6 weeks. The Genesis of this phenomenon may be chronic fatigue secondary to transitioning from a planar environment to a 360deg microgravity perspective. Recently, countermeasures to improve sleep duration and quality in astronauts on the ISS have been instituted with moderate degrees of success as measured by selfreaction time (psychomotor vigilance task testing), actigraphy, and subjective reports. Judicious use of stimulants and hypnotics, light therapy, controlled sleep periods and sleep shifting and reducing ambient CO2 levels are a few of the most promising countermeasures being used in space to improve sleep and reduce fatigue.

Description: Back pain is frequently reported by astronauts during the early phase of space flight as they adapt to the microgravity environment. However, the epidemiology of space adaptation back pain has not been well defined. The purpose of this retrospective study was to develop a case definition of space adaptation back pain, determine the incidence of space adaptation back pain, and determine the effectiveness of available treatments. Medical records from the Mercury, Apollo, Apollo-Soyuz Test Project (ASTP), Skylab, Mir, International Space Station (ISS), and Shuttle programs were reviewed. All episodes of in-flight back pain that met the criteria for space adaptation back pain were recorded. Pain characteristics, including intensity, location, and duration of the pain were noted. The effectiveness of specific treatments also was recorded. The incidence of space adaptation back pain among astronauts was determined to be 53% (384/722). Most of the affected astronauts reported mild pain (85%). Moderate pain was reported by 11% of the affected astronauts and severe pain was reported by only 4% of the affected astronauts. The most effective treatments were fetal positioning (91% effective) and the use of analgesic medications (85% effective). This retrospective study aids in the development of a case definition of space adaptation back pain and examines the epidemiology of space adaptation back pain. Space adaptation back pain is usually mild and self-limited. However, there is a risk of functional impairment and mission impact in cases of moderate or severe pain that do not respond to currently available treatments. Therefore, the development of preventive measures and more effective treatments should be pursued.

Description: Introduction: Continuously evolving medical standards of care, limited crew training time, and the inherent constraints of space flight necessitate regular revisions of the mission medical support infrastructure and methodology. A three-day Operational and Research Musculoskeletal Summit was held to review NASA s current strategy for preflight health maintenance and injury screening, risk mitigation for musculoskeletal injuries or syndromes, treatment methods during flight, and research topics to mitigate risks to astronaut health. The Summit also undertook consideration of the best evidence-based terrestrial musculoskeletal practices to recommend their adaptation for use in space. Methods: The types and frequencies of musculoskeletal injuries sustained by short- and long-duration astronauts were obtained from the Longitudinal Study of Astronaut Health. The Summit panel was comprised of experts from the clinical and research communities, as well as representatives from NASA Headquarters, the Astronaut corps, and the offices of JSC Medical Operations, JSC Human Adaptation and Countermeasures, Glenn Research Center Human Research, and Astronaut Strength Conditioning and Rehabilitation. Before the summit, panelists participated in a Web-based review of NASA s Space Medical Conditions List (SMCL). Results: The Summit generated seventy-five operational and research recommendations to the NASA Office of Space Medicine, including changes to the SMCL and to the musculoskeletal section of the ISS debrief questionnaire. From these recommendations, seven were assigned highest value and priority, and could be immediately adopted for the exploration architecture. Discussion: Optimized exercise and conditioning to improve performance and forestall musculoskeletal damage on orbit were the primary area of focus. Special attention was paid to exercise timing and muscle group specificity. The panel s recommendations are currently in various stages of consideration or integration into the ISS and Exploration programs. This effort serves to enhance the on-orbit system so comprehensive treatment can be delivered in a more effective and standardized manner.

Description: Introduction: Achieving NASA's Space Exploration Vision scientific objectives will require human access into cratered and uneven terrain for the purpose of sample acquisition to assess geological, and perhaps even biological features and experiments. Operational risk management is critical to safely conduct the anticipated tasks. This strategy, along with associated contingency plans, will be a driver of EVA system requirements. Therefore, a medical contingency EVA scenario was performed with the Haughton-Mars Project/NASA to develop belay and medical evacuation techniques for exploration and rescue respectively. Methods: A rescue system to allow two rescuer astronauts to evacuate one in incapacitated astronaut was evaluated. The systems main components were a hard-bottomed rescue litter, hand-operated winch, rope, ground picket anchors, and a rover-winch attachment adapter. Evaluation was performed on 15-25deg slopes of dirt with embedded rock. The winch was anchored either by adapter to the rover or by pickets hammered into the ground. The litter was pulled over the surface by rope attached to the winch. Results: The rescue system was utilized effectively to extract the injured astronaut up a slope and to a waiting rover for transport to a simulated habitat for advanced medical care, although several challenges to implementation were identified and overcome. Rotational stabilization of the winch was found to be important to get maximize mechanical advantage from the extraction system. Discussion: Further research and testing needs to be performed to be able to fully consider synergies with the other Exploration surface systems, in conducting contingency operations. Structural attachment points on the surface EVA suits may be critical to assist in incapacitated evacuation. Such attach points could be helpful in microgravity incapacitated crewmember transport as well. Wheeled utility carts or wheels that may be attachable to a litter may also aid in extraction and transport. Utilizing parts of the rover (e.g. seats) to deploy as a litter may be considered. Testing in simulated 1/6-g to determine feasibility of winch operation and anchor establishment will further reduce implementation uncertainties.

Description: Introduction: A study was requested in December, 2005 by the Space Medicine Division at the NASA-Johnson Space Center (JSC) to identify Apollo mission issues relevant to medical operations that had impact to crew health and/or performance. The objective was to use this new information to develop medical requirements for the future Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV), Lunar Surface Access Module (LSAM), Lunar Habitat, and Advanced Extravehicular Activity (EVA) suits that are currently being developed within the exploration architecture. Methods: Available resources pertaining to medical operations on the Apollo 7 through 17 missions were reviewed. Ten categories of hardware, systems, or crew factors were identified in the background research, generating 655 data records in a database. A review of the records resulted in 280 questions that were then posed to surviving Apollo crewmembers by mail, face-to-face meetings, or online interaction. Response analysis to these questions formed the basis of recommendations to items in each of the categories. Results: Thirteen of 22 surviving Apollo astronauts (59%) participated in the project. Approximately 236 pages of responses to the questions were captured, resulting in 107 recommendations offered for medical consideration in the design of future vehicles and EVA suits based on the Apollo experience. Discussion: The goals of this project included: 1) Develop or modify medical requirements for new vehicles; 2) create a centralized database for future access; and 3) take this new knowledge and educate the various directorates at NASA-JSC who are participating in the exploration effort. To date, the Apollo Medical Operations recommendations are being incorporated into the exploration mission architecture at various levels and a centralized database has been developed. The Apollo crewmembers input has proved to be an invaluable resource, prompting ongoing collaboration as the requirements for the future exploration missions continue to evolve and be refined.

Description: The potential risk of injury to crewmembers is inherent in aggressive surface activities, whether they be Moon-, Mars-, or asteroid-based. In December 2005, the Space Medicine Division at JSC requested a study to identify Apollo mission issues that had an impact to crew health or performance or both. This talk focused on the Apollo EVA suit and lunar surface operations concerning crew health and performance. There were roughly 20 recommendations from this study of Apollo for improving these two areas for future exploration missions, a few of which were incorporated into the Human Systems Integration Requirements (HSIR). Dr. Richard Scheuring covered these topics along with some of the analog work that has been done regarding surface operations and medical contingencies.

Description: The lunar architecture for future sortie and outpost missions will require humans to serve on the lunar surface considerably longer than the Apollo moon missions. Although the Apollo crewmembers sustained few injuries during their brief lunar surface activity, injuries did occur and are a concern for the longer lunar stays. Interestingly, lunar medical contingency plans were not developed during Apollo. In order to develop an evidence-base for handling a medical contingency on the lunar surface, a simulation using the moon-Mars analog environment at Devon Island, Nunavut, high Canadian Arctic was conducted. Objectives of this study included developing an effective management strategy for dealing with an incapacitated crewmember on the lunar surface, establishing audio/visual and biomedical data connectivity to multiple centers, testing rescue/extraction hardware and procedures, and evaluating in suit increased oxygen consumption. Methods: A review of the Apollo lunar surface activities and personal communications with Apollo lunar crewmembers provided the knowledge base of plausible scenarios that could potentially injure an astronaut during a lunar extravehicular activity (EVA). Objectives were established to demonstrate stabilization and transfer of an injured crewmember and communication with ground controllers at multiple mission control centers. Results: The project objectives were successfully achieved during the simulation. Among these objectives were extraction from a sloped terrain by a two-member crew in a 1 g analog environment, establishing real-time communication to multiple centers, providing biomedical data to flight controllers and crewmembers, and establishing a medical diagnosis and treatment plan from a remote site. Discussion: The simulation provided evidence for the types of equipment and methods for performing extraction of an injured crewmember from a sloped terrain. Additionally, the necessary communications infrastructure to connect multiple centers worldwide was established from a remote site. The surface crewmembers were confronted with a number of unexpected scenarios including environmental, communications, EVA suit, and navigation challenges during the course of the simulation which provided insight into the challenges of carrying out a medical contingency in an austere environment. The knowledge gained from completing the objectives will be incorporated into the exploration medical requirements involving an incapacitated astronaut on the lunar surface.

Description: Medical requirements are currently being developed for NASA's space exploration program. Lunar surface operations for crews returning to the moon will be performed on a daily basis to conduct scientific research and construct a lunar habitat. Inherent to aggressive surface activities is the potential risk of injury to crew members. To develop an evidence-base for handling medical contingencies on the lunar surface, a simulation project was conducted using the moon-Mars analog environment at Devon Island, Nunavut, high Canadian Arctic. A review of the Apollo lunar surface activities and personal communications with Apollo lunar crew members provided a knowledge base of plausible scenarios that could potentially injure an astronaut during a lunar extravehicular activity. Objectives were established to 1) demonstrate stabilization, field extraction and transfer an injured crew member to the habitat and 2) evaluate audio, visual and biomedical communication capabilities with ground controllers at multiple mission control centers. The simulation project s objectives were achieved. Among these objectives were 1) extracting a crew member from a sloped terrain by a two-member team in a 1-g analog environment, 2) establishing real-time communication to multiple space centers, 3) providing biomedical data to flight controllers and crew members, and 4) establishing a medical diagnosis and treatment plan from a remote site. The simulation project provided evidence for the types of equipment and methods needed for planetary space exploration. During the project, the crew members were confronted with a number of unexpected scenarios including environmental, communications, EVA suit, and navigation challenges. These trials provided insight into the challenges of carrying out a medical contingency in an austere environment. The knowledge gained from completing the objectives of this project will be incorporated into the exploration medical requirements involving an incapacited astronaut on the lunar surface.

Description: Crewmembers have experienced fatigue for reasons similar to military deployments. Astronauts experience psychological stressors such as: heavy workloads, extended duty periods, circadian misalignment, inadequate/ineffective sleep, distracting background noise, unexpected and variable mission schedules, unfavorable thermal control, unusual sleep environment with schedules that impinge on presleep periods.