Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T12:54:30.417Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

ENT entry requirements for UK armed forces

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 August 2015

G H Jones*
Affiliation:
Otolaryngology Department, Pennine Acute Hospitals NHS Trust, Manchester, UK
R Murphy
Affiliation:
Otolaryngology Department, Pennine Acute Hospitals NHS Trust, Manchester, UK
S Agrawal
Affiliation:
Otolaryngology Department, Pennine Acute Hospitals NHS Trust, Manchester, UK
M G Isles
Affiliation:
Otolaryngology Department, University Hospital North Midlands, Stoke-on-Trent, UK
*
Address for correspondence: Mr G H Jones, Otolaryngology Department, Pennine Acute Hospitals NHS Trust, Delaunays Road, Manchester M8 5RB, UK E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

Background:

Minimum health requirements exist for entry into the UK armed forces. Both pre-existing and iatrogenic ENT conditions may impact on an individual's medical fitness and their ability to enter the forces.

Methods:

The relevant literature was examined and military otolaryngology advisors were interviewed in order to define the ENT-specific conditions that restrict an individual joining the armed forces.

Results:

The ENT diseases and disabilities that inhibit an individual's ability to join the forces are described. Treatments that may facilitate or restrict recruitment are also discussed.

Conclusion:

Members of the armed forces operate in arduous environments and are required to pass a screening medical assessment before joining. Personnel may be isolated away from specialist care and therefore cannot be dependent on specialist devices or medicines. This paper aims to arm ENT specialists with occupational knowledge to enable them to correctly counsel patients and offer appropriate treatment.

Type
Main Articles
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Presented at the Royal College of General Practitioners Annual Conference, 4 October 2014, Liverpool, UK, and at the North of England Otolaryngology Society meeting, 24 October 2014, Blackburn, UK.

References

1Ng, BL. Medical selection of military pilots: a Republic of Singapore Air Force perspective. Ann Acad Med Singapore 1994;23:665–8Google ScholarPubMed
2Fletcher, RT. Pulheems: a new system of medical classification. Br Med J 1949;1:83–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3Braithwaite, M, Nicholson, G, Thornton, R, Jones, D, Simpson, R, McLoughin, D et al. Armed forces occupational health – a review. Occup Med (Lond) 2009;59:528–38CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5Her Majesty's Armed Forces Application Form Guidance Notes, AFCO Form 5. In: http://www.army.mod.uk/documents/general/AFCO_Form5-U.pdf [20 January 2015]Google Scholar
6Royal Air Force Manual: Assessment of Medical Fitness – AP1269A, 3rd edn. In: http://www.raf.mod.uk/rafcms/mediafiles/298A6475_5056_A318_A8C5219348FB4F72.pdf [20 January 2015]Google Scholar
7HOC 59/2004 – Medical standards for police recruitment. In: http://www.policecouldyou.co.uk/documents/hoc-59-2004.html [16 January 2015]Google Scholar
8Rayson, M. Chapter 2: Job analysis of Fire and Rescue Service roles. In: Medical and Occupational Evidence for Recruitment and Retention in the Fire and Rescue Service. London: Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, 2004Google Scholar
9Ministry of Defence. Annex A to Leaflet 6-7-3. Medical assessment for PULHEEMS. JSP 950. London: MOD, 2013Google Scholar
10Cain, PA. Update--Noise induced hearing loss and the military environment. J R Army Med Corps 1998;144:97101CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11Equality and Human Rights Commission. Workplace adjustments. In: http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/private-and-public-sector-guidance/employing-people/work-place-adjustments [16 January 2015]Google Scholar
12General Medical Council. Consent: patients and doctors making decisions together. In: http://www.penroseinquiry.org.uk/finalreport/pdf/PEN0180430.PDF [29 June 2015]Google Scholar