Search

This collection of photographic highlights covers the past 25 years of international collaboration in human spaceflight. Beginning in 1993, the international community came together to develop the medical systems for an international space station. Initially, this collaboration was bilateral in support of the Shuttle / Mir Space Station (Phase 1). However, the framework that was established to serve as the medical authority structure provided a foundation for the multilateral boards and panel, which were codified in the memoranda of understanding.

The performance of extravehicular activity (EVA) by National Aeronautics and Space Administration astronauts involves the risk of decompression sickness. This risk has been mitigated by the use of oxygen "prebreathe" to effectively wash out tissue nitrogen prior to each EVA. Now that the Space Shuttle Program (SSP) is being retired, high-pressure oxygen will become a limited resource. The In-Suit Light Exercise (ISLE) Prebreathe Protocol offers several potential benefits including its potential to save 6 pounds of oxygen per EVA. At the request of the NASA Engineering and Safety Center, the peer review convened on October 14, 2010. The major recommendation of the Review Committee was that the ISLE protocol was acceptable for operational use as a prebreathe option prior to EVA. The results from the peer review are contained in this document.

This slide presentation reviews the process of transforming medical research into practical medicine for astronauts and for every day people. Several examples of medical practices that started in space medical research and then were proved useful in other settings: Actigraphy, bone density scanning, the use of Potassium Citrate as a countermeasure used to lessen the risk of kidney stone formation, and ultrasound uses in remote and telemedicine

A. CO2 - Acute: Given the history of uneven removal of CO2 from spacecraft areas, there is a history of acute illness that impacts short-term health and performance. 1) Acute CO2 symptoms occur in space flight due to a combination of CO2 scrubbing limitations, microgravity-related lack of convection, and possibly interaction with microgravity-related physiological changes. 2) Reported symptoms mainly include headaches, malaise, and lethargy. Symptoms are treatable with analgesics, rest, temporarily increasing scrubbing capability, and breathing oxygen. This does not treat the underlying pathology. 3)ld prevent occurrence of symptoms. B. CO2 - Chronic: Given prolonged exposure to elevated CO2 levels, there is a history that the long-term health of the crew is impacted. 1) Chronic CO2 exposures occur in space flight due to a combination of CO2 scrubbing limitations and microgravity-related lack of convection, with possible contribution from microgravity-related physiological changes. 2) Since acute symptoms are experienced at levels significantly lower than expected, there are unidentified long-term effects from prolonged exposure to elevated CO2 levels on orbit. There have been long term effects seen terrestrially and research needed to further elucidate long term effects on orbit. 3) Recommended disposition: Research required to further elucidate long term effects. In particular, elucidation of the role of elevated CO2 on various levels of CO2 vasodilatation of intracranial blood vessels and its potential contribution to elevation of intracranial pressure.

From May 1973 to February 1974, NASA conducted a series of three human missions to the Skylab space station, which was a voluminous vehicle largely descendant of Apollo hardware and the first U.S. space station. Crew members of these missions spent record-breaking durations of time in microgravity (28, 59, and 84 days, respectively) and gave the U.S. space program its first experiences with long-duration space flight. The program overcame a number of obstacles to conduct a lauded scientific program that encompassed life sciences, astronomy, solar physics, materials sciences, and Earth observation. Yet Skylab has more to offer than the results of these scientific efforts. The operations that were conducted by the crews and ground personnel represent a rich legacy of operational experience. As we plan a return to the moon and subsequent human exploration of Mars, it is essential to use the experiences and insights of those who were involved in previous programs. Skylab and Skylab Medical Experiments Altitude Test personnel possess unique insight into operations that are being planned for the Constellation Program, such as umbilical extravehicular activity and water landing/recovery of long-duration crew members. The Skylab Program was also well known for its habitability and extensive medical suite.

From May of 1973 to February of 1974, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration conducted a series of three manned missions to the Skylab space station, a voluminous vehicle largely descendant of Apollo hardware, and America s first space station. The crewmembers of these three manned missions spent record breaking durations of time in microgravity (28 days, 59 days and 84 days, respectively) and gave the U.S. space program its first experiences with long-duration space flight. The program overcame a number of obstacles (including a significant crippling of the Skylab vehicle) to conduct a lauded scientific program that encompassed life sciences, astronomy, solar physics, materials sciences and Earth observation. Skylab has more to offer than the results of its scientific efforts. The operations conducted by the Skylab crews and ground personnel represent a rich legacy of operational experience. As we plan for our return to the moon and the subsequent manned exploration of Mars, it is essential to utilize the experiences and insights of those involved in previous programs. Skylab and SMEAT (Skylab Medical Experiments Altitude Test) personnel have unique insight into operations being planned for the Constellation Program, such as umbilical extra-vehicular activity and water landing/recovery of long-duration crewmembers. Skylab was also well known for its habitability and extensive medical suite; topics which deserve further reflection as we prepare for lunar habitation and missions beyond Earth s immediate sphere of influence. The Skylab Medical Operations Summit was held in January 2008. Crewmembers and medical personnel from the Skylab missions and SMEAT were invited to participate in a two day summit with representatives from the Constellation Program medical operations community. The purpose of the summit was to discuss issues pertinent to future Constellation operations. The purpose of this document is to formally present the recommendations of the Skylab and SMEAT participants.

Medical requirements for the future Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV), Lunar Surface Access Module (LSAM), advanced Extravehicular Activity (EVA) suits and Lunar habitat are currently being developed. Crews returning to the lunar surface will construct the lunar habitat and conduct scientific research. Inherent in aggressive surface activities is the potential risk of injury to crewmembers. Physiological responses to and the operational environment of short forays during the Apollo lunar missions were studied and documented. Little is known about the operational environment in which crews will live and work and the hardware that will be used for long-duration lunar surface operations.Additional information is needed regarding productivity and the events that affect crew function such as a compressed timeline. The Space Medicine Division at the NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) requested a study in December 2005 to identify Apollo mission issues relevant to medical operations that had impact to crew health and/or performance. The operationally oriented goals of this project were to develop or modify medical requirements for new exploration vehicles and habitats, create a centralized database for future access, and share relevant Apollo information with the multiple entities at NASA and abroad participating in the exploration effort.

Airway management techniques are necessary to establish and maintain a patent airway while treating a patient undergoing respiratory distress. There are situations where such settings are suboptimal, thus causing the caregiver to adapt to these suboptimal conditions. Such occurrences are no exception aboard the International Space Station (ISS). As a result, the NASA flight surgeon (FS) and NASA astronaut cohorts must be ready to adapt their optimal airway management techniques for suboptimal situations. Based on previous work conducted by the Medical Operation Support Team (MOST) and other investigators, the MOST had members of both the FS and astronaut cohorts evaluate two oral airway insertion techniques for the Intubating Laryngeal Mask Airway (ILMA) to determine whether either technique is sufficient to perform in suboptimal conditions within a microgravity environment. Methods All experiments were conducted in a simulated microgravity environment provided by parabolic flight aboard DC-9 aircraft. Each participant acted as a caregiver and was directed to attempt both suboptimal ILMA insertion techniques following a preflight instruction session on the day of the flight and a demonstration of the technique by an anesthesiologist physician in the simulated microgravity environment aboard the aircraft. Results Fourteen participants conducted 46 trials of the suboptimal ILMA insertion techniques. Overall, 43 of 46 trials (94%) conducted were properly performed based on criteria developed by the MOST and other investigators. Discussion The study demonstrated the use of airway management techniques in suboptimal conditions relating to space flight. Use of these techniques will provide a crew with options for using the ILMA to manage airway issues aboard the ISS. Although it is understood that the optimal method for patient care during space flight is to have both patient and caregiver restrained, these techniques provide a needed backup should conditions not present themselves in an ideal manner.

Medical Operations Support Team (MOST) is introducing/integrating teaching practices associated with high fidelity human patient simulation into the NASA culture, in particular, into medical training sessions and medical procedure evaluations. Current/Future Products iclude: a) Development of Sub-optimal Airway Protocols for the International Space Station (ISS) using the ILMA; b) Clinical Core Competency Training for NASA Flight Surgeons (FS); c) Post-Soyuz Landing Clinical Training for NASA FS; d) Experimental Integrated Training for Astronaut Crew Medical Officers and NASA FS; and e) Private Clinical Refresher Training.

The US-based health care system of the International Space Station (ISS) contains several subsystems, the Health Maintenance System, Environmental Health System and the Countermeasure System. These systems are designed to provide primary, secondary and tertiary medical prevention strategies. The medical system deployed in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) for the ISS is designed to enable a "stabilize and transport" concept of operations. In this paradigm, an ill or injured crewmember would be rapidly evacuated to a definitive medical care facility (DMCF) on Earth, rather than being treated for a protracted period on orbit. The medical requirements of the short (7 day) and long duration (up to 6 months) exploration class missions to the Moon are similar to LEO class missions with the additional 4 to 5 days needed to transport an ill or injured crewmember to a DCMF on Earth. Mars exploration class missions are quite different in that they will significantly delay or prevent the return of an ill or injured crewmember to a DMCF. In addition the limited mass, power and volume afforded to medical care will prevent the mission designers from manifesting the entire capability of terrestrial care. NASA has identified five Levels of Care as part of its approach to medical support of future missions including the Constellation program. In order to implement an effective medical risk mitigation strategy for exploration class missions, modifications to the current suite of space medical systems may be needed, including new Crew Medical Officer training methods, treatment guidelines, diagnostic and therapeutic resources, and improved medical informatics.

Medical support of spaceflight missions is composed of complex tasks and decisions that dedicated to maintaining the health and performance of the crew and the completion of mission objectives. Spacecraft represent one of the most complex vehicles built by humans, and are built to very rigorous design specifications. In the course of a Flight Readiness Review (FRR) or a mission itself, the flight surgeon must be able to understand the impact of hazards and risks that may not be completely mitigated by design alone. Some hazards are not mitigated because they are never actually identified. When a hazard is identified, it must be reduced or waivered. Hazards that cannot be designed out of the vehicle or mission, are usually mitigated through other means to bring the residual risk to an acceptable level. This is possible in most engineered systems because failure modes are usually predictable and analysis can include taking these systems to failure. Medical support of space missions is complicated by the inability of flight surgeons to provide "exact" hazard and risk numbers to the NASA engineering community. Taking humans to failure is not an option. Furthermore, medical dogma is mostly comprised of "medical prevention" strategies that mitigate risk by examining the behaviour of a cohort of humans similar to astronauts. Unfortunately, this approach does not lend itself well for predicting the effect of a hazard in the unique environment of space. This presentation will discuss how Medical Operations uses an evidence-based approach to decide if hazard mitigation strategies are adequate to reduce mission risk to acceptable levels. Case studies to be discussed will include: 1. Risk of electrocution risk during EVA 2. Risk of cardiac event risk during long and short duration missions 3. Degraded cabin environmental monitoring on the ISS. Learning Objectives 1.) The audience will understand the challenges of mitigating medical risk caused by nominal and off-nominal mission events. 2.) The audience will understand the process by which medical hazards are identified and mitigated before launch. 3.) The audience will understand the roles and responsibilities of all the other flight control positions in participating in the process of reducing hazards and reducing medical risk to an acceptable level.