◢ SPACE MEDICINE FOUNDATION
⌕ Search
Space weather
Geomagnetic storm level: Loading…
Solar radiation level: Loading…
Loading…
ROUGH DRAFT SITE · Educational use only — not medical advice and not operational guidance. Disclaimer

Home › Learn › Case files › SFP with hypertension

DRAFT · NOT REVIEWED — AI-assisted draft for educational use only; not medical advice and not operational guidance. Reviewer: Pending review. Items marked “pending verification” could not be confirmed against a primary source. Disclaimer

Fictional composite case

This case is invented for teaching. It combines typical features from the cited sources and describes no real astronaut, spaceflight participant or patient. No real patient data were used.

LRN-21 · Teaching case (fictional) · Learn

Case File: A Commercial Spaceflight Participant With Hypertension

Gravity FieldsCardiovascularBehavioral Health & SleepVestibular & SensorimotorSelection & CertificationPreflight & TrainingLEO short-durationSuborbitalClinicianOperator / SFP

draft AI-assisted Last reviewed: Pending review · Reviewer: Pending review

Bottom line
  • The operator decides fitness. U.S. rules require informed consent and training, not medical standards, for spaceflight participants [1]. ◆◆◆◆ High · E
  • FAA 2006 guidance suggests full history, exam and labs for orbital flights (tier 2) [2]. ◆◆◆◇ Moderate · E
  • Volunteers with well-controlled hypertension and other conditions tolerated simulated suborbital G-profiles in a centrifuge [3]. ◆◆◇◇ Low · A
  • Anxiety reactions were the hardest to predict [4]. ◆◆◇◇ Low · A

Proposed certainty (◆ High → ◇ Very low) and evidence-type tags: F flight · A analog · M model/animal · C computational · E expert/operational/standards. AI-proposed, pending reviewer confirmation. How to read the grades.

Presentation

A 64-year-old retired engineer has booked a seat on a 3-day orbital flight with a commercial operator. He asks you, his primary care clinician, for “a letter clearing me for spaceflight.”

  • History: high blood pressure for 10 years, treated with two medicines; home readings average 128/78 mmHg. Mild knee arthritis. No chest pain, fainting or palpitations. Car sickness as a child. He says he “gets a bit tense in small elevators.”
  • Exam: blood pressure 132/80 mmHg seated, no drop on standing. Heart, lungs and neurological exam normal.
  • Tests: 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG): normal sinus rhythm, no abnormalities.

He has not yet heard from the operator’s medical team.

Questions

  1. Who decides whether he is medically fit to fly, and what should your letter say?
  2. What level of screening does the FAA’s 2006 guidance suggest for an orbital flight?
  3. Is well-controlled hypertension likely to stop him from tolerating launch and landing G-forces?
  4. What else in his history deserves attention?

Think through your answers before opening the reveals below.

Reveal

Question 1: answer and discussion

Who decides whether he is medically fit to fly, and what should your letter say?

The operator decides, not you and not the government. U.S. rules under 14 CFR Part 460 do not set medical standards for spaceflight participants (SFPs). Instead, operators must give each participant written information about known and unknown hazards and train them for emergencies [1].

Your role is to optimize, document and communicate: control his blood pressure, summarize his history, medicines and test results, and send them to the operator’s flight surgeon. SMF’s SFP screening article suggests wording such as “no contraindication identified to the operator’s medical evaluation” rather than “cleared for spaceflight.”

Question 2: answer and discussion

What level of screening does the FAA’s 2006 guidance suggest for an orbital flight?

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) guidance (DOT/FAA/AM-06/1) is advisory. It describes two tiers [2]:

TierFlight profileSuggested screening
1Suborbital, up to +3 GzMedical questionnaire reviewed by a physician trained or experienced in aerospace medicine
2Orbital, or any flight above +3 GzFull questionnaire, physical exam and lab tests, valid 1 year, with a brief update 1–2 weeks before flight

His orbital flight falls in tier 2. “Gz” means head-to-foot acceleration (G-load).

Question 3: answer and discussion

Is well-controlled hypertension likely to stop him from tolerating launch and landing G-forces?

Probably not, based on centrifuge data, but the evidence is limited. In a centrifuge study, 86 volunteers aged 20–78 with high blood pressure, heart disease, diabetes, lung disease or back problems rode simulated suborbital profiles (up to +6 Gx and +4 Gz). Heart rate peaked at 192 beats per minute and systolic blood pressure at 217 mmHg. Grayout (69%), nausea (20%) and chest discomfort (6%) were common, yet no subject had a significant adverse physiological response [3]. The authors concluded that most people with well-controlled conditions can tolerate these forces [3].

These were short centrifuge runs, not real flights, and they modeled suborbital rather than orbital profiles. The FAA guidance advises care with rapid-onset profiles of +3 Gz or more sustained for 5 seconds or longer in people with compromised cardiovascular function [2]. Uncontrolled high blood pressure is different: it needs treatment and a flight-surgeon review.

Question 4: answer and discussion

What else in his history deserves attention?

  • Anxiety in confined spaces. In the centrifuge studies, three of the five volunteers who withdrew did so because of anxiety [3]. The screening authors wrote that better methods are needed to identify people prone to anxiety reactions [4]. Mention it to the operator’s flight surgeon.
  • Motion sickness. Childhood car sickness does not reliably predict space motion sickness (SMS); a previous episode of space motion sickness does. Most first-time flyers get it in the first 2–3 days [5].
  • Landing day. Even short orbital flights shift body fluids. Plasma volume falls by about 15% within about 2 days in weightlessness, which causes lightheadedness on standing after landing (orthostatic intolerance) [6]. Ask the flight surgeon whether any blood pressure medicine should be adjusted around landing pending verification.
  • Knees. Ask about mobility for emergency exit training, which Part 460 requires [1].

Teaching points

  • Commercial operators, not regulators or the patient’s own clinician, decide medical fitness for spaceflight participants [1].
  • FAA screening guidance from 2006 is advisory and splits screening into two tiers by flight profile [2].
  • Centrifuge data suggest most people with well-controlled chronic disease tolerate suborbital G-profiles. These are analog data from volunteers [3].
  • Anxiety was the hardest problem to predict in centrifuge trials [4].
  • Your job: optimize, document, communicate, and route findings to the operator’s flight surgeon.

Read more

Evidence profile
Overall certainty
◆◆◇◇ Low (proposed)
Evidence types
E · Expert / operational / standardsA · Terrestrial analog
Literature through
2026-10-14
Case data
Fictional composite; no real patient data
Credit
Educational only; no CME or other credit
Requirements referenced 2
RequirementTitlePlain-language meaning
[V1 3001]Selection and RecertificationApplies to NASA crew; the rationale notes screening scope may vary by role, including spaceflight participants.
[V1 3002]Pre-Mission Preventive Health CareA useful template for participant preparation: medication review, vaccines, dental care, fitness, health stabilization.

IDs as published in NASA-STD-3001 Vol. 1 Rev C (2023-09-15) and NASA-STD-3001 Vol. 2 Rev F (2026-07-14). NASA-STD-3001 binds NASA programs; it is not a regulation for commercial flights. Paraphrased. Standards quick reference.

References 6
  1. 14 CFR Part 460 — Human Space Flight Requirements. eCFR, current. www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/chapter-III/subchapter-C/part-… FAA / regulation E
  2. Antuñano MJ, Baisden DL, Davis J, et al. Guidance for Medical Screening of Commercial Aerospace Passengers. FAA Office of Aerospace Medicine; DOT/FAA/AM-06/1. January 2006. www.faa.gov/media/72446 FAA / regulation E
  3. Blue RS, Pattarini JM, Reyes DP, et al. Tolerance of centrifuge-simulated suborbital spaceflight by medical condition. Aviat Space Environ Med. 2014;85(7):721–729. doi:10.3357/ASEM.3956.2014 PMID:25022160 Peer-reviewed A
  4. Pattarini JM, Blue RS, Castleberry TL, Vanderploeg JM. Preflight screening techniques for centrifuge-simulated suborbital spaceflight. Aviat Space Environ Med. 2014;85(12):1217–1221. doi:10.3357/ASEM.4114.2014 PMID:25479265 Peer-reviewed A
  5. NASA OCHMO. Space Adaptation Sickness (SAS). Medical Technical Brief OCHMO-MTB-004 (2025). www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/ochmo-mtb-004-space-… NASA E
  6. NASA OCHMO. Orthostatic Intolerance. Technical Brief OCHMO-TB-019. www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/ochmo-tb-019-orthost… NASA E

Machine-checked on 2026-10-14: each URL was fetched, each DOI's title/journal/year matched via Crossref, PubMed IDs matched to DOIs, and claims were checked against the source text (abstract, NASA document or official web page). Human verification against full text is still required before review. NASA documents are U.S. Government works (public domain) and are summarized with attribution; journal articles are summarized, not reproduced.

Article info
Authors
Pending (AI-assisted draft)
Reviewer
Pending review
Last reviewed
Pending review
Literature through
2026-10-14
AI-assisted
Yes (disclosed)
COI
Pending
License
CC BY-SA 4.0
Use
Educational only · no CME credit · Disclaimer
Cite this version
Pending first edition

Educational use only · not medical advice · Disclaimer · CC BY-SA 4.0