Project harmony: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of psychotherapy and pharmacologic trials for comorbid posttraumatic stress, alcohol, and other drug use disorders.

We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analyses (NMA) of psychotherapy and pharmacologic treatments for individuals with co-occurring posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and alcohol or other drug use disorder (AOD). A comprehensive search spanning 1995-2019 yielded a pool of 39 studies for systematic review, including 24 randomized controlled trials for the NMA. Study interventions were grouped by target of treatment (PTSD + AOD, PTSD-only, and AOD-only) and approach (psychotherapy or medication). Standardized mean differences (SMD) from the NMA yielded evidence that at the end of treatment, integrated, trauma-focused therapy for PTSD + AOD was more effective at reducing PTSD symptoms than integrated, non-trauma-focused therapy (SMD = -0.30), AOD-focused psychotherapy (SMD = -0.29), and other control psychotherapies (SMD = -0.43). End-of-treatment alcohol use severity was less for AOD medication compared to placebo medication (SMD = -0.36) and trauma-focused therapy for PTSD + placebo medication (SMD = -0.67), and less for trauma-focused psychotherapy + AOD medication compared to PTSD medication (SMD = -0.53), placebo medication (SMD = -0.50), and trauma-focused psychotherapy + placebo medication (SMD = -0.81). Key limitations include the small number of studies in the NMA for pharmacologic treatments and the lack of demographic diversity apparent in the existing literature. Findings suggest room for new studies that can address limitations in study sample composition, sample sizes, retention, and apply new techniques for conducting comparative effectiveness in PTSD + AOD treatment. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Efficacy of mindfulness-based relapse prevention in a sample of veterans in a substance use disorder aftercare program: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Complementary integrative medicine, such as mindfulness-based interventions, (MBI) have demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of depression, anxiety, substance use disorders (SUDs), and pain. Mindfulness-based relapse prevention (MBRP) is an aftercare intervention targeting SUD relapse that integrates cognitive-behavioral relapse prevention and mindfulness meditation practices, raising awareness of substance use triggers and reactive behavioral patterns. This study evaluated the efficacy of MBRP in reducing relapse in veterans following completion of an SUD treatment program. METHODS: This study was a two-site, randomized controlled trial comparing MBRP to 12-step facilitation (TSF) aftercare in military veterans following completion of intensive treatment for SUDs. The 8 weeks of 90-minute, group-based MBRP or TSF sessions were followed by 3-, 6- and 10-month follow-up periods with assessments of alcohol/substance use and secondary outcomes of depression, anxiety, and mindfulness. RESULTS: Forty-seven percent of veterans attended ≥75 % of sessions. Veterans in both the MBRP and TSF aftercare groups maintained reductions in alcohol and illicit substance use during the aftercare treatment. Nineteen participants (11 %; 19/174) reported returning to alcohol use during the study treatment period and the study found no difference between study groups [MBRP: 9 % vs. TSF 13 %; p = 0.42]. Thirteen participants (7.5 %; 13/174) reported a return to illicit substance use during study treatment [MBRP: 5.4 % vs. TSF 10.3 % p = 0.34]. The number of days of drinking and illicit substance use was not different between groups (alcohol, p = 0.53; illicit substance use, p = 0.28). CONCLUSION: Although retention in treatment limits interpretation of the findings, both MBRP and TSF were effective in maintenance of treatment gains following an intensive treatment program for veterans with SUDs. Future studies should focus on strategies to improve treatment participation.

Differential symptom weighting in estimating empirical thresholds for underlying PTSD severity: Toward a "platinum" standard for diagnosis?

OBJECTIVE: Symptom counts as the basis for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) diagnoses in the DSM presume each symptom is equally reflective of underlying disorder severity. However, the "equal weight" assumption fails to fit PTSD symptom data when tested. The present study developed an enhanced PTSD diagnosis based on (a) a conventional PTSD diagnosis from a clinical interview and (b) an empirical classification of full PTSD that reflected the relative clinical weights of each symptom. METHOD: Baseline structured interview data from Project Harmony (N = 2658) was used. An enhanced diagnosis for full PTSD was estimated using an empirical threshold from moderated nonlinear factor analysis (MNLFA) latent PTSD scale scores, in combination with a full conventional PTSD diagnosis based on interview data. RESULTS: One in 4 patients in the sample had a PTSD diagnosis that was inconsistent with their empirical PTSD grouping, such that the enhanced diagnostic standard reduced the diagnostic discrepancy rate by 20%. Veterans, and in particular female Veterans, were at greatest odds for discrepancy between their underlying PTSD severity and DSM diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Psychometric methodologies that differentially weight symptoms can complement DSM criteria and may serve as a platform for symptom prioritization for diagnoses in future editions of DSM.

Predictors of Treatment Completion among Women Receiving Integrated Treatment for Comorbid Posttraumatic Stress and Substance Use Disorders.

Background: Retention in treatment for individuals with comorbid posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and substance use disorders (SUD) is an area of concern in treatment outcome studies. The current study explores key variables related to retention in a group of women with comorbid PTSD and SUD enrolled in community SUD treatment randomized to eight weekly sessions of a trauma adapted mindfulness-based relapse prevention (TA-MBRP) or an integrated coping skills (ICS) group intervention. Methods: Two unadjusted and adjusted logistic discrete failure time (DFT) models were fit to examine associations between participants and the time (in weeks) to treatment completion status. Key covariates of interest, including time-varying PTSD Symptom Scale-Self Report (PSS) total score, time-varying Five Factors Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ) total score, group assignment, baseline endorsements of substance use and demographics such as age, race and employment status were fit into the model. Results: In the adjusted PSS model, increased levels of PTSD symptom severity (PSS) scores at week 5 and 7 (PSS OR: 1:06: OR 1.13, respectively) were associated with higher odds of non-completion. In the FFMQ model, increased levels of FFMQ scores at week 6 (OR: 0:92) were associated with lower odds of non-completion. In both models, assignment to the ICS control group and unemployment were associated with lower odds of completion and baseline use of cocaine and sedatives were associated with higher odds of completion. Conclusion: Monitoring PTSD symptom severity and measures of mindfulness can inform providers on strategies to enhance retention early in treatment for individuals with comorbid PTSD/SUD.ClinicalTrials.gov # NCT02755103.

The role of posttraumatic guilt and anger in integrated treatment for PTSD and co-occurring substance use disorders among primarily male veterans.

OBJECTIVE: PTSD and substance use disorders (SUD) frequently co-occur among veterans. Integrated exposure-based treatments, such as Concurrent Treatment of PTSD and SUD Using Prolonged Exposure (COPE), are efficacious in reducing PTSD and SUD symptoms and posttraumatic emotions. This study examines whether guilt and anger (a) decreased in a randomized clinical trial comparing COPE with Relapse Prevention (RP) therapy for SUD and (b) mediated PTSD and SUD symptom reductions or vice versa. METHOD: Veterans (90.1% men) diagnosed with PTSD and SUD were randomized to 12 sessions of COPE (n = 54) or RP (n = 27). Guilt and anger were assessed at 10 time points during treatment. Multilevel linear models assessed changes in guilt and anger across treatments and lagged multilevel mediation analyses assessed within-subject change in guilt and anger predicting PTSD and percent days of substance use, and vice versa. RESULTS: Guilt (B = -.12, SE = .02, p < .001) and anger (B = -.13, SE = .02, p < .001) improved in both treatments, however guilt was significantly lower in Sessions 7 through 11 among veterans receiving COPE. Improvement in guilt mediated PTSD symptom improvement in both treatment groups (B = -.08, SE = .04, 95% CI [-.16, -.01]), and PTSD symptom improvement mediated anger reduction in COPE (B = -.03, SE = .01, 95% CI [-.06, -.01]). The substance use models were insignificant. CONCLUSIONS: Among veterans, integrated, trauma-focused treatments may be associated with greater guilt (directly) and anger (indirectly) reductions due to processing trauma. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Women with PTSD and Substance Use Disorders in a Research Treatment Study: A Comparison of those with and without the Dissociative Subtype of PTSD.

Significant differences in clinical features have been reported in women with substance use disorders (SUDs) between those with the dissociative subtype of posttraumatic stress disorder (D-PTSD) compared to those without, namely more severe trauma histories, PTSD symptoms, and general psychopathology. This presentation reports on a group of 88 women with PTSD and SUD taking part in a research treatment study. All women were assessed using the Clinician Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-5 (CAPS-5) and were categorized into those with (n = 23, 26%) and without (n = 65, 74%) D-PTSD. Assessments for SUDs were via the Multi-International Neuropsychiatric Inventory, Seventh Version (MINI-7). Compared to those without D-PTSD, those with D-PTSD had significantly higher CAPS-5 scores (50.5 ± 9.9 v. 39.6 ± 8.8), greater number of PTSD symptoms (16.4 ± 2.6 v. 14.2 ± 2.4), more alcohol use disorder (AUD) (65.2% v. 30.8%), and more non-cocaine stimulant use disorder (34.8% v. 12.3%). No significant differences were found for other SUDs. These women with SUDs and D-PTSD have higher degrees of PTSD severity as well as unique clinical presentations. Future research is needed to explore the significance of these findings for clinical assessment and treatment.

Project Harmony: A Meta-Analysis With Individual Patient Data on Behavioral and Pharmacologic Trials for Comorbid Posttraumatic Stress and Alcohol or Other Drug Use Disorders.

OBJECTIVE: Treatment efficacy for co-occurring posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and substance use disorders is well established, yet direct evidence for comparative effectiveness across treatments is lacking. The present study compared the effectiveness of several behavioral and pharmacological therapies for adults with co-occurring PTSD and alcohol or other drug use disorders. METHODS: A systematic search of PsycINFO, MEDLINE, and ClinicalTrials.gov was conducted through December 2020 for trials targeting PTSD, alcohol or other drug use disorders, or both disorders (36 studies, N=4,046). Primary outcomes were severity scores for PTSD, alcohol use, and drug use, estimated via moderated nonlinear factor analysis. Propensity score weight-adjusted multilevel models were used. Model-predicted effect sizes were estimated for each treatment, and comparative effect sizes for each active arm against treatment as usual, at end of treatment and at 12-month follow-up. RESULTS: Compared with treatment as usual, combining trauma-focused therapy and pharmacotherapy for substance use disorders showed the largest comparative effect sizes for PTSD severity (d=-0.92, 95% CI=-1.57, -0.30) and alcohol use severity (d=-1.10, 95% CI=-1.54, -0.68) at end of treatment. Other treatments with large comparative effect sizes included pharmacotherapies for alcohol or other drug use disorders, trauma-focused integrated therapies, and trauma-focused nonintegrated therapies. Reductions in outcomes for PTSD symptoms and alcohol use were observed for nearly all treatments. CONCLUSIONS: The findings provide support for treating comorbid PTSD and substance use disorders using a variety of approaches, with alcohol-targeted pharmacotherapies and trauma-focused behavioral therapies as a combination of treatments that lead to early and sustained improvements in PTSD and alcohol use severity. Further treatment development is indicated for combining behavioral and pharmacological treatments for synergized impact and understanding the mechanisms of action and conditions under which each treatment type is optimized.

Measurement Error-Corrected Estimation of Clinically Significant Change Trajectories for Interventions Targeting Comorbid PTSD and Substance Use Disorders in OEF/OIF Veterans.

In randomized control trials (RCTs), a focus on average differences between treatment arms often limits our understanding of whether individuals show clinically significant improvement or deterioration. The present study examined differences in individual-level clinical significance trajectories between Concurrent Treatment of PTSD and Substance Use Disorders Using Prolonged Exposure (COPE) and Relapse Prevention (RP). Eighty-one treatment-seeking veterans with a comorbid PTSD/SUD diagnosis were randomized to COPE or RP; data from an additional n = 48 patients who did not meet criteria for both disorders was used to establish a normative threshold. A newly developed, modernized approach to the Jacobson and Truax (1991) clinically significant change framework, using (a) moderated nonlinear factor analysis (MNLFA) scale scoring and (b) measurement error-corrected multilevel modeling (MEC-MLM) was used; this approach was compared to other approaches using conventional total scores and/or assuming no measurement error. Using a conventional approach to estimating the Reliable Change Index (RCI) yielded no differences between COPE and RP in the percentage of patients achieving statistically significant improvement (SSI; 88.9% for both groups). However, under MNLFA/MEC-MLM, higher percentages of patients receiving COPE (75.0%) achieved SSI compared to RP (40.7%). Findings suggest that, even though COPE and RP appear to reduce the same number of PTSD symptoms, MNLFA scoring of outcome measures gives greater weight to interventions that target and reduce "hallmark" PTSD symptoms.

Estimating posttraumatic stress disorder severity in the presence of differential item functioning across populations, comorbidities, and interview measures: Introduction to Project Harmony.

Multiple factor analytic and item response theory studies have shown that items/symptoms vary in their relative clinical weights in structured interview measures for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Despite these findings, the use of total scores, which treat symptoms as though they are equally weighted, predominates in practice, with the consequence of undermining the precision of clinical decision-making. We conducted an integrative data analysis (IDA) study to harmonize PTSD structured interview data (i.e., recoding of items to a common symptom metric) from 25 studies (total N = 2,568). We aimed to identify (a) measurement noninvariance/differential item functioning (MNI/DIF) across multiple populations, psychiatric comorbidities, and interview measures simultaneously and (b) differences in inferences regarding underlying PTSD severity between scale scores estimated using moderated nonlinear factor analysis (MNLFA) and a total score analog model (TSA). Several predictors of MNI/DIF impacted effect size differences in underlying severity across scale scoring methods. Notably, we observed MNI/DIF substantial enough to bias inferences on underlying PTSD severity for two groups: African Americans and incarcerated women. The findings highlight two issues raised elsewhere in the PTSD psychometrics literature: (a) bias in characterizing underlying PTSD severity and individual-level treatment outcomes when the psychometric model underlying total scores fails to fit the data and (b) higher latent severity scores, on average, when using DSM-5 (net of MNI/DIF) criteria, by which multiple factors (e.g., Criterion A discordance across DSM editions, changes to the number/type of symptom clusters, changes to the symptoms themselves) may have impacted severity scoring for some patients.

What's in a name? A data-driven method to identify optimal psychotherapy classifications to advance treatment research on co-occurring PTSD and substance use disorders.

Background/Objective: The present study leveraged the expertise of an international group of posttraumatic stress and substance use disorder (PTSD+SUD) intervention researchers to identify which methods of categorizing interventions which target SUD, PTSD, or PTSD+SUD for populations with both PTSD+SUD may be optimal for advancing future systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and comparative effectiveness studies which strive to compare effects across a broad variety of psychotherapy types. Method: A two-step process was used to evaluate the categorization terminology. First, we searched the literature for pre-existing categories of PTSD+SUD interventions from PTSD+SUD clinical trials, systematic and literature reviews. Then, we surveyed international trauma and substance use subject matter experts about their opinions on pre-existing intervention categorization and ideal categorization nomenclature. Results: Mixed method analyses revealed that a proliferation of PTSD+SUD treatment research over the last twenty years brought with it an abundance of ways to characterize the treatments that have been evaluated. Results from our survey of experts (N = 27) revealed that interventions for PTSD+SUD can be classified in many ways that appear to overlap highly with one another. Many experts (11/27; 41%) selected the categories of 'trauma-focused and non-trauma focused' as an optimal way to distinguish treatment types. Although several experts reinforced this point during the subsequent meeting, it became clear that no method of categorizing treatments is without flaws. Conclusion: One possible categorization (trauma-focused/non-trauma focused) was identified. Revised language and nomenclature for classification of PTSD+SUD treatments are needed in order to accommodate the needs of this advancing field.

Antecedentes/Objetivo: El presente estudio aprovechó la experticia de un grupo internacional de investigadores de intervención en trastorno de estrés postraumático y trastorno por uso de sustancias (TEPT+TUS) para identificar qué métodos de categorización de las intervenciones con foco en TUS, TEPT y TEPT+TUS para poblaciones con ambos TEPT+TUS serían óptimos para avanzar en futuras revisiones sistemáticas, meta-análisis y estudios comparativos de efectividad que busquen comparar efectos en una amplia variedad de tipos de psicoterapia.Método: Se utilizó un proceso de dos etapas para evaluar la terminología de categorización. Primero, buscamos en la literatura categorías pre-existentes de intervenciones para TEPT+TUS en ensayos clínicos de TEPT+TUS, revisiones sistemáticas y de la literatura. Después, entrevistamos a expertos internacionales en la materia de trauma y uso de sustancias sobre su opinión de la categorización pre-existente de las intervenciones y la nomenclatura ideal de categorización.Resultados: Métodos de análisis mixtos revelaron que una proliferación de investigación de tratamientos para TEPT+TUS en los últimos veinte años trajo consigo una abundancia de formas de categorizar los tratamientos que han sido evaluados. Los resultados de nuestra encuesta de expertos (N = 27) revelaron que las intervenciones para TEPT+TUS pueden ser clasificadas en muchas formas que parecen sobreponerse altamente entre sí. Muchos expertos (11/27; 41%) seleccionaron las categorías de 'centrados en el trauma y no centrados en el trauma' como una forma óptima de distinguir los tipos de tratamiento. Aunque varios expertos reforzaron este punto en la reunión subsecuente, quedó claro que ningún método de categorización de los tratamientos está libre de defectos.Conclusión: Se identificó una posible categorización (centrado en el trauma/No centrado en el trauma). Se necesita lenguaje y nomenclatura revisada para la clasificación de tratamientos de TEPT+TUS a fin de acomodar las necesidades de este campo en desarrollo.

Graded response item response theory in scaling suicidal thoughts and behaviors among trauma-exposed women with substance use disorders.

Objective: The co-occurrence of substance use disorders (SUD) and trauma-exposure is a risk factor for suicidal thoughts and behaviors (STB). However, traditional methods of measurement for suicidal thoughts and behaviors are limited by an overreliance on dichotomous (i.e., yes or no) and averaged/summed scale score measurements. Further, among trauma-exposed individuals with SUD, it remains unclear which specific demographic factors, types of SUDs, and trauma sequelae (e.g., posttraumatic stress disorder [PTSD] symptom clusters) may be associated with elevated STB. The present study utilized item response theory to (a) generate empirically derived STB severity scores and, (b) examine which demographic factors, SUD diagnoses, and DSM-IV PTSD symptom clusters are associated with suicidality in a trauma-exposed sample with SUDs. Method: Female trauma-exposed participants with SUDs (N = 544) were recruited from community substance use treatment facilities in the National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (CTN). Clinician-administered interviews assessed STB, SUDs, and PTSD symptoms. Results: Results indicated that the unidimensional item response theory (IRT) model used to estimate latent STB severity scores fit well, with strong local reliability at higher levels of latent STB severity. Regression predictors of elevated STB severity included younger age, opioid dependence, and higher PTSD reexperiencing symptoms. Conclusions: Clinicians are advised to screen for and target opioid use disorders and reexperiencing symptoms when addressing suicidal thoughts and behavior in trauma-exposed individuals with SUDs. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Ethnoracial differences in treatment-seeking veterans with substance use disorders and co-occurring PTSD: Presenting characteristics and response to integrated exposure-based treatment.

OBJECTIVE: Substance use disorders (SUD) and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) frequently co-occur. While previous research has examined ethnoracial differences among individuals with either SUD or PTSD, little research to date has focused on individuals with co-occurring SUD/PTSD. The current study addresses this gap in the literature. METHOD: Participants were 79 military veterans (91% male; 38% African American [AA] and 62% White) with current SUD/PTSD who were randomized to receive Concurrent Treatment of PTSD and Substance Use Disorders using Prolonged Exposure (COPE) or Relapse Prevention (RP). Primary outcomes included substance use and self-reported and clinician-rated PTSD symptoms. RESULTS: At baseline, AA participants were significantly older, reported greater substance and alcohol use, and tended to report higher PTSD severity than White participants. AA participants evidenced greater decreases in substance and alcohol use during treatment, but greater increases in substance and alcohol use during follow-up as compared to White participants. All participants decreased alcohol consumption during treatment; however, AA participants in the COPE condition and White participants in the RP condition evidenced the steepest decreases in average number of drinks per drinking day (DDD) during treatment. Additionally, White participants receiving RP reported greater increases in DDD during follow-up compared to AA participants. CONCLUSION: Overall, integrated treatment for co-occurring SUD/PTSD was effective for both AA and White participants; however, some important differences emerged by ethnoracial group. Findings suggest that greater attention to race and ethnicity is warranted to better understand the needs of diverse patients with SUD/PTSD and to optimize treatment outcomes.

Evaluating treatments for posttraumatic stress disorder, alcohol and other drug use disorders using meta-analysis of individual patient data: Design and methodology of a virtual clinical trial.

This paper describes Project Harmony, a Virtual Clinical Trial (VCT) funded by the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) to harmonize and analyze data from over 40 independent psychological, pharmacologic and/or combined pharmacological treatment studies for posttraumatic stress disorder and comorbid alcohol and other drug use disorders (PTSD/AOD). The study attends to three distinct analysis challenges: (1) variation in measurement of PTSD/AOD across studies, time, populations and reporters, (2) cross-study variation in treatment effect sizes and (3) non-randomized, cross-study variation in the classification of treatments (despite within-study randomization of treatment arms). To address these challenges, the study combines meta-analysis of individual patient data (MIPD), integrative data analysis (IDA) and propensity score weighting (PSW) to integrate raw data from these clinical trials. This protocol shows how this VCT analytic framework was used to (1) develop commensurate scale scores of PTSD and AOD severity when measures vary across studies, (2) compare the efficacy of evidence-based treatment models for PTSD/AOD, (3) test for potential mediators of treatment effects on AOD and PTSD across treatment models, and (4) explore individual- and study-level moderators to inform for whom each of the treatment models works best. The advantages of the general VCT approach are juxtaposed against the limitations of single randomized controlled trials and conventional meta-analysis.

Putting the Patient Back in Clinical Significance: Moderated Nonlinear Factor Analysis for Estimating Clinically Significant Change in Treatment for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder.

The present study introduced a modernized approach to Jacobson and Truax's (1991) methods of estimating treatment effects on individual-level (a) movement from the clinical to the normative range and (b) reliable change on posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) severity. Participants were 450 trauma-exposed women (M age = 39.2 years, SD = 8.9, range: 18-65 years) who presented to seven geographically diverse community mental health and substance use treatment centers. Data from 53 of these women, none of whom met the criteria for full or subthreshold PTSD, were used to establish the normative range. Using moderated nonlinear factor analysis (MNLFA) scale scoring, which weights symptoms by their clinical relevance, a significantly larger proportion of participants moved into the normative range for PTSD severity scores and/or exhibited reliable changes after treatment compared to the same individuals' movement when using symptom counts. Further, approximately 24% of the participants showed discrepant judgments on reliable change indices (RCI) between MNLFA scores and symptom counts, likely due to the false assumption that the standard error of measurement is equal for all levels of underlying PTSD severity when estimating RCIs with symptom counts. An MNLFA approach to estimating underlying PTSD severity can provide clinically meaningful information about individual-level change without the de facto assumption that PTSD symptoms have equivalent weight. Study implications are discussed with regard to a joint emphasis on (a) measurement models that highlight differential symptom weighting and (b) treatment-arm differences in individual-level outcomes rather than the current overemphasis of treatment-arm differences on group-averaged trajectories.

Response-to-Treatment for Comorbid Post-Traumatic Stress and Substance Use Disorders: The Value of Combining Person- and Variable-Centered Approaches.

Optimizing treatment for co-occurring post-traumatic stress disorder and substance use disorder (PTSD+SUD) is critically important. Whereas treatments have been designed that target PTSD+SUD with some success, these treatments do not benefit all. Data-driven approaches that combine person- and variable-centered methods, such as parallel process latent class growth analysis (PP-LCGA) can be used to identify response-to-treatment trajectories across both PTSD symptoms and substance use. The current study employed PP-LCGA separately in two randomized clinical trials (study 1 n = 81, Mean age = 40.4 years, SD = 10.7; study 2 n = 59, Mean age = 44.7 years, SD = 9.4) to examine PTSD symptom response and percentage of days using substances across treatment trials comparing Concurrent Treatment of PTSD and SUD using Prolonged Exposure and Relapse Prevention. Results revealed four PTSD+SUD profiles for study one and three PTSD+SUD profiles for study two. For PTSD symptoms, response trajectories could be broadly classified into treatment responders and non-responders across both studies. For substance use, response trajectories could be broadly classified into declining, moderately stable, and abstaining profiles. When considering PTSD symptoms and substance use trajectories together, profiles emerged that would have been missed had these treatment outcomes been considered separately.

Measurement nonequivalence of the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale by race/ethnicity: Implications for quantifying posttraumatic stress disorder severity.

Research studies suggest racial/ethnic differences in posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) diagnosis and symptom severity. Few studies to date, however, have examined the extent to which these findings are due to differences in measurement properties of existing PTSD scales. This study examined measurement equivalence across race/ethnicity in the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS) by testing for differential item functioning (DIF) in the item response theory (IRT) framework. Participants were 506 trauma-exposed women (M = 39.41 years, SD = 8.94) who participated in the National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network Women and Trauma Study. PTSD severity score estimates were improved upon as part of IRT estimation incorporating symptom "weights" (i.e., factor loadings) and group-specific DIF. Six symptoms from the CAPS showed DIF, with the majority of differences in measurement driven by White/African American and White/Latina differences, particularly for (a) avoidance of thoughts and (b) a sense of foreshortened future. Despite both racial/ethnic minority groups being slightly (not significantly) more likely to receive a PTSD diagnosis, African Americans (p = .014; Cohen's d = -.22) and Latinas (p < .001; d = -.73) had significantly lower PTSD severity scores than Whites as estimated under IRT with group-specific DIF. Examination of PTSD severity scores based on symptom counts revealed these differences were either dampened (White/Latina difference d = -.39) or entirely negated (White/African American difference d = -.08). The findings suggest the importance of considering differences in symptom relevance across race/ethnicity and their impact on capturing symptom severity parallel to diagnostic criteria. Implications for clinical practice are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Crossover between diagnostic and empirical categorizations of full and subthreshold PTSD.

BACKGROUND: Most of the work on understanding subthreshold PTSD has focused on inconsistencies in defining subthreshold PTSD and how those inconsistencies impact prevalence rates. The present study distinguishes between full and subthreshold PTSD using empirical categorization and assesses the circumstances under which empirical categorization is discordant with full and subthreshold PTSD diagnoses. METHODS: Using data from the NIDA CTN Women and Trauma Study (N = 353), we use a modernized adaptation of the Jacobson and Truax (1991) framework, assessing whether patients were above or below an empirical threshold on latent PTSD severity scores estimated under categorical confirmatory factor analysis; the empirical categorizations were then crossed with the diagnoses to form four diagnostic by empirical categorization groupings. RESULTS: Compared to a reference group (full PTSD diagnosis and empirical categorization), patients who had a full PTSD diagnosis but a subthreshold empirical categorization had lower symptom endorsement rates on 15 PTSD symptoms, were more likely to be married, ethnic minorities with fewer lifetime traumas. Conversely, patients with a subthreshold PTSD diagnosis and a full PTSD empirical grouping looked similar to "Full/Fulls", only differing on avoidance symptoms. LIMITATIONS: Alternative definitions of subthreshold PTSD and coding of symptom endorsement may impact results. The use of DSM-IV symptoms (though reconciled against overlapping symptoms from DSM-5) is also a key limitation. CONCLUSIONS: Empirical categorization can be a useful supplement to diagnosis in distinguishing subthreshold PTSD from full PTSD, using a methodology that could provide a platform for melding dimensional and categorical nosology approaches in the DSM.

Does trauma-focused exposure therapy exacerbate symptoms among patients with comorbid PTSD and substance use disorders?

BACKGROUND: Although exposure-based therapy is a well-established, effective treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), some practitioners report reluctance to implement it due to concerns that it may exacerbate symptoms of PTSD and commonly comorbid disorders, such as substance use disorders (SUD). AIM: This study compared the exacerbation of psychological symptoms among participants with comorbid PTSD and SUD who received either SUD treatment alone or SUD treatment integrated with exposure therapy for PTSD. METHOD: Participants (N = 71) were treatment-seeking, military Veterans with comorbid PTSD and SUD who were randomized to 12 individual sessions of either (1) an integrated, exposure-based treatment (Concurrent Treatment of PTSD and Substance Use Disorders using Prolonged Exposure; COPE); or (2) a non-exposure-based, SUD-only treatment (Relapse Prevention; RP). We examined between-group differences in the frequency of statistically reliable exacerbations of PTSD, SUD and depression symptoms experienced during treatment. RESULTS: At each of the 12 sessions, symptom exacerbation was minimal and generally equally likely in either treatment group. However, an analysis of treatment completers suggests that RP participants experienced slightly more exacerbations of PTSD symptoms during the course of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to investigate symptom exacerbation throughout trauma-focused exposure therapy for individuals with comorbid PTSD and SUD. Results add to a growing literature which suggests that trauma-focused, exposure-based therapy does not increase the risk of symptom exacerbation relative to non-exposure-based therapy.

Estimation of equable scale scores and treatment outcomes from patient- and clinician-reported PTSD measures using item response theory calibration.

Across multiple RCTs, discrepancies between patient and clinician reports of PTSD symptoms are at least a partial contributing factor to large discrepancies between treatment outcome effect sizes from self-report and clinician reports within the same patients. Using secondary data from the NIDA-funded Women and Trauma Study, we demonstrated Common Persons Item Response Theory (IRT) Calibration for calibrating self-reported and clinician-reported PTSD severity scores in a manner similar to the process used to produce equated scores across multiple forms of standardized tests (e.g., SAT, GRE). Under IRT calibration, treatment effect sizes between the CAPS and MPSS-SR did not differ, while with the noncalibrated measures, the CAPS effect size was 85% larger than the MPSS-SR. Further, across the range of a combined CAPS/MPSS-SR gold standard, IRT-calibrated CAPS and MPSS-SR individual scores did not differ; for uncalibrated individual scores, MPSS scores were higher than CAPS scores at higher levels of PTSD severity while the reverse was true at lower levels of severity. The use of IRT calibration approaches for calibrating self-report and clinical interview measures of PTSD will allow treatment researchers to reflect the treatment effect on PTSD as a construct (regardless of reporter) as opposed to being limited to reporting treatment effects that may be discrepant within patients and specific to the particular assessment measure being employed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).