The significant others' responses to trauma scale (SORTS): applying factor analysis and item response theory to a measure of PTSD symptom accommodation.

Background: Symptom accommodation by family members (FMs) of individuals with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) includes FMs' participation in patients' avoidance/safety behaviours and constraining self-expression to minimise conflict, potentially maintaining patients' symptoms. The Significant Others' Responses to Trauma Scale (SORTS) is the only existing measure of accommodation in PTSD but has not been rigorously psychometrically tested.Objective: We aimed to conduct further psychometric analyses to determine the factor structure and overall performance of the SORTS. Method: We conducted exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses using a sample of N = 715 FMs (85.7% female, 62.1% White, 86.7% romantic partners of individuals with elevated PTSD symptoms).Results: After dropping cross-loading items, results indicated good fit for a higher-order model of accommodation with two factors: an anger-related accommodation factor encompassed items related largely to minimising conflict, and an anxiety-related accommodation factor encompassed items related primarily to changes to the FM's activities. Accommodation was positively related to PTSD severity and negatively related to relationship satisfaction, although the factors showed somewhat distinct associations. Item Response Theory analyses indicated that the scale provided good information and robust coverage of different accommodation levels.Conclusions: SORTS data should be analysed as both a single score as well as two factors to explore the factors' potential differential performance across treatment and relationship outcomes.

We examined the Significant Others' Responses to Trauma Scale (SORTS), a measure of symptom accommodation in PTSD, among a large sample of family members.As measured by the SORTS, accommodation in PTSD could be broken down into two aspects: anger-related accommodation and anxiety-related accommodation.Accommodation was positively related to PTSD severity and negatively related to relationship satisfaction.

Using machine learning to increase access to and engagement with trauma-focused interventions for posttraumatic stress disorder.

BACKGROUND: Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) poses a global public health challenge. Evidence-based psychotherapies (EBPs) for PTSD reduce symptoms and improve functioning (Forbes et al., Guilford Press, 2020, 3). However, a number of barriers to access and engagement with these interventions prevail. As a result, the use of EBPs in community settings remains disappointingly low (Charney et al., Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy, 11, 2019, 793; Richards et al., Community Mental Health Journal, 53, 2017, 215), and not all patients who receive an EBP for PTSD benefit optimally (Asmundson et al., Cognitive Behaviour Therapy, 48, 2019, 1). Advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) have introduced new possibilities for increasinfg access to and quality of mental health interventions. AIMS: The present paper reviews key barriers to accessing and engaging in EBPs for PTSD, discusses current applications of AI in PTSD treatment and provides recommendations for future AI integrations aimed at reducing barriers to access and engagement. DISCUSSION: We propose that AI may be utilized to (1) assess treatment fidelity; (2) elucidate novel predictors of treatment dropout and outcomes; and (3) facilitate patient engagement with the tasks of therapy, including therapy practice. Potential avenues for technological advancements are also considered.

Sources of Social Support and Trauma Recovery: Evidence for Bidirectional Associations from a Recently Trauma-Exposed Community Sample.

Although the association between post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and social support is well documented, few studies have tested the causal pathways explaining this association at several points in the acute post-trauma recovery period or examined whether the association varies for different sources of social support. To address these gaps, 151 community individuals (mean age = 37.20 years, 69.5% women) exposed to trauma within the previous 6 months were recruited to complete measures of PTSD and social support from intimate partners, friends, and relatives four times in 1 year. In line with recent recommendations for research on social support and PTSD symptoms, random intercept cross-lagged panel modeling (RI-CLPM) was used to examine dynamic changes between PTSD severity and social support over time. The pattern of RI-CLPM cross-lagged coefficients indicated that positive deviations from one's expected stable level of total social support (across all sources) sped up the recovery of PTSD symptoms at the end of the post-trauma year, and more severe PTSD symptoms than expected based on one's expected stable level of PTSD started eroding social support midway through the assessment year. When specific sources of social support were analyzed separately, the association between within-person increases in social support from friends at any given time point accelerated the recovery from PTSD across the entire year. Among participants with intimate partners (n = 53), intimate partner support did not predict PTSD symptoms, but more severe PTSD symptoms at any given time point predicted less support at the following time point. Results from this longitudinal study provide additional support for the bidirectional relationship between PTSD and social support over time and suggest that perceived social support from friends may be especially helpful during trauma recovery.

Cognitive-behavioural conjoint therapy versus prolonged exposure for PTSD in military service members and veterans: results and lessons from a randomized controlled trial.

Military personnel and veterans are at heightened risk for exposure to traumatic events and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), as well as intimate relationship problems associated with PTSD.The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relative efficacy of CBCT and PE in improving intimate relationship functioning in active duty military personnel or veterans and their intimate partners; both conditions were hypothesized to significantly improve PTSD. Method: In this study, 32 military service members or veterans with PTSD and their intimate partners were randomized to receive either Cognitive-Behavioral Conjoint Therapy for PTSD (n = 15; CBCT; [Monson, C. M., & Fredman, S. J. (2012). Cognitive-behavioral conjoint therapy for posttraumatic stress disorder: Harnessing the healing power of relationships. Guilford]), a trauma-focused couple therapy, or Prolonged Exposure (n = 17; PE; [Foa, E. B., Hembree, E. A., Dancu, C. V., Peterson, A. L., Cigrang, J. A., & Riggs, D. S. (2008). Prolonged exposure treatment for combat-related stress disorders - provider's treatment manual [unpublished]. Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania]), a front-line evidence-based individual treatment for PTSD.There were significant challenges with recruitment and a significant difference in dropout from treatment for the two therapies (65% for PE; 27% for CBCT). Treatment dropout was differentially related to pre-treatment relationship functioning; those with below average relationship functioning had higher dropout in PE compared with CBCT, whereas those with above average relationship functioning did not show differential dropout. In general, CBCT led to relational improvements, but this was not consistently found in PE. Clinician- and self-reported PTSD symptoms improved with both treatments.This study is the first to test a couple or family therapy against a well-established, front-line recommended treatment for PTSD, with expected superiority of CBCT over PE on relationship outcomes. Lessons learned in trial design, including considerations of equipoise, and the effects of differential dropout on trial analyses are discussed. This trial provides further support for the efficacy of CBCT in the treatment of PTSD and enhancement of intimate relationships.

Differential dropout from trial of couple versus individual therapy for PTSD.General pattern of improvements in relationship outcomes in couple therapy for PTSD.PTSD symptoms improved in the individual and couple therapy for PTSD.Lessons learned in trial design, including considerations of equipoise, and the effects of differential dropout by condition on trial analyses are discussed.

Design of a randomized clinical trial of brief couple therapy for PTSD augmented with intranasal oxytocin.

BACKGROUND: Leveraging military veterans' intimate relationships during treatment has the potential to concurrently improve posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms and relationship quality. Cognitive-Behavioral Conjoint Therapy (CBCT) and an 8-session Brief Cognitive-Behavioral Conjoint Therapy (bCBCT) are manualized treatments designed to simultaneously improve PTSD and relationship functioning for couples in which one partner has PTSD. Although efficacious in improving PTSD, the effects of CBCT on relationship satisfaction are small, especially among veterans. Intranasal oxytocin, which targets mechanisms of PTSD and relationship quality, may enhance the efficacy of bCBCT. METHOD/DESIGN: The purpose of this 4-year clinical trial is to compare the outcomes of bCBCT augmented with intranasal oxytocin versus bCBCT plus placebo. We will also explore potential mechanisms of action: self-reported communication skills, empathy, and trust. We will recruit 120 dyads (i.e., veteran with PTSD and their intimate partner) from the VA San Diego Healthcare System. Veterans will be administered 40 international units of oxytocin (n = 60) or placebo (n = 60) 30 min before each of 8 bCBCT sessions delivered via telehealth. Clinical and functioning outcomes will be assessed at five timepoints (baseline, mid-treatment, post-treatment, and 3- and 6-month follow-up). CONCLUSION: Study findings will reveal the efficacy of oxytocin-assisted brief couple therapy for PTSD, which could serve as highly scalable option for couples coping with PTSD, as well as provide preliminary evidence of interpersonal mechanisms of change. CLINICALTRIALS: govIdentifier:NCT06194851.

Pretreatment relationship characteristics predict outcomes from an uncontrolled trial of intensive, multicouple group PTSD treatment.

Cognitive behavioral conjoint therapy for posttraumatic stress disorder (CBCT for PTSD; Monson & Fredman, 2012) is associated with improvements in patients' and partners' mental health and relationship satisfaction. Some pretreatment relationship characteristics have predicted CBCT for PTSD outcomes for patients, but findings were limited to a single community sample consisting primarily of female patients with male partners. A better understanding of whether pretreatment relationship characteristics predict outcomes in other patient populations and whether there are partners who may be particularly responsive to couple therapy for PTSD could optimize treatment matching. This study investigated whether pretreatment partner accommodation and relationship satisfaction predicted patient and partner treatment outcomes from an uncontrolled trial of an abbreviated, intensive, multicouple group version of CBCT for PTSD conducted with 24 active-duty military or veteran couples (96% male patients/female partners). In general, changes in patients' PTSD and comorbid symptoms and relationship satisfaction did not vary by pretreatment partner accommodation or patients' own pretreatment relationship satisfaction. In contrast, pretreatment relationship characteristics predicted partner outcomes. Partners who engaged in higher levels of accommodation pretreatment and partners who reported lower levels of pretreatment relationship satisfaction experienced greater declines in psychological distress following treatment. Also, partners who began the study relationally distressed exhibited significant increases in relationship satisfaction following treatment, whereas those who were not relationally distressed did not. Findings suggest that improvements generally do not vary by pretreatment relationship characteristics for patients, whereas partners who begin treatment with elevated relationship risk factors may be especially likely to experience improvement across outcomes. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

A case series of sage: a new couple-based intervention for borderline personality disorder.

BACKGROUND: Research suggests that interpersonal dysfunction may be central to borderline personality disorder (BPD), and that the relationships of people with BPD are particularly impaired. Further, the significant others of people with BPD exhibit elevated psychological problems but little access to mental healthcare. Despite this, most BPD interventions are delivered individually and do not routinely incorporate significant others. This manuscript presents the first case series of Sage, a 12-session manualized intervention for people with borderline personality disorder (BPD) and their intimate partners with three targets: a) BPD severity, b) relationship conflict, and c) intimate partner mental health. FINDINGS: Five couples of people with BPD with frequent suicidal/self-injurious behavior or high suicidal ideation and their intimate partners received Sage. Measures of Sage targets as well as tertiary outcomes were administered at pre-, mid-, and post-intervention. Four out of five dyads completed Sage, with high intervention satisfaction ratings. Improvements were generally demonstrated in BPD severity, suicidal ideation, and suicidal behavior/self-injury. Half of dyads exhibited improvements in conflict, and additional improvements in mental health outcomes for dyad members were demonstrated. One dyad exhibited poor outcomes and speculations regarding this are offered. CONCLUSIONS: Findings provide proof of concept of Sage as an intervention that can improve BPD and other mental health outcomes in those with BPD and their intimate partners. Incorporating intimate partners into BPD treatment may optimize and expedite its outcomes. However, further testing is needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This project was pre-registered at Clinicaltrials.gov (Identifier: [NCT04737252]).