Sequenced Treatment Effectiveness for Posttraumatic Stress (STEPS) Trial: A protocol for a pragmatic comparative effectiveness trial with baseline results.

BACKGROUND: There have only been two efficacy trials reporting a head-to-head comparison of medications and psychotherapy for PTSD, and neither was conducted in primary care. Therefore, this protocol paper describes a pragmatic trial that compares outcomes of primary care patients randomized to initially receive a brief trauma-focused psychotherapy or a choice of three antidepressants. In addition, because there are few trials examining the effectiveness of subsequent treatments for patients not responding to the initial treatment, this pragmatic trial also compares the outcomes of those switching or augmenting treatments. METHOD: Patients screening positive for PTSD (n = 700) were recruited from the primary care clinics of 7 Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHC) and 8 Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Centers and randomized in the ratio 1:1:2 to one of three treatment sequences: 1) selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) followed by augmentation with Written Exposure Therapy (WET), 2) SSRI followed by a switch to serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI), or 3) WET followed by a switch to SSRI. Participants complete surveys at baseline, 4 months, and 8 months. The primary outcome is PTSD symptom severity as measured by the PTSD Checklist (PCL-5). RESULTS: Average PCL-5 scores (M = 52.8, SD = 11.1) indicated considerable severity. The most common bothersome traumatic event for VA enrollees was combat (47.8%), and for FQHC enrollees was other (28.2%), followed by sexual assault (23.4%), and child abuse (19.8%). Only 22.4% were taking an antidepressant at baseline. CONCLUSION: Results will help healthcare systems and clinicians make decisions about which treatments to offer to patients.

Trajectories of financial distress during the COVID-19 pandemic and their associations with mental health and substance use outcomes in a cohort of young adults.

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to unprecedented life disruptions among young adults, including increased job insecurity and financial strain. Mental health problems and substance use have also increased during the pandemic, with young adults particularly vulnerable to experiencing these challenges. This study examines trajectories of financial distress among young adults during the pandemic and their associations with depression, anxiety, and hazardous alcohol and cannabis use. Data from 473 young adults (ages 22-29) recruited in the Northwest United States were collected from April/May 2020 to July/August 2021. Financial distress trajectories were identified using growth mixture modeling. Negative binomial models were used to examine associations between financial distress trajectories and distal outcomes of depression, anxiety, alcohol, and cannabis use. Three distinct trajectories were identified, revealing Low, Moderate, and High financial distress experiences. Individuals with "Moderate" and "High" trajectories showed significantly greater depressive and anxiety symptom scores compared with those in the "Low" financial distress trajectory group. Trajectories were not associated with subsequent levels of alcohol or cannabis use. Young adult mental health remains a priority during periods of economic downturn. Providers must be aware of the psychological challenges imposed by financial distress among young adults to address worsening mental health symptoms.

Patterns of Pre-exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) Use in a Population Accessing PrEP in Jackson, Mississippi.

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) persistence is suboptimal in the United States. In the Deep South, a region with high rates of new HIV diagnosis, patterns of PrEP discontinuation remain unexplored. We evaluated data from a clinic-based PrEP program in Jackson, Mississippi and included patients initiating PrEP between August 2018 and April 2021. We considered patients to have a gap in PrEP coverage if they had at least 30 days without an active PrEP prescription; those who restarted PrEP after 30 days were classified as 'stopped and restarted' and those who never obtained a new PrEP prescription were classified as 'stopped and did not restart'. Patients without a gap in coverage were considered 'continuously on PrEP'. We estimated median time to first PrEP discontinuation and examined factors associated with time to first PrEP discontinuation. Of 171 patients who received an initial 90-day PrEP prescription; 75% were assigned male at birth and 74% identified as Black. The median time to first discontinuation was 90 days (95% CI 90-114). Twenty-two percent were continuously on PrEP, 28% stopped and restarted (median time off PrEP = 102 days), and 50% stopped and did not restart. Associations with early PrEP stoppage were notable for patients assigned sex female vs male (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 1.6, 95% CI 1.0-2.5) and those living over 25 miles from clinic vs. 0-10 miles (aHR 1.89, 95% CI 1.2-3.0). Most patients never refilled an initial PrEP prescription though many patients re-started PrEP. Interventions to improve persistence and facilitate re-starts are needed.