Exposure to socioenvironmental stress as a predictor of physical and mental health.

The literature demonstrates links between socioenvironmental characteristics, dysregulation of the stress response system, and PTSD, though few studies integrate these factors in one model. In a secondary analysis of cross-sectional data collected by the Survey of the Health of Wisconsin (SHOW), structural equation modeling evaluated the relationships between socioenvironmental stress, cumulative biological risk (CBR), and PTSD symptom severity. The model hypothesized that exposure to socioenvironmental stress was associated with PTSD and that this relationship is mediated by increased CBR. Indices suggest the model provided a good fit to the data and supported socioenvironmental stress and CBR as valid latent constructs. Although the association between CBR and PTSD was not found to be statistically significant in this study, socioenvironmental stress was a significant predictor of PTSD and CBR. Given the role of socioenvironmental factors on CBR and PTSD symptoms, providers need to better assess and incorporate social stressors within evaluation and treatment.

Validation of the Injured Trauma Survivor Screen: An American Association for the Surgery of Trauma multi-institutional trial.

BACKGROUND: Psychological distress is common following a traumatic injury event. The Injured Trauma Survivor Screen (ITSS) was developed at a level 1 trauma center to assess for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and major depressive episode (MDE) following admission for a traumatic injury. The ITSS sensitivity and specificity were analyzed 1 to 3 and 6 to 9 months postinjury to test the validity across trauma centers. METHOD: Four level 1 trauma centers from the East, Midwest, South, and West in the United States recruited 375 eligible adult inpatients (excluded participants included those with moderate or severe traumatic brain injury, whose injury was self-inflicted, were noncommunicative, or were non-English speaking). Baseline sample (White/Caucasian, 63.2%; male, 62.4%; mean (SD) age, 45 (17.11) years; injured by motor vehicle collision, 42.4%) measurements were conducted during index hospitalization. At first follow-up, 69.6% (n = 261) were retained; at second follow-up, 61.3% (n = 230) were retained. Measurements included the ITSS, PTSD Checklist for DSM-5, Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale-Revised, and Clinician-Administered PTSD Scaled for DSM 5. RESULTS: At follow-up 1, the ITSS PTSD subscale had a sensitivity of 75% and specificity of 78.8%, and the MDE subscale had a sensitivity of 80.4% and specificity of 65.6%. At follow-up 2, the PTSD subscale had a sensitivity of 72.7% and specificity of 83.1%, and the MDE subscale had a sensitivity of 76.1% and specificity of 68.3%. A combined risk group using two symptom based measures administered at baseline produced increased specificity. CONCLUSION: The nine-item ITSS continues to be an efficient and effective risk screen for PTSD and MDE following traumatic injury requiring hospitalization. This multi-institutional validation study creates a solid foundation for further exploration of the generalizability of this screen's psychometric properties in distinct populations. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic study, level III.

Identification of risk for posttraumatic stress disorder symptom clusters early after trauma.

The current study examined how the injured trauma survivor screen (ITSS), a hospital-administered screener of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and depression, differentially predicted PTSD symptom cluster severity. Participants from a Level 1 trauma center (n = 220) completed the ITSS while inpatient and PTSD symptoms were assessed one-month post discharge. Perceived life threat and intentionality of injury were key predictors of avoidance, re-experiencing, and hyperarousal symptom clusters. However, negative alterations in mood and cognition cluster seemed best predicted by mood and cognitive risk factors. Therefore, the ITSS provides utility in differentially predicting symptom clusters and treatment planning after traumatic injury.

A Randomized Trial of Modified Prolonged Exposure to Prevent the Development of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder in Patients Hospitalized With Traumatic Injuries.

Individuals who require hospitalization after traumatic injuries are at increased risk for developing posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD); however, few early behavioral interventions have been effective at preventing PTSD within this population. The aim of this pilot study was to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of modified prolonged exposure therapy (mPE) to prevent PTSD and depression symptoms among patients hospitalized after a DSM-5 single-incident trauma. Hospitalized patients were eligible if they screened positive for PTSD risk. Participants (N = 74) were randomly assigned in a parallel-groups design to receive mPE (n = 38) or standard of care treatment (SoC; n = 36) while admitted to the hospital after a traumatic injury. Individuals randomized to the intervention condition received one (42.1%), two (36.8%), or three sessions (15.8%) of mPE, mainly depending on length of stay. There were no significant differences between groups regarding PTSD or depression severity at 1- or 3-months posttrauma, except for more PTSD diagnoses in the intervention group after 1 month, ϕ = -.326. Intervention differences were nonsignificant when we took baseline PTSD symptoms and the nonindependence of the repeated measurements within the data into account. No adverse events were reported. Overall, mPE was no more effective than SoC for hospitalized, traumatic injury survivors with a high PTSD risk. The results may point to a need for a stepped-care approach, where intervention protocols focus on first briefly treating individuals who are actively exhibiting acute stress reactions, then extensively treating those whose symptoms do not decrease over time.

Validation of Abbreviated Four- and Eight-Item Versions of the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 in a Traumatically Injured Sample.

Rates of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) are three times higher in traumatically injured populations than the general population, yet limited brief, valid measures for assessing PTSD symptom severity exist. The PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5) is a valid, efficient measure of symptom severity, but its completion is time consuming. Subsequently, abbreviated four- and eight-item versions were developed using the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview-7 PTSD module and validated in Veteran samples. This study aimed to validate these abbreviated versions using the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-5 (CAPS-5), the gold standard for PTSD diagnosis, in a traumatically injured civilian population. Participants were 251 traumatically injured adults (Mage = 42.52 years; 69.3% male; 50.2% Caucasian) recruited from a Level 1 trauma center inpatient unit; 32.3% and 17.9% of participants experienced a motor vehicle crash or gunshot wound, respectively. The CAPS-5 and PCL-5 were administered approximately 6.5 months postinjury. We examined whether compared to the full PCL-5, the abbreviated versions would adequately differentiate between participants with and without a CAPS-5 PTSD diagnosis. The abbreviated versions were highly correlated with the total scale and showed good-to-excellent internal consistency. The diagnostic utility of the abbreviated measures was comparable to that of the total scale regarding sensitivity, suggesting they may be useful as abbreviated screening tools; however, the total scale functioned better regarding specificity. The abbreviated versions of the PCL-5 may be useful screening instruments in the long-term care of traumatic injury survivors and may be more likely to be implemented across routine clinical and research contexts.

Interaction Between Psychiatric Symptoms and History of Mild TBI When Evaluating Postconcussion Syndrome in Veterans.

INTRODUCTION: Symptoms of postconcussive syndrome (PCS) after mild TBI (mTBI) have been shown to resolve quickly, yet new research raises questions about possible long-term effects of this condition. It is not clear how best to address assessment and treatment when someone reports lingering symptoms of PCS. One self-report measure used by the VA and the DoD is the Neurobehavioral Symptom Inventory (NSI), but this measure may be affected by underlying psychiatric symptoms. We investigated whether the NSI is sensitive to mTBI after considering a number of psychiatric and demographic factors. METHODS: This study examined which factors are associated with NSI scores in a Veteran sample (n = 741) that had recently returned from deployment. RESULTS: Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and depression accounted for most of the variance on the NSI. Although history of mTBI was initially related to NSI, this association was no longer significant after other covariates were considered. CONCLUSIONS: The NSI score was primarily explained by symptoms of PTSD and depression, suggesting that the NSI is not specific to the experience of a brain injury. We recommend cautious interpretation when this measure is used in the chronic phase after mTBI, especially among patients with comorbid depression or PTSD.

Screening and treating hospitalized trauma survivors for posttraumatic stress disorder and depression.

Traumatic injury affects over 2.6 million U.S. adults annually and elevates risk for a number of negative health consequences. This includes substantial psychological harm, the most prominent being posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), with approximately 21% of traumatic injury survivors developing the disorder within the first year after injury. Posttraumatic stress disorder is associated with deficits in physical recovery, social functioning, and quality of life. Depression is diagnosed in approximately 6% in the year after injury and is also a predictor of poor quality of life. The American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma suggests screening for and treatment of PTSD and depression, reflecting a growing awareness of the critical need to address patients' mental health needs after trauma. While some trauma centers have implemented screening and treatment or referral for treatment programs, the majority are evaluating how to best address this recommendation, and no standard approach for screening and treatment currently exists. Further, guidelines are not yet available with respect to resources that may be used to effectively screen and treat these disorders in trauma survivors, as well as who is going to bear the costs. The purpose of this review is: (1) to evaluate the current state of the literature regarding evidence-based screens for PTSD and depression in the hospitalized trauma patient and (2) summarize the literature to date regarding the treatments that have empirical support in treating PTSD and depression acutely after injury. This review also includes structural and funding information regarding existing postinjury mental health programs. Screening of injured patients and timely intervention to prevent or treat PTSD and depression could substantially improve health outcomes and improve quality of life for this high-risk population. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Review, level IV.

Detecting PTSD in a traumatically injured population: The diagnostic utility of the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5.

BACKGROUND: The posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5) is among few validated measures of PTSD severity in line with the DSM-5. Validation efforts among veteran samples have recommended cut scores of 33 and 38 to indicate PTSD; cut scores vary across populations depending on factors such as trauma type. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic utility of and identify optimal cut scores for the PCL-5 in relation to the gold standard Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-5 (CAPS-5) among traumatically injured individuals 6 months after discharge from a level I trauma center. METHODS: A total of 251 participants completed the PCL-5 and CAPS-5 6 months after discharge from a level I trauma center following traumatic injury. Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses detailed diagnostic accuracy of the PCL-5 and identified the optimal cut score via Youden's J index. Cut scores were also broken down by intentional versus nonintentional injury. RESULTS: The PCL-5 produces satisfactory diagnostic accuracy, with adequate sensitivity and specificity, in a traumatically injured population. Estimates indicate the optimal cut score as >30; the optimal cut score for intentional injuries was >34 and >22 for nonintentional injuries. CONCLUSIONS: This investigation provides support for the PCL-5 in detection of PTSD among injured individuals 6 months after discharge from a level I trauma center. PCL-5 specificity and sensitivity suggest clinicians working with this population can feel confident in using this measure over more onerous structured interviews (e.g., CAPS-5). This study signifies a move toward ensuring those experiencing mental health difficulties after traumatic injury are identified and connected to resources.

Six-month follow-up of the injured trauma survivor screen: Clinical implications and future directions.

BACKGROUND: The injured trauma survivor screen (ITSS) has been shown to predict posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and depression risk at 1 month after traumatic injury. This study explored the ability of the ITSS to predict chronic distress after injury, as well as the impact of combining the ITSS with an additional screening measure. METHODS: Patients were enrolled following admission to a Level I trauma center. Baseline measurements were collected during initial hospitalization, and follow-up measures were collected an average of 6.5 months after injury. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses were run to determine predictive accuracy, controlling for participants who had mental health intervention and for those who experienced additional potentially psychologically traumatic events since their injury event. RESULTS: Utilizing a cut score of 2, the ITSS PTSD scale had a sensitivity of 85.42%, specificity of 67.35%, negative predictive value (NPV) of 91.9% and positive predictive value (PPV) of 51.4%. The combined PTSD risk group (risk positive on the baseline ITSS and the PTSD checklist for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edition) had a sensitivity of 72.92%, specificity of 81.63%, NPV of 88.2%, and PPV of 61.6%. Also using a cut score of 2, the ITSS Depression Scale had a sensitivity of 72.50%, specificity of 70.29%, NPV of 91.1%, and PPV of 37.9%. CONCLUSION: The nine-item ITSS, which takes approximately 5 minutes to administer, is a stable screening tool for predicting those most at risk for PTSD and/or depression 6 months after admission to a Level I trauma center following traumatic injury. The combined PTSD risk group data provide evidence that symptom evaluation by a psychologist can improve specificity. These results further inform the recommendation of the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma regarding PTSD and depression screening in trauma centers. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic study, level III.

Exploring the gold-standard: Evidence for a two-factor model of the Clinician Administered PTSD Scale for the DSM-5.

OBJECTIVE: The latent factor structure of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) remains a source of considerable variability. The current study compared several a priori factor structures, as well as a novel 2-factor structure of posttraumatic psychological distress as measured by the Clinician Administered PTSD scale for the DSM-5 (CAPS-5). In addition, variability in diagnostic rates according to the divergent DSM-5 and ICD-11 criteria were explored. METHOD: The setting for this study was a Level 1 trauma center in a U.S. metropolitan city. Data were pooled from 2 studies (N = 309) and participants were administered the CAPS-5 at 1 (n = 139) or 6 months postinjury (n = 170). Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to compare several factor models, and prevalence rates based on DSM-5 and ICD-11 criteria were compared via z tests and kappa. RESULTS: CFAs of 5 factor structures indicated good fit for all models. A novel 2-factor model based on competing models of PTSD symptoms and modification indices was then tested. The 2-factor model of the CAPS-5 performed as well or better on most indices compared to a 7-factor hybrid. Comparisons of PTSD prevalence rates found no significant differences, but agreement was variable. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that the CAPS-5 can be seen as measuring 2 distinct phenomena: posttraumatic stress disorder and general posttraumatic dysphoria. This is an important contribution to the current debate on which latent factors constitute PTSD and may reduce discordance. (PsycINFO Database Record

Utility of the injured trauma survivor screen to predict PTSD and depression during hospital admission.

BACKGROUND: The brief, easily administered screen, the Injured Trauma Survivor Screen (ITSS), was created to identify trauma survivors at risk for development of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and depression. METHODS: An item pool of PTSD risk factors was created and given, along with a previously created screen, to patients admitted to two Level 1 trauma centers. The Clinician Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-5, the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5, and the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale Revised were given during a 1-month follow-up. A total of 139 participants were included (n = 139; µ age = 41.06; 30.9% female; 47.5% White/Caucasian; 39.6% Black/African American; 10.1% Latino/Hispanic; 1.4% American Indian; and 1.4% other). Stepwise bivariate logistic regression was used to determine items most strongly associated with PTSD and depression diagnosis 1 month after injury. RESULTS: Forty participants met criteria for a PTSD diagnosis and 28 for depression at follow-up (22 comorbid). ROC curve analysis was used to determine sensitivity (PTSD = 75.00, Depression = 75.00), specificity (PTSD = 93.94, Depression = 95.5), NPV (PTSD = 90.3, Depression = 80.8), and PPV (PTSD = 83.3, Depression = 93.8) of the final nine-item measure. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence for the utility of a predictive screen, the ITSS, to predict which injured trauma survivors admitted to the hospital are at the most risk for developing symptoms of PTSD and depression 1 month after injury. The ITSS is a short, easily administered tool that can aid in reducing the untreated cases of PTSD and depression. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic study, level III.

Lisfranc injury and Jones fracture in sports.

This article provides an update and overview of Lisfranc injury and Jones fracture in the athletic population. Sports-related Lisfranc sprains or fractures are subtle injuries that can be easily missed. Now, there is greater understanding of midfoot sprains that represent a spectrum of injury to the Lisfranc ligament complex. Most types of fifth metatarsal fractures have a favorable prognosis and can be treated conservatively. The treatment options for Jones fractures in athletes have been much debated. This article discusses issues related to anatomy, mechanism of injury, clinical presentation, imaging, and diagnosis, which are necessary to appropriately treat these injuries.

Very high users of platelet transfusions in the neonatal intensive care unit.

BACKGROUND: In neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) practice, a small percentage of the patients receive a large proportion of the platelet (PLT) transfusions administered. This study sought to better define this very-high-user group. To accomplish this, records of all NICU patients in a multihospital health care system who, during a recent 5(1/2)-year period, received 20 or more PLT transfusions were examined. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Electronic medical record repositories of Intermountain Healthcare neonates with dates of birth from January 1, 2002, through June 30, 2007, who received 20 or more PLT transfusions were identified. The causes of the thrombocytopenia were sought, whether each transfusion given was a treatment for bleeding versus prophylaxis was determined, whether each transfusion was compliant with our transfusion guidelines was judged, and the outcomes were tabulated. RESULTS: During this period, 45 patients received 20 or more PLT transfusions (median, 29; range, 20-79). Medical conditions could be categorized into six diagnoses: 1) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH; n = 13), 2) fungal sepsis (n = 8), 3) ECMO for reasons other than CDH (n = 8), 4) necrotizing enterocolitis (n = 7), 5) bacterial sepsis (n = 7), and 6) congenital hyporegenerative thrombocytopenia (n = 2). Nineteen percent of the transfusions were ordered for oozing, bruising, or bleeding and 81 percent for prophylaxis. Thirty-six percent of transfusions were given in violation of our transfusion guidelines. Forty-nine percent of the high users died, but no deaths were due to hemorrhage. All survivors developed chronic lung disease, and all survivors weighing less than 1250 g at birth developed retinopathy of prematurity. CONCLUSIONS: Almost all patients that received 20 or more PLT transfusions had an acquired, consumptive thrombocytopenia. All could have received fewer transfusions had the guidelines already in place been observed. Eighty-one percent fewer PLT transfusions would have been administered had the paradigm been transfusing only if oozing, bruising, or bleeding was present.