A comparison of the CAPS-5 and PCL-5 to assess PTSD in military and veteran treatment-seeking samples.

Background: This study was an examination of the puzzling finding that people assessed for symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) consistently score higher on the self-report PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5) than the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-5 (CAPS-5). Both scales purportedly assess PTSD severity with the same number of items, scaling, and scoring range, but differences in scores between measures make outcomes difficult to decipher.Objective: The purpose of this study was to examine several possible psychometric reasons for the discrepancy in scores between interview and self-report.Method: Data were combined from four clinical trials to examine the baseline and posttreatment assessments of treatment-seeking active duty military personnel and veterans.Results: As in previous studies, total scores were higher on the PCL-5 compared to the CAPS-5 at baseline and posttreatment. At baseline, PCL-5 scores were higher on all 20 items, with small to large differences in effect size. At posttreatment, only three items were not significantly different. Distributions of item responses and wording of scale anchors and items were examined as possible explanations of the difference between measures. Participants were more likely to use the full range of responses on the PCL-5 compared to interviewers.Conclusions: Suggestions for improving the congruence between these two scales are discussed. Administration of interviews by trained assessors can be resource intensive, so it is important that those assessing PTSD severity are afforded confidence in the equivalence of their assessment of PTSD regardless of the assessment method used.

The purpose of this study was to examine two commonly used measures of posttraumatic stress disorder, the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS-5), an interview measure, and the PTSD Checklist (PCL-5), a self-report measure, to explore discrepancies in scores.Both measures have the same number of items and range of scores assessing the identical 20 symptoms of PTSD, yet higher scores are reported on the PCL-5.It appears that the differences in wording of the anchors may contribute to discrepancies in scoring.Addressing these problems would allow for a better match in scoring between scales.

Self-Rated Versus Clinician-Rated Assessment of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder: An Evaluation of Discrepancies Between the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 and the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-5.

Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is commonly assessed with self-rated or clinician-rated measures. Although scores from these assessment modalities are strongly associated, they are often discrepant for individual symptoms, total symptom severity, and diagnostic status. To date, no known studies have empirically identified the sources of these discrepancies. In the present study, we had three aims: (a) replicate previously identified discrepancies; (b) examine contribution of possible objective predictors of discrepancies, including negative response bias, random responding, conscientiousness, neuroticism, and verbal IQ; and (c) identify subjective sources of discrepancies through analysis of participant feedback. Trauma-exposed undergraduates (N = 60) were administered the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5), the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-5 (CAPS-5), and other questionnaires. Interviewers identified discrepancies between corresponding PCL-5/CAPS-5 scores and asked participants to describe their attributions for discrepancies. Discrepancies, both dimensional and dichotomous, occurred at the item, cluster, and total score level. Objective predictors were weakly associated with discrepancies. The most commonly reported reasons for discrepancies were time-frame reminders, comprehension of symptoms, trauma-related attribution errors, increased awareness, and general errors. These findings help explain discordance between the PCL-5 and CAPS-5, and inform use and interpretation of these two widely used PTSD measures in clinical and research applications.

Enhancing Prolonged Exposure therapy for PTSD using physiological biomarker-driven technology.

Prolonged Exposure (PE) therapy is one of the most efficacious, evidence-based treatments for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). A key component of PE involves in vivo exposures (IVEs) during which patients approach situations or activities in "real life" that are safe but avoided because they elicit a fear response. Despite their critical role in treatment, little research has focused on IVEs. This gap in knowledge is primarily due to the fact that IVEs are typically conducted by patients in between therapy sessions, leaving clinicians reliant upon patient self-report. This approach has numerous shortcomings, which the current study addresses by leveraging technology to develop an innovative device that allows for physiological, biomarker-driven, therapist-guided IVEs. The new system enables clinicians to virtually accompany patients during IVEs and provides real-time physiological (heart rate, skin conductance) and self-report (subjective units of distress) data that clinicians can use to modify the exposure and optimize therapeutic value. This Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Phase I project aims to: (1) integrate physiological sensors and live audio/visual streaming into a system for clinicians to guide patients during IVEs; (2) determine feasibility and acceptability of the system; and (3) conduct a pilot randomized clinical trial among veterans with PTSD (N = 40) to evaluate the preliminary efficacy of the system in reducing PTSD symptoms during PE. This paper describes the rationale, design, and methodology of the Phase I project. The findings from this study have the potential to innovate clinical practice, advance the science of exposure therapy, and improve clinical outcomes.

Comparing written exposure therapy to Prolonged Exposure for the treatment of PTSD in a veteran sample: A non-inferiority randomized design.

Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is highly prevalent among veterans. Although there are effective treatment approaches for PTSD, such as Prolonged Exposure (PE) and Cognitive Processing Therapy, many providers trained in these approaches do not use them, or use them without sufficient fidelity, and veterans drop out of these treatments at very high rates. The time intensive nature of these treatments is frequently cited as a barrier to receiving the treatment among veterans and delivering the treatment among providers. According, there is an urgent need to establish more efficient and effective PTSD treatment approaches in order to meet the needs of veterans seeking care. Written exposure therapy (WET) is an efficient, exposure-based treatment, and may represent a plausible alternative treatment option to address PTSD in veterans. Although WET has been found to be effective and non-inferior to more time intensive trauma-focused treatment, it has not yet been investigated with a veteran sample. In an ongoing randomized controlled trial (RCT) we are investigating whether WET is non-inferior in treating PTSD compared with the more time intensive PE. The study sample will include 150 men and women veterans diagnosed with PTSD who are randomly assigned to either WET (n = 75) or PE (n = 75). Participants are assessed prior to treatment and 10-, 20-, and 30-weeks after the first treatment session. The primary outcome is PTSD symptom severity assessed with the Clinician Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-5. Establishing that PTSD can be treated effectively with fewer treatment sessions would represent a significant advance in improving access to evidence-based care for veterans with PTSD.

Written exposure therapy and app-delivered mindfulness-based meditation for PTSD and subthreshold PTSD in China: Design of a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and subthreshold PTSD are still major global concerns, especially in developing areas short of mental health resources. Written exposure therapy (WET), a brief 5-session treatment, has been found to be effective in reducing PTSD symptoms, but no studies have examined it in an Eastern context. Mindfulness-based meditation mobile application may be a promising approach to reduce insomnia comorbid with PTSD. The current study aims to: 1) examine the effectiveness of WET for Chinese PTSD and subthreshold PTSD patients, and 2) examine the effectiveness of adding a mindfulness-based application (MBA) to WET for reducing comorbid insomnia. METHODS: The randomized controlled trial will enroll 150 adults with subthreshold/full PTSD and comorbid insomnia. Participants will be randomly assigned to written exposure therapy plus mindfulness-based application condition (WET + MBA, n = 50), written exposure therapy alone (WET, n = 50), or minimal contact control (MMC, n = 50). Clinical interview of the primary outcome (PTSD symptoms) will be administrated at baseline, posttreatment, 3- and 6- month follow-up, while self-reported PTSD symptoms and secondary outcomes (insomnia severity) will be administrated at baseline, every week and all follow-ups. DISCUSSION: This is the first study applying WET in Chinese PTSD patients, as well as examining a mindfulness-based mobile application as a treatment add-on for comorbid insomnia. Study findings will contribute to the knowledge of the effectiveness of WET and a mindfulness-based mobile application, and the development of a culture-adapted treatment protocol. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ChiCTR, ChiCTR2000034119. Registered 24 June 2020, http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=55,467.

Study design for a randomized clinical trial of cognitive-behavioral therapy for posttraumatic headache.

Posttraumatic headache (PTH) is a common debilitating condition arising from head injury and is highly prevalent among military service members and veterans with traumatic brain injury (TBI). Diagnosis and treatment for PTH is still evolving, and surprisingly little is known about the putative mechanisms that drive these headaches. This manuscript describes the design of a randomized clinical trial of two nonpharmacological (i.e., behavioral) interventions for posttraumatic headache. Design of this trial required careful consideration of PTH diagnosis and inclusion criteria, which was challenging due to the lack of standard clinical characteristics in PTH unique from other types of headaches. The treatments under study differed in clinical focus and dose (i.e., number of treatment sessions), but the trial was designed to balance the treatments as well as possible. Finally, while the primary endpoints for pain research can vary from assessments of pain intensity to objective and subjective functional measures, this trial of PTH interventions chose carefully to establish clinically relevant endpoints and to maximize the opportunity to detect significant differences between groups with two primary outcomes. All these issues are discussed in this manuscript.