DSM-5 criterion-a-based trauma types in service members and veterans seeking treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder.

OBJECTIVE: In posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), the assumption of the equipotentiality of traumas ignores potentially unique contexts and consequences of different traumas. Accordingly, Stein et al. (2012) developed a reliable typing scheme in which assessors categorized descriptions of traumatic events into six "types": life threat to self (LTS), life threat to other, aftermath of violence (AV), traumatic loss, moral injury by self (MIS), and moral injury by other (MIO). We extended this research by validating the typing scheme using participant endorsements of type, rather than assesor-based types. We examined the concordance of participant and assesor types, frequency, and validity of participant-based trauma types by examining associations with baseline mental and behavioral health problems. METHOD: Interviewers enrolled military personnel and veterans (N = 1,443) in clinical trials of PTSD and helped them select the most currently distressing Criterion-A trauma. Participants and, archivally, assessors typed the distressing aspect(s) of this experience. RESULTS: AV was the most frequently participant-endorsed type, but LTS was the most frequently rated worst part of an event. Although participants endorsed MIS and MIO the least frequently, these were associated with worse mental and behavioral health problems. The agreement between participants and assessors regarding the worst part of the event was poor. CONCLUSION: Because of discrepancies between participant and assessor typologies, clinical researchers should use participants' ratings, and these should trump assessor judgment. Differences in pretreatment behavioral and mental health problems across some participant-endorsed trauma types partially support the validity of the participant ratings. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

An examination of the criterion-related validity of varying methods of indexing clinically significant change in posttraumatic stress disorder treatment.

OBJECTIVE: Clinicians, patients, and researchers need benchmarks to index individual-level clinically significant change (CSC) to guide decision making and inferences about treatment efficacy. Yet, there is no consensus best practice for determining CSC for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) treatments. We examined criterion-related validity of the most common approach-Jacobson and Truax's (J&T; 1991) procedures for indexing CSC. We generated and compared four methods of calculating the J&T indices of CSC (two sets of sample-specific inputs, putatively norm-referenced benchmarks, and a combination of sample-specific and norm-referenced criteria) with respect to their association with a criterion index of quality of life (QoL). METHOD: Participants were 91 women Veterans enrolled in a randomized clinical trial for PTSD who completed self-report measures on PTSD symptoms and various domains of QoL and functioning, pre- and posttreatment. For each of the four methods used to calculate CSC, the QoL composite was regressed onto the CSC categories. RESULTS: All methods explained large variance in change in QoL. Across all methods, participants categorized as unchanged had smaller changes in QoL, compared with those who improved or had probable recovery. The norm-referenced benchmarks accounted for the relatively largest amount of variance in QoL, but categorized the fewest patients as having made CSC. CONCLUSIONS: The J&T methodology for indexing CSC in PTSD symptoms has criterion-related validity, and a norm-referenced benchmark appears to be the most potent. However, the norm-referenced parameters may be overly specific, potentially leading to an underestimate of improvement. Research is needed to test the generalizability of these results. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Expected symptom change trajectories for the early identification of probable treatment nonresponse in VA PTSD specialty care clinics: A proof-of-concept.

The purpose of measurement-based care (MBC) is to detect treatment nonresponse sufficiently early in treatment to adjust treatment plans and prevent failure or dropout. Thus, the potential of MBC is to provide the infrastructure for a flexible, patient-centered approach to evidence-based care. However, MBC is underutilized across the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) specialty clinics, likely because no actionable, empirically determined guidelines for using repeated measurement effectively are currently available to clinicians. With data collected as part of routine care in VA PTSD specialty clinics across the United States in the year prior to COVID-19 (n = 2,182), we conducted a proof-of-concept for a method of generating session-by-session benchmarks of probable patient nonresponse to treatment, which can be visualized alongside individual patient data using the most common measure of PTSD symptoms used in VA specialty clinics, the PTSD Checklist for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edition (PCL-5). Using survival analysis, we first identified the probability of cases reaching clinically significant change at each session, as well as any significant moderators of treatment response. We then generated a multilevel model with initial symptom burden predicting the trajectory of PCL-5 scores across sessions. Finally, we determined the slowest changing 50% and 60% of all cases to generate benchmarks at each session for each level of the predictor(s) and then assessed the accuracy of these benchmarks at each session for classifying treatment responders and nonresponders. The final models were able to accurately identify nonresponders as early as the sixth session of treatment. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

A Public Health Framework for Preventing Mental Disorders in the Context of Pandemics.

The COVID-19 pandemic has universally threatened the building blocks of mental health, well-being, and quality of life, namely, expectations of safety, connectedness, hope, and individual and societal efficacy. Consequently, unprecedently large numbers of individuals are significantly stressed and many are at risk for relapse of mental health problems, exacerbations of existing mental and behavioral health problems, and new onset clinical problems. Because of the scope of the problem, a population-based public health perspective is needed, which in the context of disasters has well-established theories and prevention approaches. Public health approaches to disasters and pandemics focus on preventing subclinical problems from becoming clinical disorders, in comparison to clinical care approaches that focus on treating established disorders. Fortunately, specialty care clinicians who typically think about assessing and treating established disorders have the training and clinical competencies to deliver prevention-focused interventions. This paper is designed to help specialty care clinicians who use cognitive-behavioral strategies to understand the biopsychosocial impacts and resource deficits associated with COVID-19-related stressors and the public health perspective to address them. We also provide ways clinicians can help people who are suffering from significant stress and resource deficits bounce back and regain functioning. We describe psychological first aid, stress management, repeated ecological assessment, writing about stressors, problem-solving, and behavioral activation approaches to assist individuals at risk for enduring stress-linked problems.

Adaptive disclosure, a combat-specific PTSD treatment, versus cognitive-processing therapy, in deployed marines and sailors: A randomized controlled non-inferiority trial.

Adaptive Disclosure (AD) is a new emotion-focused psychotherapy for combat-related PTSD. As a second step in the evaluation process, we conducted a non-inferiority (NI) trial of AD, relative to Cognitive Processing Therapy - Cognitive Therapy version (CPT-C), an established first-line psychotherapy. Participants were 122 U.S. Marines and Sailors. The primary endpoint was PTSD symptom severity change from pre- to posttreatment, using the Clinician Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-IV. Secondary endpoints were depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9; PHQ-9) and functioning (Veterans Rand Health Survey-12; VR-12). For cases with complete data, the mean difference in CAPS-IV change scores was 0.33 and the confidence interval (CI) did not include the predefined NI margin (95% CI =-10.10, 9.44). The mean difference in PHQ-9 change scores was -1.01 and the CI did not include the predefined margin (95% CI = -3.31, 1.28), as was the case for the VR-12 Physical Component and VR-12 Mental Component subscale scores (0.27; 95% CI = -4.50, 3.95, and -2.10; 95% CI = -7.03, 2.83, respectively). A series of intent-to-treat sensitivity analyses confirmed these results. The differential effect size for CAPS-IV was d = 0.01 (nonsignificant). As predicted, Adaptive Disclosure was found to be no less effective than a first-line psychotherapy.

Parameters of Aggressive Behavior in a Treatment-Seeking Sample of Military Personnel: A Secondary Analysis of Three Randomized Controlled Trials of Evidence-Based PTSD Treatments.

Aggressive behavior is prevalent among veterans of post-9/11 conflicts who have posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). However, little is known about whether PTSD treatments reduce aggression or the direction of the association between changes in PTSD symptoms and aggression in the context of PTSD treatment. We combined data from three clinical trials of evidence-based PTSD treatment in service members (N = 592) to: (1) examine whether PTSD treatment reduces psychological (e.g., verbal behavior) and physical aggression, and; (2) explore temporal associations between aggressive behavior and PTSD. Both psychological (Estimate = -2.20, SE = 0.07) and physical aggression (Estimate = -0.36, SE = 0.05) were significantly reduced from baseline to posttreatment follow-up. Lagged PTSD symptom reduction was not associated with reduced reports of aggression; however, higher baseline PTSD scores were significantly associated with greater reductions in psychological aggression (exclusively; ß = -0.67, 95% CI = -1.05, -0.30, SE = -3.49). Findings reveal that service members receiving PTSD treatment report substantial collateral changes in psychological aggression over time, particularly for participants with greater PTSD symptom severity. Clinicians should consider cotherapies or alternative ways of targeting physical aggression among service members with PTSD and alternative approaches to reduce psychological aggression among service members with relatively low PTSD symptom severity when considering evidence-based PTSD treatments.

Public Recognition and Perceptions of Obsessive Compulsive Disorder.

Previous research has indicated that the public's knowledge on obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD) is poor. Public understanding and perception of OCD may be one contributor to this issue. Given that mental health literacy is an important first step for those to receive the appropriate care, we sought to understand more about the public's awareness and perceptions of OCD. Data regarding knowledge of OCD were collected through a New York statewide telephone survey (N = 806). Results indicated that those who had never heard of OCD were more likely to be ethnic minorities, have a lower income, and less education. Most participants described OCD either in terms of compulsions or in terms of perfectionism. Almost half (46.5%) of participants did not think there is a difference between someone with OCD and someone who is obsessive-compulsive. These findings are consistent with previous literature regarding race and treatment seeking behaviors.