Refine
Language
- English (3)
Has Fulltext
- yes (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (3) (remove)
Keywords
- TEPT (3) (remove)
Institute
- Medizin (1)
- Psychologie (1)
- Psychologie und Sportwissenschaften (1)
Background: Trauma-related guilt and shame are crucial for the development and maintenance of PTSD (posttraumatic stress disorder). We developed an intervention combining cognitive techniques with loving-kindness meditations (C-METTA) that specifically target these emotions. C-METTA is an intervention of six weekly individual treatment sessions followed by a four-week practice phase.
Objective: This study examined C-METTA in a proof-of-concept study within a randomized wait-list controlled trial.
Method: We randomly assigned 32 trauma-exposed patients with a DSM-5 diagnosis to C-METTA or a wait-list condition (WL). Primary outcomes were clinician-rated PTSD symptoms (CAPS-5) and trauma-related guilt and shame. Secondary outcomes included psychopathology, self-criticism, well-being, and self-compassion. Outcomes were assessed before the intervention phase and after the practice phase.
Results: Mixed-design analyses showed greater reductions in C-METTA versus WL in clinician-rated PTSD symptoms (d = −1.09), guilt (d = −2.85), shame (d = −2.14), psychopathology and self-criticism.
Conclusion: Our findings support positive outcomes of C-METTA and might contribute to improved care for patients with stress-related disorders. The study was registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00023470).
HIGHLIGHTS
C-METTA is an intervention that addresses trauma-related guilt and shame and combines cognitive interventions with loving-kindness meditations.
A proof-of-concept study was conducted examining C-METTA in a wait-list randomized controlled trial
C-METTA led to reductions in trauma-related guilt and shame and PTSD symptoms.
Background: ICD-11 features Complex Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (CPTSD) as a new diagnosis. To date, very few studies have investigated CPTSD in young patients, and there is a need for evidence on effective treatment.
Objective: The present study evaluates the applicability of developmentally adapted cognitive processing therapy (D-CPT) for CPTSD in young patients in a secondary analysis of the treatment condition of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) investigating the efficacy of D-CPT.
Methods: The D-CPT treatment group in the original study included 44 patients (14–21 years) with DSM-IV PTSD after childhood abuse. We used the ICD-11 algorithm to divide the sample into a probable CPTSD and a non-CPTSD group. We performed multilevel models for interviewer-rated and self-rated PTSD symptoms with fixed effects of group (CPTSD, non-CPTSD) and time (up to 12 months follow-up) and their interaction. Treatment response rates for both groups were calculated.
Results: Nineteen (43.2%) patients fulfilled criteria for probable ICD-11 CPTSD while 25 (56.8%) did not. Both CPTSD and non-CPTSD groups showed symptom reduction over time. The CPTSD group reported higher symptom severity before and after treatment. Linear improvement and treatment response rates were similar for both groups. D-CPT reduced symptoms of disturbances in self-regulation in both groups.
Discussion: Both, patients with and without probable ICD-11 CPTSD seemed to benefit from D-CPT and the treatment also reduced disturbances in self-regulation.
Conclusion: This study presents initial evidence of the applicability of D-CPT in clinical practice for young patients with CPTSD. It remains debatable whether CPTSD implies different treatment needs as opposed to PTSD.
Background: A diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) requires the identification of one or more traumatic events, designated the index trauma, which serves as the basis for assessment of severity of PTSD. In patients who have experienced more than one traumatic event, severity may depend on the exact definition of the index trauma. Defining the index trauma as the worst single incident may result in PTSD severity scores that differ from what would be seen if the index trauma included multiple events.
Objective: This study aimed to investigate the impact of the definition of the index trauma on PTSD baseline severity scores and treatment outcome.
Method: A planned secondary analysis was performed on data from a subset (N = 58) of patients enrolled in a trial evaluating the efficacy of a 12 week residential dialectical behavioural therapy programme for PTSD related to childhood abuse (DBT-PTSD). Assessments of the severity of PTSD were conducted at admission, at the end of the 12 week treatment period, and at 6 and 12 weeks post-treatment, using the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale. The index trauma was defined with respect to both the worst single incident and up to three qualitatively distinct traumatic events.
Results: When the index trauma included multiple traumas, PTSD severity scores were significantly higher and improvements from pre- to post-treatment were significantly lower than when the index trauma was defined as the worst single incident.
Conclusions: In patients with PTSD who have experienced multiple traumas, defining the index trauma as the worst single incident may miss some aspects of clinically relevant symptomatology, thereby leading to a possibly biased interpretation of treatment effects. In DBT-PTSD, treatment effects were lower when the index trauma included multiple traumatic events. More research is needed to determine the impact of the various index trauma definitions on the evaluation of other trauma-focused treatments.