Search

As part of the development of the Eleventh Revision of International Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD-11), the World Health Organization Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse is conducting a series of case-controlled field studies using a new and powerful method to test the application by clinicians of the proposed ICD-11 diagnostic guidelines for mental and behavioural disorders. This article describes the case-controlled field study for Disorders Specifically Associated with Stress. Using a vignette-based experimental methodology, 1,738 international mental health professionals diagnosed standardized cases designed to test key differences between the proposed diagnostic guidelines for ICD-11 and corresponding guidelines for ICD-10. Across eight comparisons, several proposed changes for ICD-11, including the addition of Complex PTSD and Prolonged Grief Disorder, produced significantly improved diagnostic decisions and clearer application of diagnostic guidelines compared to ICD-10. However, several key areas were also identified, such as the description of the diagnostic requirement of re-experiencing in PTSD, in which the guidelines were not consistently applied as intended. These results informed specific revisions to improve the clarity of the proposed ICD-11 diagnostic guidelines. The next step will be to further test these guidelines in clinic-based studies using real patients in relevant settings.

ABSTRACTBackground: The International Trauma Questionnaire (ITQ) is a validated measure that assesses ICD-11 posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and complex PTSD (CPTSD). An important task is to determine whether the ITQ is an appropriate evaluative measure for clinical trials.Objective: To assess the psychometric properties of the ITQ in the context of treatment and determine if the ITQ measures reliable and clinically significant change over the course of a psychosocial intervention.Method: Analyses were based on data from an online skills training programme delivered to 254 U.S. Veterans. Reliability and validity of the ITQ scores were assessed at baseline. Changes in symptom scores and probable diagnostic rates were compared at pre-, mid- and post-treatment. A reliable change index (RCI) score was computed to classify participants as improved, unchanged, or worsened. The PCL-5 was used as a comparison measure.Results: Baseline concurrent and factorial validity was similar to previous studies. Internal consistency at each assessment was excellent and comparable to the PCL-5. Decline in symptoms from pre-to-post-treatment was significant for PTSD and CPTSD symptom profiles. Rate of probable disorder (PTSD or CPTSD) declined significantly from pre-treatment to post-treatment. Pre-to-post treatment declines exceeded the critical RCI values for the ITQ. Clinically significant changes were observed where most participants improved, some stayed the same, and few worsened. The performance of the ITQ was consistent with the PCL-5 regarding sensitivity to change.Conclusion: This study provides the first demonstration that the ITQ measures reliable and clinically significant treatment-related change of ICD-11 PTSD and CPTSD symptoms.

ABSTRACTBackground: Veterans have higher rates of PTSD and depression compared to the general population and experience substantial functional impairment. Impairment in social functioning has been a significant concern among Veterans, particularly rural Veterans, who have limited access to mental health care and are at risk for social isolation.Objective: A mixed-method study was implemented to evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of webSTAIR, a web-based skills training programme, paired with home-based telehealth sessions. It was hypothesized that the programme would lead not only to reductions in PTSD and depression but also to improvements in social functioning.Method: Participants were 80 trauma-exposed Veterans enrolled in rural-serving VHA facilities with clinically elevated symptoms of either PTSD or depression. The study directed substantial outreach efforts to rural women Veterans and those who have experienced military sexual trauma (MST).Results: Significant improvements were obtained with PTSD and depression symptoms as well as in social functioning, emotion regulation, and interpersonal problems at post-treatment and 3-month follow-up. Ratings of therapeutic alliance were high as were reports of overall satisfaction in the programme. There were no differences by gender or MST status in symptom outcomes or satisfaction.Conclusions: The results support the feasibility and effectiveness of this integrated telehealth web-based skills training programme for both male and female Veterans as well as for those with and without MST. The focus on resource building and improved functioning make this programme of particular interest. Further testing is warranted.

ABSTRACTThis letter to the editor responds to a recent EJPT editorial and following commentary which express concerns about the validity of the ICD-11 complex PTSD (CPTSD) diagnosis. Achterhof and colleagues caution that latent profile analyses and latent class analyses, which have been frequently used to demonstrate the discriminative validity of the ICD-11 PTSD and CPTSD constructs, have limitations and cannot be relied on to definitively determine the validity of the diagnosis. Ford takes a broader perspective and introduces the concept of ‘cPTSD’ which describes a wide ranging set of symptoms identified from studies related to DSM-IV, DSM-V and ICD-11 and proposes that the validity of the ICD-11 CPTSD is in question as it does not address the multiple symptoms identified from previous trauma-related disorders. We argue that ICD-11 CPTSD is a theory-driven, empirically supported construct that has internal consistency and conceptual coherence and that it need not explain nor resolve the inconsistencies of past formulations to demonstrate its validity. We do agree with Ford and with Achterhof and colleagues that no one single statistical process can definitively answer the question of whether CPTSD is a valid construct. We reference several studies utilizing many different statistical approaches implemented across several countries, the overwhelming majority of which have supported the validity of ICD-11 as a unique construct. We conclude with our own cautions about ICD-11 CPTSD research to date and identify important next steps.

ABSTRACTThis letter provides an update on the activities of “The Global Collaboration on Traumatic Stress” (GC-TS) as first described by Schnyder et al. in 2017. It presents in further detail the projects of the first theme, in particular the development of and initial data on the Global Psychotrauma Screen (GPS), a brief instrument designed to screen for the wide range of potential outcomes of trauma. English language data and ongoing studies in several languages provide a first indication that the GPS is a feasible, reliable and valid tool, a tool that may be very useful in the current pandemic of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Further multi-language and cross-cultural validation is needed.Since the start of the GC-TS, new themes have been introduced to focus on in the coming years: a) Forcibly displaced persons, b) Global prevalence of stress and trauma related disorders, c) Socio-emotional development across cultures, and d) Collaborating to make traumatic stress research data “FAIR”. The most recent theme added is that of Global crises, currently focusing on COVID-19-related projects.

ABSTRACTBackground: Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) have been identified as an important public health problem with serious implications. Less well understood is how distinct configurations of childhood adversities carry differential risks for mental health, emotional, and social outcomes later in life.Objective: To determine if distinct profiles of childhood adversities exist for males and females and to examine if unique associations exist between the resultant latent profiles of childhood adversities and multiple indicators of mental health and social and emotional wellbeing in adulthood.Method: Participants (N= 1,839) were a nationally representative household sample of adults currently residing in the USA and the data were collected via online self-report questionnaires. Latent class analysis was used to identify the optimal number of classes to explain ACE co-occurrence among males and females, separately. ANOVAs, chi-square tests, and t-tests were used to compare male and female classes across multiple mental health, emotional, and social wellbeing variables in adulthood.Results: Females were significantly more likely than males to report a range of ACEs and mental health, social, and emotional difficulties in adulthood. Two- and four-class models were identified as the best fit for males and females, respectively, indicating more complexity and variation in ACE exposures among females. For males and female, ACEs were strongly associated with poorer mental health, emotional, and social outcomes in adulthood. Among females, growing up in a dysfunctional home environment was a significant risk factor for adverse social outcomes in adulthood.Conclusions: Males and females have distinct patterns of childhood adversities, with females experiencing more complex and varied patterns of childhood adversity. These patterns of ACEs were associated with numerous negative mental, emotional, and social outcomes among both sexes.

ABSTRACTTrauma is a global issue. The great majority of the global burden of disease arising from mental health conditions occurs in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), among populations in political, economic, and/or cultural transition and those struck by forced migration. These mental health problems frequently arise as a result of traumatic events that adversely affect adults, children, and families, including war, mass violence, natural disasters, and accidents. In response to this, the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies (ISTSS) launched the Global Initiative to have a stronger global impact on trauma-related issues. As part of this initiative, the Global Collaboration was established by representatives of eight professional organizations active in the field of traumatic stress. The group decided to focus on childhood abuse and neglect as its first collaboration. They collected guidelines worldwide, providing the basis for a synthesized core guide for prevention and treatment that can be customized for specific cultural contexts. The resulting ‘Internet information on Childhood Abuse and Neglect’ (iCAN) is a comprehensive guide for adults who have been affected by childhood abuse and neglect, as well as for the survivors’ significant others. It is currently provided in eight languages, and is freely available at the homepage of ISTSS and other websites. A second achievement of the Global Collaboration is the validation of the Computerized Childhood Attachment and Relational Trauma Screen (CARTS), a self-report measure designed to measure occurrences of childhood maltreatment, and its translation into multiple languages, including Croatian, Dutch, French, Georgian, German, Italian, Japanese, Norwegian, Russian, and Spanish. A study is currently planned to collect normative responses to the questionnaire, and to conduct cross-cultural comparisons. The Global Collaboration’s success may be seen as an encouraging step towards a truly global structure in the field of traumatic stress.

Over the past three decades, research and clinical practice related to the field of traumatic stress have developed tremendously. In parallel with the steady accumulation of basic knowledge, therapeutic approaches have been developed to treat people suffering from posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and other trauma-related psychological problems. Today, a number of evidence-based treatments are available. They differ in various ways; however, they also have a number of commonalities. Given this situation, clinicians may wonder which treatment program to use, or more specifically, which treatment components are critical for a successful therapy. In this article, seven pioneers who have developed empirically supported psychotherapies for trauma-related disorders were asked to compose an essay of three parts: first, to provide a brief summary of the treatment they have developed; second, to identify three key interventions that are common and critical in treating PTSD; and third, to suggest important topics and future directions for research. The paper ends with a summary highlighting the identified commonalities (psychoeducation; emotion regulation and coping skills; imaginal exposure; cognitive processing, restructuring, and/or meaning making; emotions; and memory processes), pointing to future directions such as trying to better understand the underlying mechanisms of action, and developing treatments that are tailored to the needs of different patient groups.

BackgroundThere has been debate regarding whether Complex Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (Complex PTSD) is distinct from Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) when the latter is comorbid with PTSD.ObjectiveTo determine whether the patterns of symptoms endorsed by women seeking treatment for childhood abuse form classes that are consistent with diagnostic criteria for PTSD, Complex PTSD, and BPD.MethodA latent class analysis (LCA) was conducted on an archival dataset of 280 women with histories of childhood abuse assessed for enrollment in a clinical trial for PTSD.ResultsThe LCA revealed four distinct classes of individuals: a Low Symptom class characterized by low endorsements on all symptoms; a PTSD class characterized by elevated symptoms of PTSD but low endorsement of symptoms that define the Complex PTSD and BPD diagnoses; a Complex PTSD class characterized by elevated symptoms of PTSD and self-organization symptoms that defined the Complex PTSD diagnosis but low on the symptoms of BPD; and a BPD class characterized by symptoms of BPD. Four BPD symptoms were found to greatly increase the odds of being in the BPD compared to the Complex PTSD class: frantic efforts to avoid abandonment, unstable sense of self, unstable and intense interpersonal relationships, and impulsiveness.ConclusionsFindings supported the construct validity of Complex PTSD as distinguishable from BPD. Key symptoms that distinguished between the disorders were identified, which may aid in differential diagnosis and treatment planning.

BackgroundThe WHO International Classification of Diseases, 11th version (ICD-11), has proposed two related diagnoses, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and complex PTSD within the spectrum of trauma and stress-related disorders.ObjectiveTo use latent profile analysis (LPA) to determine whether there are classes of individuals that are distinguishable according to the PTSD and complex PTSD symptom profiles and to identify potential differences in the type of stressor and severity of impairment associated with each profile.MethodAn LPA and related analyses were conducted on 302 individuals who had sought treatment for interpersonal traumas ranging from chronic trauma (e.g., childhood abuse) to single-incident events (e.g., exposure to 9/11 attacks).ResultsThe LPA revealed three classes of individuals: (1) a complex PTSD class defined by elevated PTSD symptoms as well as disturbances in three domains of self-organization: affective dysregulation, negative self-concept, and interpersonal problems; (2) a PTSD class defined by elevated PTSD symptoms but low scores on the three self-organization symptom domains; and (3) a low symptom class defined by low scores on all symptoms and problems. Chronic trauma was more strongly predictive of complex PTSD than PTSD and, conversely, single-event trauma was more strongly predictive of PTSD. In addition, complex PTSD was associated with greater impairment than PTSD. The LPA analysis was completed both with and without individuals with borderline personality disorder (BPD) yielding identical results, suggesting the stability of these classes regardless of BPD comorbidity.ConclusionPreliminary data support the proposed ICD-11 distinction between PTSD and complex PTSD and support the value of testing the clinical utility of this distinction in field trials. Replication of results is necessary.