Search

Introduction to the 3rd Biennial Conference of the Society for Implementation Research Collaboration: advancing efficient methodologies through team science and community partnerships Cara Lewis, Doyanne Darnell, Suzanne Kerns, Maria Monroe-DeVita, Sara J. Landes, Aaron R. Lyon, Cameo Stanick, Shannon Dorsey, Jill Locke, Brigid Marriott, Ajeng Puspitasari, Caitlin Dorsey, Karin Hendricks, Andria Pierson, Phil Fizur, Katherine A. Comtois A1: A behavioral economic perspective on adoption, implementation, and sustainment of evidence-based interventions Lawrence A. Palinkas A2: Towards making scale up of evidence-based practices in child welfare systems more efficient and affordable Patricia Chamberlain A3: Mixed method examination of strategic leadership for evidence-based practice implementation Gregory A. Aarons, Amy E. Green, Mark. G. Ehrhart, Elise M. Trott, Cathleen E. Willging A4: Implementing practice change in Federally Qualified Health Centers: Learning from leaders’ experiences Maria E. Fernandez, Nicholas H. Woolf, Shuting (Lily) Liang, Natalia I. Heredia, Michelle Kegler, Betsy Risendal, Andrea Dwyer, Vicki Young, Dayna Campbell, Michelle Carvalho, Yvonne Kellar-Guenther A3: Mixed method examination of strategic leadership for evidence-based practice implementation Gregory A. Aarons, Amy E. Green, Mark. G. Ehrhart, Elise M. Trott, Cathleen E. Willging A4: Implementing practice change in Federally Qualified Health Centers: Learning from leaders’ experiences Maria E. Fernandez, Nicholas H. Woolf, Shuting (Lily) Liang, Natalia I. Heredia, Michelle Kegler, Betsy Risendal, Andrea Dwyer, Vicki Young, Dayna Campbell, Michelle Carvalho, Yvonne Kellar-Guenther A5: Efficient synthesis: Using qualitative comparative analysis and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research across diverse studies Laura J. Damschroder, Julie C. Lowery A6: Establishing a veterans engagement group to empower patients and inform Veterans Affairs (VA) health services research Sarah S. Ono, Kathleen F. Carlson, Erika K. Cottrell, Maya E. O’Neil, Travis L. Lovejoy A7: Building patient-practitioner partnerships in community oncology settings to implement behavioral interventions for anxious and depressed cancer survivors Joanna J. Arch, Jill L. Mitchell A8: Tailoring a Cognitive Behavioral Therapy implementation protocol using mixed methods, conjoint analysis, and implementation teams Cara C. Lewis, Brigid R. Marriott, Kelli Scott A9: Wraparound Structured Assessment and Review (WrapSTAR): An efficient, yet comprehensive approach to Wraparound implementation evaluation Jennifer Schurer Coldiron, Eric J. Bruns, Alyssa N. Hook A10: Improving the efficiency of standardized patient assessment of clinician fidelity: A comparison of automated actor-based and manual clinician-based ratings Benjamin C. Graham, Katelin Jordan A11: Measuring fidelity on the cheap Rochelle F. Hanson, Angela Moreland, Benjamin E. Saunders, Heidi S. Resnick A12: Leveraging routine clinical materials to assess fidelity to an evidence-based psychotherapy Shannon Wiltsey Stirman, Cassidy A. Gutner, Jennifer Gamarra, Dawne Vogt, Michael Suvak, Jennifer Schuster Wachen, Katherine Dondanville, Jeffrey S. Yarvis, Jim Mintz, Alan L. Peterson, Elisa V. Borah, Brett T. Litz, Alma Molino, Stacey Young McCaughanPatricia A. Resick A13: The video vignette survey: An efficient process for gathering diverse community opinions to inform an intervention Nancy Pandhi, Nora Jacobson, Neftali Serrano, Armando Hernandez, Elizabeth Zeidler- Schreiter, Natalie Wietfeldt, Zaher Karp A14: Using integrated administrative data to evaluate implementation of a behavioral health and trauma screening for children and youth in foster care Michael D. Pullmann, Barbara Lucenko, Bridget Pavelle, Jacqueline A. Uomoto, Andrea Negrete, Molly Cevasco, Suzanne E. U. Kerns A15: Intermediary organizations as a vehicle to promote efficiency and speed of implementation Robert P. Franks, Christopher Bory A16: Applying the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research constructs directly to qualitative data: The power of implementation science in action Edward J. Miech, Teresa M. Damush A17: Efficient and effective scaling-up, screening, brief interventions, and referrals to treatment (SBIRT) training: a snowball implementation model Jason Satterfield, Derek Satre, Maria Wamsley, Patrick Yuan, Patricia O’Sullivan A18: Matching models of implementation to system needs and capacities: addressing the human factor Helen Best, Susan Velasquez A19: Agency characteristics that facilitate efficient and successful implementation efforts Miya Barnett, Lauren Brookman-Frazee, Jennifer Regan, Nicole Stadnick, Alison Hamilton, Anna Lau A20: Rapid assessment process: Application to the Prevention and Early Intervention transformation in Los Angeles County Jennifer Regan, Alison Hamilton, Nicole Stadnick, Miya Barnett, Anna Lau, Lauren Brookman-Frazee A21: The development of the Evidence-Based Practice-Concordant Care Assessment: An assessment tool to examine treatment strategies across practices Nicole Stadnick, Anna Lau, Miya Barnett, Jennifer Regan, Scott Roesch, Lauren Brookman-Frazee A22: Refining a compilation of discrete implementation strategies and determining their importance and feasibility Byron J. Powell, Thomas J. Waltz, Matthew J. Chinman, Laura Damschroder, Jeffrey L. Smith, Monica M. Matthieu, Enola K. Proctor, JoAnn E. Kirchner A23: Structuring complex recommendations: Methods and general findings Thomas J. Waltz, Byron J. Powell, Matthew J. Chinman, Laura J. Damschroder, Jeffrey L. Smith, Monica J. Matthieu, Enola K. Proctor, JoAnn E. Kirchner A24: Implementing prolonged exposure for post-traumatic stress disorder in the Department of Veterans Affairs: Expert recommendations from the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) project Monica M. Matthieu, Craig S. Rosen, Thomas J. Waltz, Byron J. Powell, Matthew J. Chinman, Laura J. Damschroder, Jeffrey L. Smith, Enola K. Proctor, JoAnn E. Kirchner A25: When readiness is a luxury: Co-designing a risk assessment and quality assurance process with violence prevention frontline workers in Seattle, WA Sarah C. Walker, Asia S. Bishop, Mariko Lockhart A26: Implementation potential of structured recidivism risk assessments with justice- involved veterans: Qualitative perspectives from providers Allison L. Rodriguez, Luisa Manfredi, Andrea Nevedal, Joel Rosenthal, Daniel M. Blonigen A27: Developing empirically informed readiness measures for providers and agencies for the Family Check-Up using a mixed methods approach Anne M. Mauricio, Thomas D. Dishion, Jenna Rudo-Stern, Justin D. Smith A28: Pebbles, rocks, and boulders: The implementation of a school-based social engagement intervention for children with autism Jill Locke, Courtney Benjamin Wolk, Colleen Harker, Anne Olsen, Travis Shingledecker, Frances Barg, David Mandell, Rinad S. Beidas A29: Problem Solving Teletherapy (PST.Net): A stakeholder analysis examining the feasibility and acceptability of teletherapy in community based aging services Marissa C. Hansen, Maria P. Aranda, Isabel Torres-Vigil A30: A case of collaborative intervention design eventuating in behavior therapy sustainment and diffusion Bryan Hartzler A31: Implementation of suicide risk prevention in an integrated delivery system: Mental health specialty services Bradley Steinfeld, Tory Gildred, Zandrea Harlin, Fredric Shephard A32: Implementation team, checklist, evaluation, and feedback (ICED): A step-by-step approach to Dialectical Behavior Therapy program implementation Matthew S. Ditty, Andrea Doyle, John A. Bickel III, Katharine Cristaudo A33: The challenges in implementing muliple evidence-based practices in a community mental health setting Dan Fox, Sonia Combs A34: Using electronic health record technology to promote and support evidence-based practice assessment and treatment intervention David H. Lischner A35: Are existing frameworks adequate for measuring implementation outcomes? Results from a new simulation methodology Richard A. Van Dorn, Stephen J. Tueller, Jesse M. Hinde, Georgia T. Karuntzos A36: Taking global local: Evaluating training of Washington State clinicians in a modularized cogntive behavioral therapy approach designed for low-resource settings Maria Monroe-DeVita, Roselyn Peterson, Doyanne Darnell, Lucy Berliner, Shannon Dorsey, Laura K. Murray A37: Attitudes toward evidence-based practices across therapeutic orientations Yevgeny Botanov, Beverly Kikuta, Tianying Chen, Marivi Navarro-Haro, Anthony DuBose, Kathryn E. Korslund, Marsha M. Linehan A38: Predicting the use of an evidence-based intervention for autism in birth-to-three programs Colleen M. Harker, Elizabeth A. Karp, Sarah R. Edmunds, Lisa V. Ibañez, Wendy L. Stone A39: Supervision practices and improved fidelity across evidence-based practices: A literature review Mimi Choy-Brown A40: Beyond symptom tracking: clinician perceptions of a hybrid measurement feedback system for monitoring treatment fidelity and client progress Jack H. Andrews, Benjamin D. Johnides, Estee M. Hausman, Kristin M. Hawley A41: A guideline decision support tool: From creation to implementation Beth Prusaczyk, Alex Ramsey, Ana Baumann, Graham Colditz, Enola K. Proctor A42: Dabblers, bedazzlers, or total makeovers: Clinician modification of a common elements cognitive behavioral therapy approach Rosemary D. Meza, Shannon Dorsey, Shannon Wiltsey-Stirman, Georganna Sedlar, Leah Lucid A43: Characterization of context and its role in implementation: The impact of structure, infrastructure, and metastructure Caitlin Dorsey, Brigid Marriott, Nelson Zounlome, Cara Lewis A44: Effects of consultation method on implementation of cognitive processing therapy for post-traumatic stress disorder Cassidy A. Gutner, Candice M. Monson, Norman Shields, Marta Mastlej, Meredith SH Landy, Jeanine Lane, Shannon Wiltsey Stirman A45: Cross-validation of the Implementation Leadership Scale factor structure in child welfare service organizations Natalie K. Finn, Elisa M. Torres, Mark. G. Ehrhart, Gregory A. Aarons A46: Sustainability of integrated smoking cessation care in Veterans Affairs posttraumatic stress disorder clinics: A qualitative analysis of focus group data from learning collaborative participants Carol A. Malte, Aline Lott, Andrew J. Saxon A47: Key characteristics of effective mental health trainers: The creation of the Measure of Effective Attributes of Trainers (MEAT) Meredith Boyd, Kelli Scott, Cara C. Lewis A48: Coaching to improve teacher implementation of evidence-based practices (EBPs) Jennifer D. Pierce A49: Factors influencing the implementation of peer-led health promotion programs targeting seniors: A literature review Agathe Lorthios-Guilledroit, Lucie Richard, Johanne Filiatrault A50: Developing treatment fidelity rating systems for psychotherapy research: Recommendations and lessons learned Kevin Hallgren, Shirley Crotwell, Rosa Muñoz, Becky Gius, Benjamin Ladd, Barbara McCrady, Elizabeth Epstein A51: Rapid translation of alcohol prevention science John D. Clapp, Danielle E. Ruderman A52: Factors implicated in successful implementation: evidence to inform improved implementation from high and low-income countries Melanie Barwick, Raluca Barac, Stanley Zlotkin, Laila Salim, Marnie Davidson A53: Tracking implementation strategies prospectively: A practical approach Alicia C. Bunger, Byron J. Powell, Hillary A. Robertson A54: Trained but not implementing: the need for effective implementation planning tools Christopher Botsko A55: Evidence, context, and facilitation variables related to implementation of Dialectical Behavior Therapy: Qualitative results from a mixed methods inquiry in the Department of Veterans Affairs Sara J. Landes, Brandy N. Smith, Allison L. Rodriguez, Lindsay R. Trent, Monica M. Matthieu A56: Learning from implementation as usual in children’s mental health Byron J. Powell, Enola K. Proctor A57: Rates and predictors of implementation after Dialectical Behavior Therapy Intensive Training Melanie S. Harned, Marivi Navarro-Haro, Kathryn E. Korslund, Tianying Chen, Anthony DuBose, André Ivanoff, Marsha M. Linehan A58: Socio-contextual determinants of research evidence use in public-youth systems of care Antonio R. Garcia, Minseop Kim, Lawrence A. Palinkas, Lonnie Snowden, John Landsverk A59: Community resource mapping to integrate evidence-based depression treatment in primary care in Brazil: A pilot project Annika C. Sweetland, Maria Jose Fernandes, Edilson Santos, Cristiane Duarte, Afrânio Kritski, Noa Krawczyk, Caitlin Nelligan, Milton L. Wainberg A60: The use of concept mapping to efficiently identify determinants of implementation in the National Institute of Health--President’s Emergent Plan for AIDS Relief Prevention of Mother to Child HIV Transmission Implementation Science Alliance Gregory A. Aarons, David H. Sommerfeld, Benjamin Chi, Echezona Ezeanolue, Rachel Sturke, Lydia Kline, Laura Guay, George Siberry A61: Longitudinal remote consultation for implementing collaborative care for depression Ian M. Bennett, Rinad Beidas, Rachel Gold, Johnny Mao, Diane Powers, Mindy Vredevoogd, Jurgen Unutzer A62: Integrating a peer coach model to support program implementation and ensure long- term sustainability of the Incredible Years in community-based settings Jennifer Schroeder, Lane Volpe, Julie Steffen A63: Efficient sustainability: Existing community based supervisors as evidence-based treatment supports Shannon Dorsey, Michael D Pullmann, Suzanne E. U. Kerns, Nathaniel Jungbluth, Lucy Berliner, Kelly Thompson, Eliza Segell A64: Establishment of a national practice-based implementation network to accelerate adoption of evidence-based and best practices Pearl McGee-Vincent, Nancy Liu, Robyn Walser, Jennifer Runnals, R. Keith Shaw, Sara J. Landes, Craig Rosen, Janet Schmidt, Patrick Calhoun A65: Facilitation as a mechanism of implementation in a practice-based implementation network: Improving care in a Department of Veterans Affairs post-traumatic stress disorder outpatient clinic Ruth L. Varkovitzky, Sara J. Landes A66: The ACT SMART Toolkit: An implementation strategy for community-based organizations providing services to children with autism spectrum disorder Amy Drahota, Jonathan I. Martinez, Brigitte Brikho, Rosemary Meza, Aubyn C. Stahmer, Gregory A. Aarons A67: Supporting Policy In Health with Research: An intervention trial (SPIRIT) - protocol and early findings Anna Williamson A68: From evidence based practice initiatives to infrastructure: Lessons learned from a public behavioral health system’s efforts to promote evidence based practices Ronnie M. Rubin, Byron J. Powell, Matthew O. Hurford, Shawna L. Weaver, Rinad S. Beidas, David S. Mandell, Arthur C. Evans A69: Applying the policy ecology model to Philadelphia’s behavioral health transformation efforts Byron J. Powell, Rinad S. Beidas, Ronnie M. Rubin, Rebecca E. Stewart, Courtney Benjamin Wolk, Samantha L. Matlin, Shawna Weaver, Matthew O. Hurford, Arthur C. Evans, Trevor R. Hadley, David S. Mandell A70: A model for providing methodological expertise to advance dissemination and implementation of health discoveries in Clinical and Translational Science Award institutions Donald R. Gerke, Beth Prusaczyk, Ana Baumann, Ericka M. Lewis, Enola K. Proctor A71: Establishing a research agenda for the Triple P Implementation Framework Jenna McWilliam, Jacquie Brown, Michelle Tucker A72: Cheap and fast, but what is “best?”: Examining implementation outcomes across sites in a state-wide scaled-up evidence-based walking program, Walk With Ease Kathleen P Conte A73: Measurement feedback systems in mental health: Initial review of capabilities and characteristics Aaron R. Lyon, Meredith Boyd, Abigail Melvin, Cara C. Lewis, Freda Liu, Nathaniel Jungbluth A74: A qualitative investigation of case managers’ attitudes toward implementation of a measurement feedback system in a public mental health system for youth Amelia Kotte, Kaitlin A. Hill, Albert C. Mah, Priya A. Korathu-Larson, Janelle R. Au, Sonia Izmirian, Scott Keir, Brad J. Nakamura, Charmaine K. Higa-McMillan A75: Multiple pathways to sustainability: Using Qualitative Comparative Analysis to uncover the necessary and sufficient conditions for successful community-based implementation Brittany Rhoades Cooper, Angie Funaiole, Eleanor Dizon A76: Prescribers’ perspectives on opioids and benzodiazepines and medication alerts to reduce co-prescribing of these medications Eric J. Hawkins, Carol A. Malte, Hildi J. Hagedorn, Douglas Berger, Anissa Frank, Aline Lott, Carol E. Achtmeyer, Anthony J. Mariano, Andrew J. Saxon A77: Adaptation of Coordinated Anxiety Learning and Management for comorbid anxiety and substance use disorders: Delivery of evidence-based treatment for anxiety in addictions treatment centers Kate Wolitzky-Taylor, Richard Rawson, Richard Ries, Peter Roy-Byrne, Michelle Craske A78: Opportunities and challenges of measuring program implementation with online surveys Dena Simmons, Catalina Torrente, Lori Nathanson, Grace Carroll A79: Observational assessment of fidelity to a family-centered prevention program: Effectiveness and efficiency Justin D. Smith, Kimbree Brown, Karina Ramos, Nicole Thornton, Thomas J. Dishion, Elizabeth A. Stormshak, Daniel S. Shaw, Melvin N. Wilson A80: Strategies and challenges in housing first fidelity: A multistate qualitative analysis Mimi Choy-Brown, Emmy Tiderington, Bikki Tran Smith, Deborah K. Padgett A81: Procurement and contracting as an implementation strategy: Getting To Outcomes® contracting Ronnie M. Rubin, Marilyn L. Ray, Abraham Wandersman, Andrea Lamont, Gordon Hannah, Kassandra A. Alia, Matthew O. Hurford, Arthur C. Evans A82: Web-based feedback to aid successful implementation: The interactive Stages of Implementation Completion (SIC)TM tool Lisa Saldana, Holle Schaper, Mark Campbell, Patricia Chamberlain A83: Efficient methodologies for monitoring fidelity in routine implementation: Lessons from the Allentown Social Emotional Learning Initiative Valerie B. Shapiro, B.K. Elizabeth Kim, Jennifer L. Fleming, Paul A. LeBuffe A84: The Society for Implementation Research Collaboration (SIRC) implementation development workshop: Results from a new methodology for enhancing implementation science proposals Sara J. Landes, Cara C. Lewis, Allison L. Rodriguez, Brigid R. Marriott, Katherine Anne Comtois A85: An update on the Society for Implementation Research Collaboration (SIRC) Instrument Review Project

The aim of this study was to determine optimally efficient cutoff scores on the Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist (PCL) for identifying full posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and partial PTSD (P-PTSD) in active-duty Marines and Sailors. Participants were 1,016 Marines and Sailors who were administered the PCL and Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS) 3 months after returning from Operations Iraqi and Enduring Freedom. PCL cutoffs were tested against three CAPS-based classifications: full PTSD, stringent P-PTSD, and lenient P-PTSD. A PCL score of 39 was found to be optimally efficient for identifying full PTSD. Scores of 38 and 33 were found to be optimally efficient for identifying stringent and lenient P-PTSD, respectively. Findings suggest that the PCL cutoff that is optimally efficient for detecting PTSD in active-duty Marines and Sailors is substantially lower than the score of 50 commonly used by researchers. In addition, findings provide scores useful for identifying P-PTSD in returning service members.

ImportanceWhether traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a risk factor for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) has been difficult to determine because of the prevalence of comorbid conditions, overlapping symptoms, and cross-sectional samples.ObjectiveTo examine the extent to which self-reported predeployment and deployment-related TBI confers increased risk of PTSD when accounting for combat intensity and predeployment mental health symptoms.Design, setting, and participantsAs part of the prospective, longitudinal Marine Resiliency Study (June 2008 to May 2012), structured clinical interviews and self-report assessments were administered approximately 1 month before a 7-month deployment to Iraq or Afghanistan and again 3 to 6 months after deployment. The study was conducted at training areas on a Marine Corps base in southern California or at Veterans Affairs San Diego Medical Center. Participants for the final analytic sample were 1648 active-duty Marine and Navy servicemen who completed predeployment and postdeployment assessments. Reasons for exclusions were nondeployment (n = 34), missing data (n = 181), and rank of noncommissioned and commissioned officers (n = 66).Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was the total score on the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS) 3 months after deployment.ResultsAt the predeployment assessment, 56.8% of the participants reported prior TBI; at postdeployment assessment, 19.8% reported sustaining TBI between predeployment and postdeployment assessments (ie, deployment-related TBI). Approximately 87.2% of deployment-related TBIs were mild; 250 of 287 participants (87.1%) who reported posttraumatic amnesia reported less than 24 hours of posttraumatic amnesia (37 reported ≥ 24 hours), and 111 of 117 of those who lost consciousness (94.9%) reported less than 30 minutes of unconsciousness. Predeployment CAPS score and combat intensity score raised predicted 3-month postdeployment CAPS scores by factors of 1.02 (P

Abstract Background Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is one of the most commonly observed stress-related conditions following combat exposure and its effective prevention is a high health-care priority. Reports of peritraumatic reactions have been shown to be highly associated with PTSD among combat exposed service members. However, existing instruments measuring peritraumatic symptoms were not specifically developed to assess combat-related peritraumatic stress and each demonstrates a different peritraumatic focus. We therefore developed the Peritraumatic Behavior Questionnaire (PBQ), a new military-specific rating scale focused upon the wide range of symptoms suggestive of combat-related peritraumatic distress in actively deployed Service Members. This study describes the development of the PBQ and reports on the psychometric properties of its self-rated version (PBQ-SR). Methods 688 Marine infantry service members were retrospectively assessed by the PBQ-SR within the scope of the Marine Resiliency Study after their deployment to war zone. Participants have been additionally assessed by a variety of questionnaires, as well as clinical interviews both pre and post-deployment. Results The PBQ-SR demonstrated satisfactory internal consistency, convergent and discriminant validity, as well as high correlation with trait dissociation prior to deployment. Component analysis suggested a latent bi-dimensional structure separating a peritraumatic emotional distress and physical awareness factor. The PBQ-SR total score showed high correlation to general anxiety, depression, poorer general health and posttraumatic symptoms after deployment and remained a significant predictor of PTSD severity, after controlling for those measures. The suggested screening cut-off score of 12 points demonstrated satisfactory predictive power. Conclusions This study confirms the ability of the PBQ-SR to unify the underlying peritraumatic symptom dimensions and reliably assess combat-related peritraumatic reaction as a general construct. The PBQ-SR demonstrated promise as a potential standard screening measure in military clinical practice, while It’s predictive power should be established in prospective studies.

The Marine Resiliency Study (MRS) is a prospective study of factors predictive of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) among approximately 2,600 Marines in 4 battalions deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan. We describe the MRS design and predeployment participant characteristics. Starting in 2008, our research team conducted structured clinical interviews on Marine bases and collected data 4 times: at predeployment and at 1 week, 3 months, and 6 months postdeployment. Integrated with these data are medical and career histories from the Career History Archival Medical and Personnel System (CHAMPS) database. The CHAMPS database showed that 7.4% of the Marines enrolled in MRS had at least 1 mental health diagnosis. Of enrolled Marines, approximately half (51.3%) had prior deployments. We found a moderate positive relationship between deployment history and PTSD prevalence in these baseline data.

BackgroundBereavement is a universal experience, and its association with excess morbidity and mortality is well established. Nevertheless, grief becomes a serious health concern for a relative few. For such individuals, intense grief persists, is distressing and disabling, and may meet criteria as a distinct mental disorder. At present, grief is not recognized as a mental disorder in the DSM-IV or ICD-10. The goal of this study was to determine the psychometric validity of criteria for prolonged grief disorder (PGD) to enhance the detection and potential treatment of bereaved individuals at heightened risk of persistent distress and dysfunction.Methods and findingsA total of 291 bereaved respondents were interviewed three times, grouped as 0-6, 6-12, and 12-24 mo post-loss. Item response theory (IRT) analyses derived the most informative, unbiased PGD symptoms. Combinatoric analyses identified the most sensitive and specific PGD algorithm that was then tested to evaluate its psychometric validity. Criteria require reactions to a significant loss that involve the experience of yearning (e.g., physical or emotional suffering as a result of the desired, but unfulfilled, reunion with the deceased) and at least five of the following nine symptoms experienced at least daily or to a disabling degree: feeling emotionally numb, stunned, or that life is meaningless; experiencing mistrust; bitterness over the loss; difficulty accepting the loss; identity confusion; avoidance of the reality of the loss; or difficulty moving on with life. Symptoms must be present at sufficiently high levels at least six mo from the death and be associated with functional impairment.ConclusionsThe criteria set for PGD appear able to identify bereaved persons at heightened risk for enduring distress and dysfunction. The results support the psychometric validity of the criteria for PGD that we propose for inclusion in DSM-V and ICD-11. Please see later in the article for Editors' Summary.

The authors conducted confirmatory factor analyses of reports of posttraumatic stress reactions using a national probability sample of individuals indirectly exposed to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 (n = 675). Reactions at three time points in the year after the attacks were best accounted for by a lower-order, 4-factor solution (Reexperiencing, Strategic Avoidance, Emotional Numbing, and Hyperarousal Symptoms). Indirect exposure to a traumatic event appears to induce a response with a similar symptom structure as responses to direct exposure.

Copyright of European Journal of Psychotraumatology is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a debilitating and costly mental health issue (Greenberg et al., 1999; Hoge, Terhakopian, Castro, Messer, & Engel, 2007). RAND reported an estimated 2-year cost of [...], Introduction: Many military service members with PTSD do not receive evidence-based specialty behavioral health treatment because of perceived barriers and stigma. Behavioral health providers in primary care can deliver brief, effective treatments expanding access and reducing barriers and stigma. The purpose of this randomized clinical trial was to determine if a brief cognitive-behavior therapy delivered in primary care using the Primary Care Behavioral Health model would be effective at reducing PTSD and co-occurring symptoms. Method: A total of 67 service members (50 men, 17 women) were randomized to receive a brief, trauma-focused intervention developed for the primary care setting called Prolonged Exposure for Primary Care (PE-PC) or a delayed treatment minimal contact control condition. Inclusion criteria were significant PTSD symptoms following military deployment, medication stability, and interest in receiving treatment for PTSD symptoms in primary care. Exclusion criteria were moderate or greater risk of suicide, severe brain injury, or alcohol/substance use at a level that required immediate treatment. Assessments were completed at baseline, posttreatment/postminimal contact control, and at 8-week and 6-month posttreatment follow-up points. Primary measures were the PTSD Symptom Scale-Interview and the PTSD Checklist--Stressor-Specific. Results: PE-PC resulted in larger reduction in PTSD severity and general distress than the minimal contact control. Delayed treatment evidenced medium to large effects comparable to the immediate intervention group. Treatment benefits persisted through the 6-month follow-up of the study. Discussion: PE-PC delivered in integrated primary care is effective for the treatment of PTSD and co-occurring symptoms and may help reduce barriers and stigma found in specialty care settings. Keywords: primary care behavioral health, posttraumatic stress disorder, randomized clinical trial

Potentially morally injurious events (PMIEs) entail acts of commission (e.g., cruelty, proscribed or prescribed violence) or omission (e.g., high stakes failure to protect others) and bearing witness (e.g., to grave inhumanity, to the gruesome aftermath of violence), or being the victim of others' acts of commission (e.g., high stakes trust violations) or omission (e.g., being the victim of grave individual or systemic failures to protect) that transgress deeply held beliefs and expectations about right and wrong. Although there is a proliferation of interest in moral injury (the outcome associated with exposure to PMIEs), there has been no operational definition of the putative syndrome and no standard assessment scheme or measure, which has hampered research and care in this area. We describe an international effort to define the syndrome of moral injury and develop and validate the Moral Injury Outcome Scale (MIOS) in three stages. To ensure content validity, in Stage I, we conducted interviews with service members, Veterans, and clinicians/Chaplains in each country, inquiring about the lasting impact of PMIEs. Qualitative analysis yielded six operational definitions of domains of impact of PMIEs and components within domains that establish the parameters of the moral injury syndrome. From the domain definitions, we derived an initial pool of scale items. Stage II entailed scale refinement using factor analytic methods, cross-national invariance testing, and internal consistency reliability analyses of an initial 34-item MIOS. A 14-item MIOS was invariant and reliable across countries and had two factors: Shame-Related (SR) and Trust-Violation-Related (TVR) Outcomes. In Stage III, MIOS total and subscale scores had strong convergent validity, and PMIE-endorsers had substantially higher MIOS scores vs. non-endorsers. We discuss and contextualize the results and describe research that is needed to substantiate these inaugural findings to further explore the validity of the MIOS and moral injury, in particular to examine discriminant and incremental validity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Resting-state functional connectivity (rsFC) is an emerging means of understanding the neurobiology of combat-related post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). However, most rsFC studies to date have limited focus to cognitively related intrinsic connectivity networks (ICNs), have not applied data-driven methodologies or have disregarded the effect of combat exposure. In this study, we predicted that group independent component analysis (GICA) would reveal group-wise differences in rsFC across 50 active duty service members with PTSD, 28 combat-exposed controls (CEC), and 25 civilian controls without trauma exposure (CC). Intranetwork connectivity differences were identified across 11 ICNs, yet combat-exposed groups were indistinguishable in PTSD vs CEC contrasts. Both PTSD and CEC demonstrated anatomically diffuse differences in the Auditory Vigilance and Sensorimotor networks compared to CC. However, intranetwork connectivity in a subset of three regions was associated with PTSD symptom severity among executive (left insula; ventral anterior cingulate) and right Fronto-Parietal (perigenual cingulate) networks. Furthermore, we found that increased temporal synchronization among visuospatial and sensorimotor networks was associated with worse avoidance symptoms in PTSD. Longitudinal neuroimaging studies in combat-exposed cohorts can further parse PTSD-related, combat stress-related or adaptive rsFC changes ensuing from combat. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We tested whether a continuous measure of repressor coping style predicted lower posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms in 122 health care professionals serving in Operation Iraqi Freedom. Zero-order correlational analyses indicated that predeployment repressor coping scores negatively predicted postdeployment PTSD symptoms, \(r_s = -0.29, p = 0.001\), whereas predeployment Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC) scores did not predict postdeployment PTSD symptoms, \(r_s = -0.13, p = 0.14\). However, predeployment trait anxiety was chiefly responsible for the association between repressor coping and PTSD symptom severity, \(r_s = 0.38, p = 0.001\). Four percent of the subjects qualified for a probable PTSD diagnosis. Although service members with relatively higher PTSD scores had lower repressor coping scores than did the other subjects, their level of predeployment anxiety was chiefly responsible for this relationship. Knowing someone's predeployment level of trait anxiety permits better prediction of PTSD symptoms among trauma-exposed service members than does knowing his or her level of repressive coping., Psychology, Author's Original

Background: Bereavement is a universal experience, and its association with excess morbidity and mortality is well established. Nevertheless, grief becomes a serious health concern for a relative few. For such individuals, intense grief persists, is distressing and disabling, and may meet criteria as a distinct mental disorder. At present, grief is not recognized as a mental disorder in the DSM-IV or ICD-10. The goal of this study was to determine the psychometric validity of criteria for prolonged grief disorder (PGD) to enhance the detection and potential treatment of bereaved individuals at heightened risk of persistent distress and dysfunction. Methods and Findings: A total of 291 bereaved respondents were interviewed three times, grouped as 0–6, 6–12, and 12–24 mo post-loss. Item response theory (IRT) analyses derived the most informative, unbiased PGD symptoms. Combinatoric analyses identified the most sensitive and specific PGD algorithm that was then tested to evaluate its psychometric validity. Criteria require reactions to a significant loss that involve the experience of yearning (e.g., physical or emotional suffering as a result of the desired, but unfulfilled, reunion with the deceased) and at least five of the following nine symptoms experienced at least daily or to a disabling degree: feeling emotionally numb, stunned, or that life is meaningless; experiencing mistrust; bitterness over the loss; difficulty accepting the loss; identity confusion; avoidance of the reality of the loss; or difficulty moving on with life. Symptoms must be present at sufficiently high levels at least six mo from the death and be associated with functional impairment. Conclusions: The criteria set for PGD appear able to identify bereaved persons at heightened risk for enduring distress and dysfunction. The results support the psychometric validity of the criteria for PGD that we propose for inclusion in DSM-V and ICD-11., Version of Record

Study Objectives: Sleep disturbances are common in military personnel with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and may persist following treatment. This study examined service members seeking treatment for PTSD, reporting insomnia symptoms, nightmares, excessive daytime sleepiness, and potential obstructive sleep apnea at baseline and the impact of sleep disturbances on a course of PTSD treatment., Methods: In this secondary analysis, sleep was evaluated in 223 service members who participated in a randomized clinical trial comparing Cognitive Processing Therapy for PTSD delivered in individual or group formats. Sleep assessments included the Insomnia Severity Index, the Trauma-Related Nightmare Survey, and Epworth Sleepiness Scale administered at baseline and 2 weeks posttreatment., Results: Following PTSD treatment, there were significant improvements for insomnia symptoms ( M Δ = -1.49; d = -0.27), nightmares ( M Δ  = -0.35; d = -0.27), and excessive daytime sleepiness ( M Δ  = -0.91; d = -0.16). However, mean scores remained in clinical ranges at posttreatment. Participants with baseline insomnia symptoms had worse PTSD severity throughout treatment. Participants with baseline excessive daytime sleepiness or probable obstructive sleep apnea had greater PTSD severity reductions when treated with Cognitive Processing Therapy individually vs. in a group. Those with insomnia symptoms, nightmare disorder, and sleep apnea had greater depressive symptoms throughout treatment., Conclusions: Insomnia symptoms, nightmares, and excessive daytime sleepiness were high at baseline in service members seeking treatment for PTSD. While sleep symptoms improved with PTSD treatment, these sleep disorders were related to worse treatment outcomes with regards to symptoms of PTSD and depression. Individual Cognitive Processing Therapy is recommended over group Cognitive Processing Therapy for patients with either excessive daytime sleepiness or probable obstructive sleep apnea., Clinical Trial Registration: Registry: ClinicalTrials.gov; Name: Group vs. Individual Cognitive Processing Therapy for Combat-related PTSD; URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02173561; Identifier: NCT02173561., Citation: Puriksma KE, Taylor DJ, Wachen JS, et al. Self-reported sleep problems in active-duty US Army personnel receiving posttraumatic stress disorder treatment in group or individual formats: secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial. J Clin Sleep Med . 2023;19(8):1389-1398., (© 2023 American Academy of Sleep Medicine.)

Importance: Improved, efficient, and acceptable treatments are needed for combat-related posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD)., Objective: To determine the efficacy of 2 compressed prolonged exposure (PE) therapy outpatient treatments for combat-related PTSD., Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial was conducted among military personnel and veterans at 4 sites in Texas from 2017 to 2019. Assessors were blinded to conditions. Data were analyzed from November 2020 to October 2022., Interventions: The interventions were massed-PE, which included 15 therapy sessions of 90 minutes each over 3 weeks, vs intensive outpatient program PE (IOP-PE), which included 15 full-day therapy sessions over 3 weeks with 8 treatment augmentations. The IOP-PE intervention was hypothesized to be superior to massed-PE., Main Outcomes and Measures: Coprimary outcomes included the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fifth Edition) (DSM-5) (CAPS-5) and the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5) administered at baseline and posttreatment follow-ups. Measures ranged from 0 to 80, with higher scores indicating greater severity. Diagnostic remission and reliable change were secondary outcomes., Results: Among 319 military personnel and veterans screened, 234 were randomized (mean [SD] age, 39.20 [7.72] years; 182 [78%] male participants), with 117 participants randomized to IOP-PE and 117 participants randomized to massed-PE. A total of 61 participants (26%) were African American, 58 participants (25%) were Hispanic, and 102 participants (44%) were White; 151 participants (65%) were married. Linear mixed-effects models found that CAPS-5 scores decreased in both treatment groups at the 1-month follow-up (IOP-PE: mean difference, -13.85 [95% CI, -16.47 to -11.23]; P < .001; massed-PE: mean difference, -14.13 [95% CI, -16.63 to -11.62]; P < .001). CAPS-5 change scores differed from 1- to 6-month follow-ups (mean difference, 4.44 [95% CI, 0.89 to 8.01]; P = .02). PTSD symptoms increased in massed-PE participants during follow-up (mean difference, 3.21 [95% CI, 0.65 to 5.77]; P = .01), whereas IOP-PE participants maintained treatment gains (mean difference, 1.23 [95% CI, -3.72 to 1.27]; P = .33). PCL-5 scores decreased in both groups from baseline to 1-month follow-up (IOP-PE: mean difference, -21.81 [95% CI, -25.57 to -18.04]; P < .001; massed-PE: mean difference, -19.96 [95% CI, -23.56 to -16.35]; P < .001) and were maintained at 6 months (IOP-PE: mean change, -0.21 [95% CI, -3.47 to 3.06]; P = .90; massed-PE: mean change, 3.02 [95% CI, -0.36 to 6.40]; P = .08). Both groups had notable PTSD diagnostic remission at posttreatment (IOP-PE: 48% [95% CI, 36% to 61%] of participants; massed-PE: 62% [95% CI, 51% to 73%] of participants), which was maintained at 6 months (IOP-PE: 53% [95% CI, 40% to 66%] of participants; massed-PE: 52% [95% CI, 38% to 66%] of participants). Most participants demonstrated reliable change on the CAPS-5 (61% [95% CI, 52% to 69%] of participants) and the PCL-5 (74% [95% CI, 66% to 81%] of participants) at the 1-month follow-up., Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that PE can be adapted into compressed treatment formats that effectively reduce PTSD symptoms., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03529435.

Study Objectives: Characterize associations between sleep impairments and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms, including anger, in service members seeking treatment for PTSD., Methods: Ninety-three US Army personnel recruited into a PTSD treatment study completed the baseline assessment. State-of-the-science sleep measurements included 1) retrospective, self-reported insomnia, 2) prospective sleep diaries assessing sleep patterns and nightmares, and 3) polysomnography measured sleep architecture and obstructive sleep apnea-hypopnea severity. Dependent variables included self-report measures of PTSD severity and anger severity. Pearson correlations and multiple linear regression analyses examined if sleep symptoms, not generally measured in PTSD populations, were associated with PTSD and anger severity., Results: All participants met PTSD, insomnia, and nightmare diagnostic criteria. Mean sleep efficiency = 70%, total sleep time = 5.5 hours, obstructive sleep apnea/hypopnea (obstructive sleep apnea-hypopnea index ≥ 5 events/h) = 53%, and clinically significant anger = 85%. PTSD severity was associated with insomnia severity (β = .58), nightmare severity (β = .24), nightmare frequency (β = .31), and time spent in Stage 1 sleep (β = .27, all P < .05). Anger severity was associated with insomnia severity (β = .37), nightmare severity (β = .28), and obstructive sleep apnea-hypopnea during rapid eye movement sleep (β = .31, all P < .05)., Conclusions: Insomnia and nightmares were related to PTSD and anger severity, and obstructive sleep apnea-hypopnea was related to anger. Better assessment and evidence-based treatment of these comorbid sleep impairments in service members with PTSD and significant anger should result in better PTSD, anger, and quality-of-life outcomes., Clinical Trials Registration: Registry: ClinicalTrials.gov; Name: Treatment of Comorbid Sleep Disorders and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder; Identifier: NCT02773693; URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02773693., Citation: Miles SR, Pruiksma KE, Slavis D, et al. Sleep disorder symptoms are associated with greater posttraumatic stress and anger symptoms in US Army service members seeking treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder. J Clin Sleep Med . 2022;18(6):1617-1627., (© 2022 American Academy of Sleep Medicine.)

Study Objectives: The aim of this study was to obtain preliminary data on the efficacy, credibility, and acceptability of Exposure, relaxation, and rescripting therapy for military service members and veterans (ERRT-M) in active duty military personnel with trauma-related nightmares., Methods: Forty participants were randomized to either 5 sessions of ERRT-M or 5 weeks of minimal contact control (MCC) followed by ERRT-M. Assessments were completed at baseline, posttreatment/postcontrol, and 1-month follow-up., Results: Differences between ERRT-M and control were generally medium in size for nightmare frequency (Cohen d = -0.53), nights with nightmares (d = -0.38), nightmare severity (d = -0.60), fear of sleep (d = -0.44), and symptoms of insomnia (d = -0.52), and depression (d = -0.51). In the 38 participants who received ERRT-M, there were statistically significant, medium-sized decreases in nightmare frequency (d = -0.52), nights with nightmares (d = -0.50), nightmare severity (d = -0.55), fear of sleep (d = -0.48), and symptoms of insomnia (d = -0.59), posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (d = -0.58) and depression (d = -0.59) from baseline to 1-month follow-up. Participants generally endorsed medium to high ratings of treatment credibility and expectancy. The treatment dropout rate (17.5%) was comparable to rates observed for similar treatments in civilians., Conclusions: ERRT-M produced medium effect-size reductions in nightmares and several secondary outcomes including PTSD, depression, and insomnia. Participants considered ERRT-M to be credible. An adequately powered randomized clinical trial is needed to confirm findings and to compare ERRT-M to an active treatment control., Clinical Trial Registration: Registry: ClinicalTrials.gov; Title: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial of Treatment for Trauma-Related Nightmares In Active Duty Military Personnel; Identifier: NCT02506595; URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02506595., (© 2020 American Academy of Sleep Medicine.)