Search

Objectives: This study aimed, following both single‐ and multi‐event trauma, to ascertain prevalence and course of the dissociative subtype of post‐traumatic stress disorder (PTSD‐DS) in youth; how well early PTSD‐DS predicts later PTSD; and whether dissociation accounts for unique variance in post‐traumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) and functional impairment over and above the effect of other post‐trauma cognitive processing factors and PTSS respectively. Design and Methods: This study is a secondary analysis of data from the Acute Stress Programme for Children and Teenagers study (n = 234) and the Coping in Care After Trauma study (n = 110) in which children had experienced single‐ and multi‐event trauma respectively. Results: PTSD‐DS diagnosis was common in children with PTSD regardless of trauma experienced (>39.0%). PTSD‐DS showed a similar trajectory of natural recovery to PTSD, and it was similarly predictive of later PTSD following single‐event trauma. Finally, dissociation was a significant factor in PTSS and functional impairment. Conclusions: These results should be viewed in the context of several limitations including narrow sample of participants which reduces the generalizability of results, concerns around children's ability to conceptualize challenging concepts such as dissociation and the use of self‐report measures to form diagnostic groups. The PTSD‐DS diagnosis may offer clinical utility to the extant PTSD diagnosis in children and adolescents, as dissociation has been shown to be a contributory factor in the maintenance of both PTSS and functional impairment. Further research is required to inform further editions of the DSM and other diagnostic systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The 11th edition of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD‐11) made a number of significant changes to the diagnostic criteria for post‐traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). We sought to determine the prevalence and 3‐month predictive values of the new ICD‐11 PTSD criteria relative to ICD‐10 PTSD, in children and adolescents following a single traumatic event. ICD‐11 also introduced a diagnosis of Complex PTSD (CPTSD), proposed to typically result from prolonged, chronic exposure to traumatic experiences, although the CPTSD diagnostic criteria do not require a repeated experience of trauma. We therefore explored whether children and adolescents demonstrate ICD‐11 CPTSD features following exposure to a single‐incident trauma. Method: Data were analysed from a prospective cohort study of youth aged 8–17 years who had attended an emergency department following a single trauma. Assessments of PTSD, CPTSD, depressive and anxiety symptoms were performed at two to four weeks (n = 226) and nine weeks (n = 208) post‐trauma, allowing us to calculate and compare the prevalence and predictive value of ICD‐10 and ICD‐11 PTSD criteria, along with CPTSD. Predictive abilities of different diagnostic thresholds were undertaken using positive/negative predictive values, sensitivity/specificity statistics and logistic regressions. Results: At Week 9, 15 participants (7%) were identified as experiencing ICD‐11 PTSD, compared to 23 (11%) experiencing ICD‐10 PTSD. There was no significant difference in comorbidity rates between ICD‐10 and ICD‐11 PTSD diagnoses. Ninety per cent of participants with ICD‐11 PTSD also met criteria for at least one CPTSD feature. Five participants met full CPTSD criteria. Conclusions: Reduced prevalence of PTSD associated with the use of ICD‐11 criteria is likely to reduce identification of PTSD relative to using ICD‐10 criteria but not relative to DSM‐4 and DSM‐5 criteria. Diagnosis of CPTSD is likely to be infrequent following single‐incident trauma. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Rehabilitative care for children with limb difference often includes the provision and use of an artificial (or prosthetic) limb. Of key influence in this process is how parents experience and respond to their child's limb difference and prosthesis use. However, research on this is lacking. Therefore, this study aimed to explore the experiences of parenting a child with limb difference who had been provided with an artificial limb. Design: Semi-structured interviews took place with seven parents. Interview data was recorded, transcribed and analyzed using interpretative phenomenological analysis. Results: The analysis identified four themes: (1) managing the initial emotional experience through the development of coping resources; (2) opportunities through prosthesis use and its relationship with "normality"; (3) managing and making sense of social reactions toward their child; (4) the intrinsic role of support: developing a collective connection and enabling shared knowledge. Conclusions: The study highlighted salient aspects to parents' experiences and sense-making that can inform clinical support. Emotional support, the management of social responses, and the holistic co-ordination of healthcare support with peer support networks are discussed. Healthcare professionals involved in the prosthetic rehabilitation process should look to explore these meanings to help support the management of the child's prosthesis use. Understanding the sense-making of parents is important in effective service provision for children with limb difference. Service provision for children with limb difference should consider the support needs of parents. Working with limb difference charities and voluntary organizations could help services develop needed parent-to-parent support networks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The revision of Acute Stress Disorder (ASD) in the DSM-5 (DSM-5, 2013) proposes a cluster-free model of ASD symptoms in both adults and youth. Published evaluations of competing models of ASD clustering in youth have rarely been examined. Methods: We used Confirmatory Factor Analysis (combined with multigroup invariance tests) to explore the latent structure of ASD symptoms in a trauma-exposed sample of children and young people (N = 594). The DSM-5 structure was compared with the previous DSM-IV conceptualization (4-factor), and two alternative models proposed in the literature (3-factor; 5-factor). Model fit was examined using goodness-of-fit indices. We also established DSM-5 ASD prevalence rates relative to DSM-IV ASD, and the ability of these models to classify children impaired by their symptoms. Results: Based on both the Bayesian Information Criterion, the interfactor correlations and invariance testing, the 3-factor model best accounted for the profile of ASD symptoms. DSM-5 ASD led to slightly higher prevalence rates than DSM-IV ASD and performed similarly to DSM-IV with respect to categorising children impaired by their symptoms. Modifying the DSM-5 ASD algorithm to a 3+ or 4+ symptom requirement was the strongest predictor of impairment. Conclusions: These findings suggest that a uni-factorial general-distress model is not the optimal model of capturing the latent structure of ASD symptom profiles in youth and that modifying the current DSM-5 9+ symptom algorithm could potentially lead to a more developmentally sensitive conceptualization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research into children’s perspectives and understandings of emotional difficulties is limited and methodologically varied. In this paper we explore young children’s perspectives and understandings of emotional difficulties in their peers. We conducted five focus groups involving a total of 25 children. The children, aged eight and nine, were presented with vignettes representing peers experiencing emotional difficulties, and invited to discuss their perspectives on possible causes. We also explored their emotional and behavioural reactions to the vignette characters.Using interpretative phenomenological analysis we identified three themes: Searching for an Explanation; Empathy versus Blame; and Consequences and Solutions. The children drew on their own emotional experiences in their sense-making, and the extent to which they held the character responsible for their behaviour was particularly important in influencing their responses towards the characters. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]