Limits...
Randomized controlled trial of a brief dyadic cognitive-behavioral intervention designed to prevent PTSD.

Brunet A, Des Groseilliers IB, Cordova MJ, Ruzek JI - Eur J Psychotraumatol (2013)

Bottom Line: In an intent-to-treat analysis, a time-by-group interaction was found, whereby the treated participants had less PTSD symptoms at the post-treatment but not at the pre-treatment compared to controls.Controlling for the improvement observed in the control participants, the intervention yielded a net effect size of d=0.39.A brief, early, and effective intervention can be provided by nurses or social workers in hospital settings, at a fairly low cost to individuals presenting to the emergency room as the result of trauma exposure.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Psychosocial Research Division, Douglas Institute Research Center, Verdun, Québec, Canada ; Department of Psychiatry, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada.

ABSTRACT

Background: There is a dearth of effective interventions to prevent the development of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

Method: We evaluated the efficacy of a brief dyadic two-session cognitive-behavioral intervention through a controlled trial involving trauma-exposed individuals recruited at the hospital's emergency room. Participants were randomly assigned to either the dyadic intervention group (n=37) or to a waiting list (assessment only) group (n=37).

Results: In an intent-to-treat analysis, a time-by-group interaction was found, whereby the treated participants had less PTSD symptoms at the post-treatment but not at the pre-treatment compared to controls. Controlling for the improvement observed in the control participants, the intervention yielded a net effect size of d=0.39.

Conclusions: A brief, early, and effective intervention can be provided by nurses or social workers in hospital settings, at a fairly low cost to individuals presenting to the emergency room as the result of trauma exposure.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Flow chart of the study participants.Note. Several randomized participants were lost before baseline, most of them did not return their baseline symptom assessment and/or failed to find a time to meet the therapist in a timely manner. The intent to treat sample completed at least two symptom assessments and received at least one intervention session. Protocol violation in the control group entailed the following exclusion criteria : initiating trauma-related court litigation in one case and a loss of consciousness undiagnosed at the time of recruitment in two cases. Protocol violation in the intervention group entailed coming alone to the dyadic intervention and being diagnosed with a terminal illness during the study.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3755180&req=5

Figure 0001: Flow chart of the study participants.Note. Several randomized participants were lost before baseline, most of them did not return their baseline symptom assessment and/or failed to find a time to meet the therapist in a timely manner. The intent to treat sample completed at least two symptom assessments and received at least one intervention session. Protocol violation in the control group entailed the following exclusion criteria : initiating trauma-related court litigation in one case and a loss of consciousness undiagnosed at the time of recruitment in two cases. Protocol violation in the intervention group entailed coming alone to the dyadic intervention and being diagnosed with a terminal illness during the study.

Mentions: As shown in Fig. 1, 90 participants were deemed eligible. A total of 83 were randomized. Ten participants in the intervention group, and seven in the control group, left the study before the end, yielding a drop-out rate of 20%. The main reason for dropping out was the tight schedule for conducting the intervention (i.e., in the third week after trauma exposure). This often led to scheduling problems between the therapist (available only on a part-time basis), the study participants and their intervention partner. Six participants were excluded during the analyses because they did not follow the instructions properly or because of too much missing data.


Randomized controlled trial of a brief dyadic cognitive-behavioral intervention designed to prevent PTSD.

Brunet A, Des Groseilliers IB, Cordova MJ, Ruzek JI - Eur J Psychotraumatol (2013)

Flow chart of the study participants.Note. Several randomized participants were lost before baseline, most of them did not return their baseline symptom assessment and/or failed to find a time to meet the therapist in a timely manner. The intent to treat sample completed at least two symptom assessments and received at least one intervention session. Protocol violation in the control group entailed the following exclusion criteria : initiating trauma-related court litigation in one case and a loss of consciousness undiagnosed at the time of recruitment in two cases. Protocol violation in the intervention group entailed coming alone to the dyadic intervention and being diagnosed with a terminal illness during the study.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3755180&req=5

Figure 0001: Flow chart of the study participants.Note. Several randomized participants were lost before baseline, most of them did not return their baseline symptom assessment and/or failed to find a time to meet the therapist in a timely manner. The intent to treat sample completed at least two symptom assessments and received at least one intervention session. Protocol violation in the control group entailed the following exclusion criteria : initiating trauma-related court litigation in one case and a loss of consciousness undiagnosed at the time of recruitment in two cases. Protocol violation in the intervention group entailed coming alone to the dyadic intervention and being diagnosed with a terminal illness during the study.
Mentions: As shown in Fig. 1, 90 participants were deemed eligible. A total of 83 were randomized. Ten participants in the intervention group, and seven in the control group, left the study before the end, yielding a drop-out rate of 20%. The main reason for dropping out was the tight schedule for conducting the intervention (i.e., in the third week after trauma exposure). This often led to scheduling problems between the therapist (available only on a part-time basis), the study participants and their intervention partner. Six participants were excluded during the analyses because they did not follow the instructions properly or because of too much missing data.

Bottom Line: In an intent-to-treat analysis, a time-by-group interaction was found, whereby the treated participants had less PTSD symptoms at the post-treatment but not at the pre-treatment compared to controls.Controlling for the improvement observed in the control participants, the intervention yielded a net effect size of d=0.39.A brief, early, and effective intervention can be provided by nurses or social workers in hospital settings, at a fairly low cost to individuals presenting to the emergency room as the result of trauma exposure.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Psychosocial Research Division, Douglas Institute Research Center, Verdun, Québec, Canada ; Department of Psychiatry, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada.

ABSTRACT

Background: There is a dearth of effective interventions to prevent the development of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

Method: We evaluated the efficacy of a brief dyadic two-session cognitive-behavioral intervention through a controlled trial involving trauma-exposed individuals recruited at the hospital's emergency room. Participants were randomly assigned to either the dyadic intervention group (n=37) or to a waiting list (assessment only) group (n=37).

Results: In an intent-to-treat analysis, a time-by-group interaction was found, whereby the treated participants had less PTSD symptoms at the post-treatment but not at the pre-treatment compared to controls. Controlling for the improvement observed in the control participants, the intervention yielded a net effect size of d=0.39.

Conclusions: A brief, early, and effective intervention can be provided by nurses or social workers in hospital settings, at a fairly low cost to individuals presenting to the emergency room as the result of trauma exposure.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus