Remission from post-traumatic stress disorder in adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis of long term outcome studies.

Clinical psychology review (Impact Factor: 7.18). 03/2014; 34(3):249-255. DOI: 10.1016/j.cpr.2014.03.002
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a frequent mental disorder associated with significant distress and high costs. We conducted the first systematic review and meta-analysis on spontaneous long-term remission rates, i. e., without specific treatment. Data sources were searches of databases, hand searches, and contact with authors. Remission estimates were obtained from observational prospective studies of PTSD without specific treatment. Remission was defined as the actual percentage of PTSD cases at baseline who are non-cases after a minimum of ten months. Forty-two studies with a total of 81,642 participants were included. The mean observation period was 40months. Across all studies, an average of 44.0% of individuals with PTSD at baseline were non-cases at follow-up. Remission varied between 8 and 89%. In studies with the baseline within the first five months following trauma the remission rate was 51.7% as compared to 36.9% in studies with the baseline later than five months following trauma. Publications on PTSD related to natural disaster reported the highest mean of remission rate (60.0%), whereas those on PTSD related to physical disease reported the lowest mean of remission rate from PTSD (31.4%). When publications on natural disaster were used as a reference group, the only type of traumatic events to differ from natural disaster was physical disease. No other measured predictors were associated with remission from PTSD. Long-term remission from PTSD without specific treatment varies widely and is higher in studies with the baseline within five months following trauma.


Available from: Nexhmedin Morina, Nov 12, 2014
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This paper reviews the psychological health research conducted in the United States in support of combat veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan, using the Military Psychological Health Research Continuum, which includes foundational science, epidemiology, etiology, prevention and screening, treatment, follow-up care, and services research. The review is limited to those studies involving combat veterans and military families. This review discusses perplexing issues regarding the impact of combat on the mental health of service members such as risk and resilience factors of mental health, biomarkers of posttraumatic stress syndrome (PTSD), mental health training, psychological screening, psychological debriefing, third location decompression, combat and suicide, the usefulness of psychotherapy and drug therapy for treating PTSD, role of advanced technology, telemedicine and virtual reality, methods to reduce stigma and barriers to care, and best approaches to the dissemination of evidence-based interventions. The mental health research of special populations such as women, National Guardsmen and reservists, and military families is also presented. The review concludes by identifying future areas of research.
    European Journal of Psychotraumatology 08/2014; 5. DOI:10.3402/ejpt.v5.24713 · 2.40 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The efficacy of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) treatments in psychosis has not been examined in a randomized clinical trial to our knowledge. Psychosis is an exclusion criterion in most PTSD trials. To examine the efficacy and safety of prolonged exposure (PE) therapy and eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) therapy in patients with psychotic disorders and comorbid PTSD. A single-blind randomized clinical trial with 3 arms (N = 155), including PE therapy, EMDR therapy, and waiting list (WL) of 13 outpatient mental health services among patients with a lifetime psychotic disorder and current chronic PTSD. Baseline, posttreatment, and 6-month follow-up assessments were made. Participants were randomized to receive 8 weekly 90-minute sessions of PE (n = 53), EMDR (n = 55), or WL (n = 47). Standard protocols were used, and treatment was not preceded by stabilizing psychotherapeutic interventions. Clinician-rated severity of PTSD symptoms, PTSD diagnosis, and full remission (on the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale) were primary outcomes. Self-reported PTSD symptoms and posttraumatic cognitions were secondary outcomes. Data were analyzed as intent to treat with linear mixed models and generalized estimating equations. Participants in the PE and EMDR conditions showed a greater reduction of PTSD symptoms than those in the WL condition. Between-group effect sizes were 0.78 (P < .001) in PE and 0.65 (P = .001) in EMDR. Participants in the PE condition (56.6%; odds ratio [OR], 3.41; P = .006) or the EMDR condition (60.0%; OR, 3.92; P < .001) were significantly more likely to achieve loss of diagnosis during treatment than those in the WL condition (27.7%). Participants in the PE condition (28.3%; OR, 5.79; P = .01), but not those in the EMDR condition (16.4%; OR, 2.87; P = .10), were more likely to gain full remission than those in the WL condition (6.4%). Treatment effects were maintained at the 6-month follow-up in PE and EMDR. Similar results were obtained regarding secondary outcomes. There were no differences in severe adverse events between conditions (2 in PE, 1 in EMDR, and 4 in WL). The PE therapy and EMDR therapy showed no difference in any of the outcomes and no difference in participant dropout (24.5% in PE and 20.0% in EMDR, P = .57). Standard PE and EMDR protocols are effective, safe, and feasible in patients with PTSD and severe psychotic disorders, including current symptoms. A priori exclusion of individuals with psychosis from evidence-based PTSD treatments may not be justifiable. Identifier: ISRCTN79584912.
    JAMA Psychiatry 03/2015; 72(3):259-267. DOI:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2014.2637 · 12.01 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective: This paper aimed to report the current status of research in the field of post-traumatic stress disorder following childbirth (PTSD FC), and to update the findings of an earlier 2008 paper. Background: A group of international researchers, clinicians and service users met in 2006 to establish the state of clinical and academic knowledge relating to PTSD FC. A paper identified four key areas of research knowledge at that time. Methods: Fourteen clinicians and researchers met in Oxford, UK to update the previously published paper relating to PTSD FC. The first part of the meeting focused on updating the four key areas identified previously, and the second part on discussing new and emerging areas of research within the field. Results: A number of advances have been made in research within the area of PTSD FC. Prevalence is well established within mothers, several intervention studies have been published, and there is growing interest in new areas: staff and pathways; prevention and early intervention; impact on families and children; special populations; and post-traumatic growth. Conclusion: Despite progress, significant gaps remain within the PTSD FC knowledge base. Further research continues to be needed across all areas identified in 2006, and five areas were identified which can be seen as ‘new and emerging’. All of these new areas require further extensive research. Relatively little is still known about PTSD FC.
    Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology 04/2015; DOI:10.1080/02646838.2015.1031646 · 0.67 Impact Factor