Parenting Amidst COVID-19: Pandemic-Related Stressors, Inequities, and Treatment Utilization and Perceptions

Many parents of children under age 18 are faced with additional COVID-19 parenting- related stressors and may be experiencing increases in psychological difficulties; however, we have yet to investigate parent’s levels of posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) and adjustment disorder. Further, COVID-19 has served as a sobering reminder of the significant public health disparities in our society and it is critical to identify risk factors for poorer clinical outcomes. The primary objectives of the present study were to: (a) determine whether parents are reporting higher levels of pandemic-related stress, PTSS, and adjustment disorder than controls, (b) identify specific individual-level factors (e.g., age, gender, race, number of children, age of children) that may be related to higher levels of stress and symptoms among parents, and (c) report parents’ utilization of, and perceived efficacy of, psychological interventions during COVID-19. A U.S. nationally representative sample (N = 2,019) from Qualtrics Data panels was recruited in July– August 2020. Parents endorsed higher levels of stress, PTSS, and adjustment disorder, particularly younger parents. Further, 38.3% of parents reported PTSS above clinical cutoff. Younger participants and persons of color reported higher levels of pandemic- related stress. One-third of parents (33.1%) reported using online mental health services. Taken together, parents may be at greater risk for pandemic stress, PTSS, and adjustment disorder symptoms. Individual-level risk factors, such as age and minority status, are important to consider when understanding COVID-19 stress. Clinical intervention efforts should prioritize trauma-focused treatments for parents, especially those who are younger and identify as a person of color

Psychological treatment of PTSD with comorbid substance use disorder (SUD): Expert recommendations of the European Society for Traumatic Stress Studies (ESTSS)

Background: Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and substance use disorder (SUD) are often comorbid and difficult to treat. The availability of evidence-based treatment guidelines is very limited and there is significant uncertainty about what best practice looks like. Objective: This paper describes the methodology used to develop expert recommendations for the assessment and psychological treatment of PTSD and comorbid SUD and presents the final recommendations. Methodology: A small committee of experts in the field of PTSD and SUD was formed on behalf of the European Society for Traumatic Stress Studies (ESTSS) Board. The committee developed recommendations based on a two-stage process. In the first stage a systematic review of randomised controlled trials of psychological interventions aimed at treating PTSD-SUD comorbidity was completed, and other recent relevant reviews systematic were also considered. To complement the recommendations based on systematic review, the second stage involved the review and collation of existing guidance, good practice and consensus recommendations made in methodologically rigorous clinical practice guidelines. Results: The two-stage process resulted in 9 recommendations related to assessment and 21 recommendations related to treatment planning and delivery. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first attempt to provide expert recommendations based on a systematic review of the literature and through collation of guidance provided in other authoritative and reliable sources. These expert recommendations will provide helpful guidance to clinicians and service providers in both addiction and mental health settings about appropriate clinical care for those with PTSD SUD comorbidity

A systematic review and meta-analysis of psychological interventions for comorbid post-traumatic stress disorder and substance use disorder

Background The psychological treatment of comorbid post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and substance use disorder (SUD) is clinically challenging, and outcomes are often poor. Objective This paper describes a systematic review and meta-analysis which sought to establish the current efficacy for a number of established psychological approaches for adults and adolescents, in comparison to interventions for SUD alone, or other active approaches, following a pre-registered protocol. Method This review followed PRISMA and Cochrane Collaboration guidelines. Data extraction and risk of bias judgements using Cochrane criteria were undertaken by all authors. Primary outcomes were PTSD severity and substance use post-treatment. The quality of findings was assessed using GRADE. Following a comprehensive search, conducted to 13 September 2021, 27 studies were included. Results We found a relatively high level of dropout across studies. In our main comparisons, we found no benefits for present-focused treatment approaches aimed at improving coping skills beyond those for SUD-only interventions. We found modest benefits for trauma-focused intervention plus SUD intervention post-treatment for PTSD (standardized mean difference (SMD) = −0.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) −0.64, −0.08), and at 6–13 months for PTSD (SMD = −0.48, 95% CI −0.81, −0.15) and alcohol use (SMD = −0.23, 95% CI −0.44, −0.02). There were no benefits for cognitive restructuring interventions as a group, but we found a modest effect for integrated cognitive behavioural therapy (ICBT) for PTSD post-treatment (SMD = −0.33, 95% CI −0.62, −0.04). There was evidence of some benefit for trauma-focused intervention over present-focused intervention for PTSD from a single study and for reduction in dropout for incentivized attendance for trauma-focused intervention from another single study. Most findings were of very low quality. Conclusion There is evidence that trauma-focused therapy and ICBT can improve PTSD for some individuals, but many patients do not fully engage with treatment and average treatment effects are modest

Racism, Posttraumatic Stress Symptoms, and Racial Disparity in the U.S. COVID-19 Syndemic

The COVID-19 syndemic, with a disproportionately higher adverse impact on communities of color (i.e., COVID-19 infection and death), will likely exacerbate the existing health disparities in trauma-related symptoms between people of color (POC) and White Americans. However, no studies have examined the racial disparity in posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) during COVID-19. Grounded in ecological theory and racial trauma framework, we investigated racial disparity in PTSS and three possible mechanisms, 1) COVID stress, 2) direct racism, and 3) indirect racism, for these discrepancies using a large U.S. national sample. Results indicated that POC reported higher levels of PTSS than White Americans. The PTSS racial disparity was accounted more by direct and indirect racism than by the COVID-19- specific stressors, after controlling for age, gender, education, income, parent status, adverse childhood experiences (ACEs), and intimate partner violence (IPV). Additional fine-grained analyses for Hispanic/Latinx Americans, Black/African Americans, and Asian American and Pacific Islanders by and large corroborated the above findings. Our findings highlighted the deleterious impact of the ongoing racism pandemic on the POC community as a public health crisis in addition to the COVID-19 pandemic

The pandemic coping scale – validity and reliability of a brief measure of coping during a pandemic

This study assessed the validity and reliability of the Pandemic Coping Scale (PCS), a new brief measure of coping with pandemic-related stressors. Methods The PCS was administered to N = 2316 German participants during the COVID-19 pandemic. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis was applied among random splits of the sample. Global goodness of fit (χ2, RMSEA, SRMR, CFI, TLI), local goodness of fit (factor loadings, communalities, factor reliability, discriminant validity) and additional test quality criteria (internal consistency, item discrimination and difficulty) were evaluated for a four-factor model vs. a four-factor model combined with a second-order general factor. Convergent and divergent validity were examined by Pearson correlations of the PCS subscales with the Brief-COPE subscales; criterion validity was evaluated by correlations with wellbeing (WHO-5), depressive (PHQ-9) and anxiety symptoms (GAD-2). Results Exploratory factor analysis suggested a four-factor solution (‘Healthy Lifestyle’, ‘Joyful Activities’, ‘Daily Structure’, ‘Prevention Adherence’). Confirmatory factor analysis showed a sufficient global fit for both specified models which did not differ in their fit to the data. Local goodness of fit indices showed moderate to large factor loadings and good factor reliabilities except for the subscale ‘Prevention Adherence’. Internal consistencies were good for the PCS total scale (α = .83), the ‘Healthy Lifestyle’ (α = .79) and the ‘Daily Structure’ (α = .86) subscales, acceptable for ‘Joyful Activities’ (α = .60), and low for ‘Prevention Adherence’ (α = .52). The four subscales evidenced convergent and divergent validity with the Brief-COPE subscales. The subscales ‘Healthy lifestyle’, ‘Joyful activities’ and ‘Daily structure’ showed criterion validity with wellbeing, depressive and anxiety symptoms. Conclusions The PCS is a reliable and valid measure to assess pandemic-specific coping behavior in the domains of ‘Healthy Lifestyle’, ‘Joyful Activities’, and ‘Daily Structure’. The PCS subscale ‘Prevention Adherence’ might be improved by adding items with varying item difficulties

Effects of current treatments for trauma survivors with posttraumatic stress disorder on reducing a negative self-concept: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: A negative self-concept is characterised by dysfunctional cognitions about the self and has been suggested to be a key factor involved in the development and maintenance of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). In addition, the current definitions of PTSD according to DSM-5 and the new ICD-11 diagnosis of Complex PTSD (CPTSD) include aspects of negative self-concept in their diagnostic criteria. Objective: The aim of this meta-analysis was to synthesise the currently available evidence on the effects of psychological interventions for PTSD on negative self-concept. Methods: PubMed, PsychINFO, PSYNDEX, PTSDpubs and Cochrane Library were searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of psychological treatments for PTSD symptoms in adults, published up to February 2021. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted, with risk of bias assessed by the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. Results: A total of 25 RCTs (N = 2585) were included in the meta-analysis. Results showed that psychological interventions significantly improve a negative self-concept with a moderate to large controlled effect size (k = 30, g = 0.67, 95% CI [0.31, 1.02], p < .001) at post-treatment. Heterogeneity between studies was large but could not be accounted for by moderators included in the current analysis, i.e. different types of interventions (e.g. with vs. without a cognitive restructuring component, trauma-focused vs. not). Conclusions: Current treatments for PTSD are effective in reducing a negative self-concept. However, more research is needed to identify moderators of this effect and identify interventions that are most effective for reducing negative self-concept

Associations of Depressive Symptoms, COVID-19-Related Stressors, and Coping Strategies. A Comparison Between Cities and Towns in Germany

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a wide range of stressors related to depressive symptoms. Prevention measures like physical distancing have burdened the general population, especially in highly urbanized areas. However, little is known about the associations between pandemic-related stressors, coping strategies, and depressive symptoms in highly urbanized vs. less urbanized environments. Methods: Participants were recruited in a cross-sectional online survey in Germany. Propensity score matching yielded a matched sample of city (n = 453) and town (n = 453) inhabitants. Depressive symptoms, COVID-19-related stressors, and coping strategies were compared between cities and towns. Multiple regression analysis was performed to determine associations between pandemic-related stressors and depressive symptoms for the two groups separately. Results: City inhabitants showed significantly higher depression scores than town inhabitants (t = 2.11, df = 897.95, p = 0.035). Seven coping strategies were more often used by the city sample. Depressive symptoms were associated with “restricted physical social contact” and “difficult housing conditions” (adjusted R2= 0.19, F[9,443] = 12.52, p < 0.001) in city inhabitants, and with “fear of infection” and “difficult housing conditions” (adjusted R2= 0.20, F[9,443] = 13.50, p < 0.001) in town inhabitants. Limitations: The data were collected at the end of the first wave and represent a snapshot without causal inferences. Pandemic-related stressors were measured with a newly developed scale. Conclusion: Depressive symptoms, perceived stressors, and approach/avoidance coping strategies differed between city vs. town inhabitants. These differences should be considered in policy-making and mental health care

Stressors, coping and symptoms of adjustment disorder in the course of the COVID-19 pandemic - study protocol of the European Society for Traumatic Stress Studies (ESTSS) pan-European study

Background: During the current COVID-19 pandemic, the people in Europe are exposed to self-isolation, quarantine, job loss, risk of contracting COVID-19, or grief of loved ones. Such a complex array of stressors may lead to symptoms of adjustment disorder or posttraumatic stress disorder. This research protocol describes a study launched by the European Society of Traumatic Stress Studies (ESTSS) to investigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on symptoms of adjustment disorder across European countries. Objective: The longitudinal online cohort study aims (1) to explore psychosocial reactions to the COVID-19 pandemic across ten European countries; (2) to examine the relationships between risk and resilience factors, stressors and symptoms of adjustment disorder during the pandemic; and (3) to investigate whether these relationships are moderated by coping behaviours. Method: In ten countries (Austria, Croatia, Georgia, Germany, Italy, Lithuania, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, and Sweden), between 1,000 and 2,000 participants will be recruited, depending on the size of the country. Participants will be assessed at two timepoints with a six-month interval. Following a conceptual framework based on the WHO's social framework of health, an assessment of risk and resilience factors, COVID-19 related stressors and pandemic-specific coping behaviours will be measured to estimate their contribution to symptoms of adjustment disorder. The Adjustment Disorder New Module 8 (ADNM-8) will be used to assess symptoms of adjustment disorder. As a secondary measure, symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder will be measure using the Primary Care PTSD Screen for DSM-5 (PC-PTSD-5). Data analysis: The relative contribution of risk factors, resilience factors, and stressors on symptoms of adjustment disorder or symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder will be estimated using multilevel analysis. To determine the moderating effects of different types of coping behaviours on these relationships, a multilevel mediation analysis will be carried out

Risk and protective factors for posttraumatic stress disorder in trauma-exposed individuals during the COVID-19 pandemic – findings from a pan-European study

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic is a health emergency resulting in multiple stressors that may be related to posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Objective: This study examined relationships between risk and protective factors, pandemic-related stressors, and PTSD during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Data from the European Society of Traumatic Stress Studies (ESTSS) ADJUST Study were used. N = 4,607 trauma-exposed participants aged 18 years and above were recruited from the general populations of eleven countries (Austria, Croatia, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Italy, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, and Sweden) from June to November 2020. We assessed sociodemographic (e.g. gender), pandemic-related (e.g. news consumption), and health-related (e.g. general health condition) risk and protective factors, pandemic-related stressors (e.g. fear of infection), and probable PTSD (PC-PTSD-5). The relationships between these variables were examined using logistic regression on multiple imputed data sets. Results: The prevalence of probable PTSD was 17.7%. Factors associated with an increased risk for PTSD were younger age, female gender, more than 3 h of daily pandemic-related news consumption (vs. no consumption), a satisfactory, poor, or very poor health condition (vs. a very good condition), a current or previous diagnosis of a mental disorder, and trauma exposure during the COVID-19 pandemic. Factors associated with a reduced risk for PTSD included a medium and high income (vs. very low income), face-to-face contact less than once a week or 3–7 times a week (vs. no contact), and digital social contact less than once a week or 1–7 days a week (vs. no contact). Pandemic-related stressors associated with an increased risk for PTSD included governmental crisis management and communication, restricted resources, restricted social contact, and difficult housing conditions. Conclusion: We identified risk and protective factors as well as stressors that may help identify trauma-exposed individuals at risk for PTSD, enabling more efficient and rapid access to care