Phase-based treatment versus immediate trauma-focused treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder due to childhood abuse:Randomised clinical trial

Background It is unclear whether people with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and symptoms of complex PTSD due to childhood abuse need a treatment approach different from approaches in the PTSD treatment guidelines. Aims To determine whether a phase-based approach is more effective than an immediate trauma-focused approach in people with childhood-trauma related PTSD (Netherlands Trial Registry no.: NTR5991). Method Adults with PTSD following childhood abuse were randomly assigned to either a phase-based treatment condition (8 sessions of Skills Training in Affect and Interpersonal Regulation (STAIR), followed by 16 sessions of eye-movement desensitisation and reprocessing (EMDR) therapy; n = 57) or an immediately trauma-focused treatment condition (16 sessions of EMDR therapy; n = 64). Participants were assessed for symptoms of PTSD and complex PTSD, and other forms of psychopathology before, during and after treatment and at 3- and 6-month follow-ups. Results Data were analysed with linear mixed models. No significant differences between the two treatments on any variable at post-treatment or follow-up were found. Post-treatment, 68.8% no longer met PTSD diagnostic criteria. Self-reported PTSD symptoms significantly decreased for both STAIR–EMDR therapy (d = 0.93) and EMDR therapy (d = 1.54) from pre- to post-treatment assessment, without significant difference between the two conditions. No differences in drop-out rates between the conditions were found (STAIR–EMDR 22.8% v. EMDR 17.2%). No study-related adverse events occurred. Conclusions This study provides compelling support for the use of EMDR therapy alone for the treatment of PTSD due to childhood abuse as opposed to needing any preparatory intervention

Phase-based treatment versus immediate trauma-focused treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder due to childhood abuse:Randomised clinical trial

Background It is unclear whether people with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and symptoms of complex PTSD due to childhood abuse need a treatment approach different from approaches in the PTSD treatment guidelines. Aims To determine whether a phase-based approach is more effective than an immediate trauma-focused approach in people with childhood-trauma related PTSD (Netherlands Trial Registry no.: NTR5991). Method Adults with PTSD following childhood abuse were randomly assigned to either a phase-based treatment condition (8 sessions of Skills Training in Affect and Interpersonal Regulation (STAIR), followed by 16 sessions of eye-movement desensitisation and reprocessing (EMDR) therapy; n = 57) or an immediately trauma-focused treatment condition (16 sessions of EMDR therapy; n = 64). Participants were assessed for symptoms of PTSD and complex PTSD, and other forms of psychopathology before, during and after treatment and at 3- and 6-month follow-ups. Results Data were analysed with linear mixed models. No significant differences between the two treatments on any variable at post-treatment or follow-up were found. Post-treatment, 68.8% no longer met PTSD diagnostic criteria. Self-reported PTSD symptoms significantly decreased for both STAIR-EMDR therapy (d = 0.93) and EMDR therapy (d = 1.54) from pre- to post-treatment assessment, without significant difference between the two conditions. No differences in drop-out rates between the conditions were found (STAIR-EMDR 22.8% v. EMDR 17.2%). No study-related adverse events occurred. Conclusions This study provides compelling support for the use of EMDR therapy alone for the treatment of PTSD due to childhood abuse as opposed to needing any preparatory intervention.</p

Predictors of treatment dropout in patients with posttraumatic stress disorder due to childhood abuse

Background: Knowledge about patient characteristics predicting treatment dropout for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is scarce, whereas more understanding about this topic may give direction to address this important issue. Method: Data were obtained from a randomized controlled trial in which a phase-based treatment condition (Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing [EMDR] therapy preceded by Skills Training in Affect and Interpersonal Regulation [STAIR]; n = 57) was compared with a direct trauma-focused treatment (EMDR therapy only; n = 64) in people with a PTSD due to childhood abuse. All pre-treatment variables included in the trial were examined as possible predictors for dropout using machine learning techniques. Results: For the dropout prediction, a model was developed using Elastic Net Regularization. The ENR model correctly predicted dropout in 81.6% of all individuals. Males, with a low education level, suicidal thoughts, problems in emotion regulation, high levels of general psychopathology and not using benzodiazepine medication at screening proved to have higher scores on dropout. Conclusion: Our results provide directions for the development of future programs in addition to PTSD treatment or for the adaptation of current treatments, aiming to reduce treatment dropout among patients with PTSD due to childhood abuse

Predictors of treatment dropout in patients with posttraumatic stress disorder due to childhood abuse1

BackgroundKnowledge about patient characteristics predicting treatment dropout for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is scarce, whereas more understanding about this topic may give direction to address this important issue.MethodData were obtained from a randomized controlled trial in which a phase-based treatment condition (Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing [EMDR] therapy preceded by Skills Training in Affect and Interpersonal Regulation [STAIR]; n = 57) was compared with a direct trauma-focused treatment (EMDR therapy only; n = 64) in people with a PTSD due to childhood abuse. All pre-treatment variables included in the trial were examined as possible predictors for dropout using machine learning techniques.ResultsFor the dropout prediction, a model was developed using Elastic Net Regularization. The ENR model correctly predicted dropout in 81.6% of all individuals. Males, with a low education level, suicidal thoughts, problems in emotion regulation, high levels of general psychopathology and not using benzodiazepine medication at screening proved to have higher scores on dropout.ConclusionOur results provide directions for the development of future programs in addition to PTSD treatment or for the adaptation of current treatments, aiming to reduce treatment dropout among patients with PTSD due to childhood abuse

Phase-based treatment versus immediate trauma-focused treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder due to childhood abuse: Randomised clinical trial

Background It is unclear whether people with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and symptoms of complex PTSD due to childhood abuse need a treatment approach different from approaches in the PTSD treatment guidelines. Aims To determine whether a phase-based approach is more effective than an immediate trauma-focused approach in people with childhood-trauma related PTSD (Netherlands Trial Registry no.: NTR5991). Method Adults with PTSD following childhood abuse were randomly assigned to either a phase-based treatment condition (8 sessions of Skills Training in Affect and Interpersonal Regulation (STAIR), followed by 16 sessions of eye-movement desensitisation and reprocessing (EMDR) therapy; n = 57) or an immediately trauma-focused treatment condition (16 sessions of EMDR therapy; n = 64). Participants were assessed for symptoms of PTSD and complex PTSD, and other forms of psychopathology before, during and after treatment and at 3- and 6-month follow-ups. Results Data were analysed with linear mixed models. No significant differences between the two treatments on any variable at post-treatment or follow-up were found. Post-treatment, 68.8% no longer met PTSD diagnostic criteria. Self-reported PTSD symptoms significantly decreased for both STAIR-EMDR therapy (d = 0.93) and EMDR therapy (d = 1.54) from pre- to post-treatment assessment, without significant difference between the two conditions. No differences in drop-out rates between the conditions were found (STAIR-EMDR 22.8% v. EMDR 17.2%). No study-related adverse events occurred. Conclusions This study provides compelling support for the use of EMDR therapy alone for the treatment of PTSD due to childhood abuse as opposed to needing any preparatory intervention

Predictors of treatment dropout in patients with posttraumatic stress disorder due to childhood abuse

BACKGROUND: Knowledge about patient characteristics predicting treatment dropout for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is scarce, whereas more understanding about this topic may give direction to address this important issue.METHOD: Data were obtained from a randomized controlled trial in which a phase-based treatment condition (Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing [EMDR] therapy preceded by Skills Training in Affect and Interpersonal Regulation [STAIR]; n  = 57) was compared with a direct trauma-focused treatment (EMDR therapy only; n  = 64) in people with a PTSD due to childhood abuse. All pre-treatment variables included in the trial were examined as possible predictors for dropout using machine learning techniques. RESULTS: For the dropout prediction, a model was developed using Elastic Net Regularization. The ENR model correctly predicted dropout in 81.6% of all individuals. Males, with a low education level, suicidal thoughts, problems in emotion regulation, high levels of general psychopathology and not using benzodiazepine medication at screening proved to have higher scores on dropout.CONCLUSION: Our results provide directions for the development of future programs in addition to PTSD treatment or for the adaptation of current treatments, aiming to reduce treatment dropout among patients with PTSD due to childhood abuse.</p

Predictors and moderators of treatment outcomes in phase-based treatment and trauma-focused treatments in patients with childhood abuse-related post-traumatic stress disorder

Background: Knowledge of treatment predictors and moderators is important for improving the effectiveness of treatment for PTSD due to childhood abuse. Objective: The first aim of this study was to test the potential predictive value of variables commonly associated with PTSD resulting from a history of repeated childhood abuse, in relation to treatment outcomes. The second aim was to examine if complex PTSD symptoms act as potential moderators between treatment conditions and outcomes. Method: Data were obtained from a randomized controlled trial comparing a phase-based treatment (Skills Training in Affect and Interpersonal Regulation [STAIR] followed by Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing [EMDR] therapy; n = 57) with a direct trauma-focused treatment (EMDR therapy only; n = 64) in people with PTSD due to childhood abuse. The possible predictive effects of the presence of borderline personality disorder, dissociative symptoms, and suicidal and self-injurious behaviours were examined. In addition, it was determined whether symptoms of emotion regulation difficulties, self-esteem, and interpersonal problems moderated the relation between the treatment condition and PTSD post-treatment, corrected for pre-treatment PTSD severity. Results: Pre-treatment PTSD severity proved to be a significant predictor of less profitable PTSD treatment outcomes. The same was true for the severity of dissociative symptoms, but only post-treatment, and not when corrected for false positives. Complex PTSD symptoms did not moderate the relationship between the treatment conditions and PTSD treatment outcomes. Conclusions: The current findings suggest that regardless of the common comorbid symptoms studied, immediate trauma-focused treatment is a safe and effective option for individuals with childhood-related PTSD. However, individuals experiencing severe symptoms of PTSD may benefit from additional treatment sessions or the addition of other evidence-based PTSD treatment approaches. The predictive influence of dissociative sequelae needs further research. The study design was registered in The Dutch trial register (https://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC = 5991) NTR5991 and was approved by the medical ethics committee of Twente NL 56641.044.16 CCMO.</p