Health–economic Benefits of Treating Trauma in Psychosis

Background: Co-occurrence of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in psychosis (estimated as 12%) raises personal suffering and societal costs. Health–economic studies on PTSD treatments in patients with a diagnosis of a psychotic disorder have not yet been conducted, but are needed for guideline development and implementation. This study aims to analyse the cost-effectiveness of guideline PTSD therapies in patients with a psychotic disorder. Methods: This health–economic evaluation alongside a randomized controlled trial included 155 patients with a psychotic disorder in care as usual (CAU), with comorbid PTSD. Participants received eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) (n = 55), prolonged exposure (PE) (n = 53) or waiting list (WL) (n = 47) with masked assessments at baseline (T0) and at the two-month (post-treatment, T2) and six-month follow-up (T6). Costs were calculated using the TiC-P interview for assessing healthcare consumption and productivity losses. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and economic acceptability were calculated for quality-adjusted life years (EQ-5D-3L-based QALYs) and PTSD ‘Loss of diagnosis’ (LoD, CAPS). Results: Compared to WL, costs were lower in EMDR (-€1410) and PE (-€501) per patient per six months. In addition, EMDR (robust SE 0.024, t = 2.14, p = .035) and PE (robust SE 0.024, t = 2.14, p = .035) yielded a 0.052 and 0.051 incremental QALY gain, respectively, as well as 26% greater probability for LoD following EMDR (robust SE = 0.096, z = 2.66, p = .008) and 22% following PE (robust SE 0.098, z = 2.28, p = .023). Acceptability curves indicate high probabilities of PTSD treatments being the better economic choice. Sensitivity analyses corroborated these outcomes. Conclusion: Adding PTSD treatment to CAU for individuals with psychosis and PTSD seem to yield better health and less PTSD at lower costs, which argues for implementation

A multi-site single blind clinical study to compare the effects of prolonged exposure, eye movement desensitization and reprocessing and waiting list on patients with a current diagnosis of psychosis and co morbid post traumatic stress disorder: study protocol for the randomized controlled trial Treating Trauma in Psychosis

Contains fulltext : 116518.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)Background: Trauma contributes to psychosis and in psychotic disorders post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is often a comorbid disorder. A problem is that PTSD is underdiagnosed and undertreated in people with psychotic disorders. This study's primary goal is to examine the efficacy and safety of prolonged exposure and eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) for PTSD in patients with both psychotic disorders and PTSD, as compared to a waiting list. Secondly, the effects of both treatments are determined on (a) symptoms of psychosis, in particular verbal hallucinations, (b) depression and social performance, and (c) economic costs. Thirdly, goals concern links between trauma exposure and psychotic symptomatology and the prevalence of exposure to traumatic events, and of PTSD. Fourthly predictors, moderators, and mediators for treatment success will be explored. These include cognitions and experiences concerning treatment harm, credibility and burden in both participants and therapists. Methods/Design: A short PTSD-screener assesses the possible presence of PTSD in adult patients (21- to 65-years old) with psychotic disorders, while the Clinician Administered PTSD Scale interview will be used for the diagnosis of current PTSD. The M.I.N.I. Plus interview will be used for diagnosing lifetime psychotic disorders and mood disorders with psychotic features. The purpose is to include consenting participants (N = 240) in a multi-site single blind randomized clinical trial. Patients will be allocated to one of three treatment conditions (N = 80 each): prolonged exposure or EMDR (both consisting of eight weekly sessions of 90 minutes each) or a six-month waiting list. All participants are subjected to blind assessments at pre-treatment, twomonths post treatment, and six monthspost treatment. In addition, participants in the experimental conditions will have assessments at mid treatment and at 12 months follow-up. Discussion: The results from the post treatment measurement can be considered strong empirical indicators of the safety and effectiveness of prolonged exposure and EMDR. The six-month and twelve-month follow-up data have the potential of reliably providing documentation of the long-term effects of both treatments on the various outcome variables. Data from pre-treatment and midtreatment can be used to reveal possible pathways of change.19 p

Narrative Exposure Therapy for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder associated with repeated interpersonal trauma in patients with Severe Mental Illness: a mixed methods design

Background: In the Netherlands, most patients with severe mental illness (SMI) receive flexible assertive community treatment (FACT) provided by multidisciplinary community mental health teams. SMI patients with comorbid posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) are sometimes offered evidence-based trauma-focused treatment like eye movement desensitization reprocessing or prolonged exposure. There is a large amount of evidence for the effectiveness of narrative exposure therapy (NET) within various vulnerable patient groups with repeated interpersonal trauma. Some FACT-teams provide NET for patients with comorbid PTSD, which is promising, but has not been specifically studied in SMI patients. Objectives: The primary aim is to evaluate NET in SMI patients with comorbid PTSD associated with repeated interpersonal trauma to get insight into whether (1) PTSD and dissociative symptoms changes and (2) changes occur in the present SMI symptoms, care needs, quality of life, global functioning, and care consumption. The second aim is to gain insight into patients’ experiences with NET and to identify influencing factors on treatment results. Methods: This study will have a mixed methods convergent design consisting of quantitative repeated measures and qualitative semi-structured in-depth interviews based on Grounded Theory. The study population will include adult SMI outpatients (n=25) with comorbid PTSD and receiving NET. The quantitative study parameters will be existence and severity of PTSD, dissociative, and SMI symptoms; care needs; quality of life; global functioning; and care consumption. In a longitudinal analysis, outcomes will be analyzed using mixed models to estimate the difference in means between baseline and repeated measurements. The qualitative study parameters will be experiences with NET and perceived factors for success or failure. Integration of quantitative and qualitative results will be focused on interpreting how qualitative results enhance the understanding of quantitative outcomes. Discussion: The results of this study will provide more insight into influencing factors for clinical changes in this population