Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background: Psychological therapies are the recommended first-line treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Previous systematic reviews have grouped theoretically similar interventions to determine differences between broadly distinct approaches. Consequently, we know little regarding the relative efficacy of the specific manualized therapies commonly applied to the treatment of PTSD. Objective: To determine the effect sizes of manualized therapies for PTSD. Methods: We undertook a systematic review following Cochrane Collaboration guidelines. A pre-determined definition of clinical importance was applied to the results and the quality of evidence was appraised using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach. Results: 114 randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) of 8171 participants were included. There was robust evidence that the therapies broadly defined as CBT with a trauma focus (CBT-T), as well as Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR), had a clinically important effect. The manualized CBT-Ts with the strongest evidence of effect were Cognitive Processing Therapy (CPT); Cognitive Therapy (CT); and Prolonged Exposure (PE). There was also some evidence supporting CBT without a trauma focus; group CBT with a trauma focus; guided internet-based CBT; and Present Centred Therapy (PCT). There was emerging evidence for a number of other therapies. Conclusions: A recent increase in RCTs of psychological therapies for PTSD, results in a more confident recommendation of CBT-T and EMDR as the first-line treatments. Among the CBT-Ts considered by the review CPT, CT and PE should be the treatments of choice. The findings should guide evidence informed shared decision-making between patient and clinician.

Background: Despite the established efficacy of psychological therapies for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) there has been little systematic exploration of dropout rates. Objective: To ascertain rates of dropout across different modalities of psychological therapy for PTSD and to explore potential sources of heterogeneity. Method: A systematic review of dropout rates from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of psychological therapies was conducted. The pooled rate of dropout from psychological therapies was estimated and reasons for heterogeneity explored using meta-regression. Results:: The pooled rate of dropout from RCTs of psychological therapies for PTSD was 16% (95% CI 14-18%). There was evidence of substantial heterogeneity across studies. We found evidence that psychological therapies with a trauma-focus were significantly associated with greater dropout. There was no evidence of greater dropout from therapies delivered in a group format; from studies that recruited participants from clinical services rather than via advertisements; that included only military personnel/veterans; that were limited to participants traumatized by sexual traumas; that included a higher proportion of female participants; or from studies with a lower proportion of participants who were university educated. Conclusions: Dropout rates from recommended psychological therapies for PTSD are high and this appears to be particularly true of interventions with a trauma focus. There is a need to further explore the reasons for dropout and to look at ways of increasing treatment retention.

Post-traumatic stress disorder is a common condition that affects millions of people across the world. Up to date recommendations based on the best available evidence are vital to prevent and treat this debilitating condition. In this issue, we are bringing together a series of systematic reviews and meta-analyses that underpinned the development of the 2018 International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies Guidelines. The strongest evidence was found for psychological treatments for PTSD, in particular for cognitive behavioural therapy with a trauma focus (CBT-TF)(generic), cognitive processing therapy (CPT), cognitive therapy (CT), eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing (EMDR) and prolonged exposure (PE). For the subgroup of military personnel and veterans, results were less impressive. Dropout from trauma-focused psychological treatments was higher than for other forms of psychological treatment for PTSD in adults. For early interventions, CBT-TF, CT and EMDR were recommended. With regard to pharmacological approaches, a number of them were effective but with a low effect size. Of the pharmacologically assisted psychotherapies, MDMA-assisted psychotherapy was promising. Six complementary and alternative approaches showed emerging evidence. We now have an evidence base for a diverse range of pharmacological, psychological and other approaches that should facilitate their implementation and lead to the more effective management of people affected by traumatic events. * A diverse range of pharmacological, psychological and other approaches now have an evidence base for the prevention and treatment of PTSD.* This editorial introduces the EJPT special issue that considers these interventions and their relative strengths in more detail.

Although complex post-traumatic stress disorder and borderline personality disorder are distinct disorders, there is confusion in clinical practice regarding the similarities between the diagnostic profiles of these conditions. We summarise the differences in the diagnostic criteria that are clinically informative and we illustrate these with case studies to enable diagnostic accuracy in clinical practice.

Translational research highlights the potential of novel 'memory consolidation/reconsolidation therapies' to treat re-experiencing symptoms and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). This systematic review and meta-analysis assessed the efficacy of so-called memory consolidation/reconsolidation therapies in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for prevention and treatment of PTSD and symptoms of re-experiencing in children and adults (PROSPERO: CRD42020171167). RCTs were identified and rated for risk of bias. Available data was pooled to calculate risk ratios (RR) for PTSD prevalence and standardised mean differences (SMD) for PTSD/re-experiencing severity. Twenty-five RCTs met inclusion criteria (16 prevention and nine treatment trials). The methodology of most studies had a significant risk of bias. We found a large effect of reconsolidation interventions in the treatment of PTSD (11 studies, n = 372, SMD: −1.42 (−2.25 to −0.58), and a smaller positive effect of consolidation interventions in the prevention of PTSD (12 studies, n = 2821, RR: 0.67 (0.50 to 0.90). Only three protocols (hydrocortisone for PTSD prevention, Reconsolidation of Traumatic Memories (RTM) for treatment of PTSD symptoms and cognitive task memory interference procedure with memory reactivation (MR) for intrusive memories) were superior to control. There is some emerging evidence of consolidation and reconsolidation therapies in the prevention and treatment of PTSD and intrusive memories specifically. Translational research should strictly adhere to protocols/procedures describing precise reconsolidation conditions (e.g. MR) to both increase the likelihood of positive findings and more confidently interpret negative findings of putative reconsolidation agents.

Background: Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a common and debilitating disorder which has a significant impact on the lives of sufferers. A number of early psychological interventions have been developed to try to prevent chronic difficulties. Objective: The objective of this study was to establish the current evidence for the effectiveness of multiple session early psychological interventions aimed at preventing or treating traumatic stress symptoms beginning within three months of trauma exposure. Methods: Randomized controlled trials of early multiple session psychological interventions aimed at preventing or reducing traumatic stress symptoms of individuals exposed to a traumatic event, fulfiling trauma criteria for an ICD or DSM diagnosis of PTSD were identified through a search of the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Group Clinical Trials Registers database, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and PILOTS. Two authors independently extracted study details and data and completed risk of bias assessments. Analyses were undertaken using Review Manager software. Quality of findings were rated according to 'Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation' (GRADE) and appraised for clinical importance. Results: Sixty-one studies evaluating a variety of interventions were identified. For individuals exposed to a trauma who were not pre-screened for traumatic stress symptoms there were no clinically important differences between any intervention and usual care. For individuals reporting traumatic stress symptoms we found clinically important evidence of benefits for trauma-focused cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT-T), cognitive therapy without exposure and eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR). Differences were greatest for those diagnosed with acute stress disorder (ASD) and PTSD. Conclusions: There is evidence for the effectiveness of several early psychological interventions for individuals with traumatic stress symptoms following trauma exposure, especially for those meeting the diagnostic threshold for ASD or PTSD. Evidence is strongest for trauma-focused CBT. * We found no clinically important evidence for the benefit of early intervention offered to all individuals exposed to a traumatic event, regardless of symptomatology.* There was evidence of a clinically important effect for trauma-focused CBT (CBT-T), brief EMDR and cognitive therapy without exposure.* Evidence was strongest for CBT-T.

Multi-modular motion-assisted memory desensitization and reconsolidation therapy (3MDR) is a new psychological intervention for people with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). 3MDR is immersive, delivered in a virtual reality environment, and emphasises engagement, recollection and reprocessing. Through a theory-driven examination of data relating to 10 out of 42 UK military veterans taking part in a trial of 3MDR, the principal objective was to explore the complex interrelationships between people, interventions and context and to investigate how factors within these domains interacted in specific outcome typologies. Quantitative and qualitative data relating to 10 trial participants were derived from: researcher-assessed and self-report clinical measures; interviews; physiological recordings; words describing thoughts and feelings during therapy; and subjective unit of distress scores. Using a convergent mixed methods approach, data were tabulated using a person, intervention and context model. Participant summaries were grouped into outcome typologies, followed by an analysis of data convergence and divergence within each and an interpretation of identified patterns. Three outcome response typologies were identified: dramatic improvement, moderate improvement and minimal improvement. Within the person domain, factors associated with outcomes included walking capacity, commitment and ability to complete therapy, and levels of subjective distress. Within the intervention domain, factors associated with outcomes related to image selection and use, therapeutic alliance and orientations towards the tailoring of sessions. Within the context domain, factors associated with outcomes included reactions to the therapy environment. The patterning of secondary outcomes broadly corresponded with primary outcomes within each typology. Alongside patterned data differentiating aspects of the person, intervention and context domains, within the three response typologies data also existed where no obvious patterning was detected. The model developed here may have novel value in evaluating a range of personalised interventions, but further work is needed before confident assertions can be made of who is likely to benefit from 3MDR specifically.

Background: Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a major cause of morbidity amongst active duty and ex-serving military personnel. In recent years increasing efforts have been made to develop more effective treatments. Objective: To determine which psychological therapies are efficacious in treating active duty and ex-serving military personnel with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Method: A systematic review was undertaken according to Cochrane Collaboration Guidelines. The primary outcome measure was reduction in PTSD symptoms and the secondary outcome dropout. Results: Twenty-four studies with 2386 participants were included. Evidence demonstrated that CBT with a trauma focus (CBT-TF) was associated with the largest evidence of effect when compared to waitlist/usual care in reducing PTSD symptoms post treatment (10 studies; n = 524; SMD −1.22, −1.78 to −0.66). Group CBT-TF was less effective when compared to individual CBT-TF at reducing PTSD symptoms post treatment (1 study; n = 268; SMD −0.35, −0.11 to −0.59). Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) therapy was not effective when compared to waitlist/usual care at reducing PTSD symptoms post treatment (4 studies; n = 92; SMD −0.83, −1.75 to 0.10). There was evidence of greater dropout from CBT-TF therapies compared to waitlist and Present Centred Therapy. Conclusions: The evidence, albeit limited, supports individual CBT-TF as the first-line psychological treatment of PTSD in active duty and ex-serving personnel. There is evidence for Group CBT-TF, but this is not as strong as for individual CBT-TF. EMDR cannot be recommended as a first line therapy at present and urgently requires further evaluation. Lower effect sizes than for other populations with PTSD and high levels of drop-out suggest that CBT-TF in its current formats is not optimally acceptable and further research is required to develop and evaluate more effective treatments for PTSD and complex PTSD in active duty and ex-serving military personnel. * PTSD is a common psychiatric condition amongst active duty and ex-serving military personnel.* Evidence supports individual CBT-TF as the first-line psychological treatment of PTSD in active duty and ex-serving personnel.* High levels of drop-out suggest that CBT-TF in its current formats of delivery is not optimally acceptable to active duty and ex-serving military personnel.* EMDR currently cannot be recommended as a first line therapy for active duty and ex-serving military personnel and further evaluation is urgently required.

A study in Lithuania showed that the International Trauma Interview is a valid tool for assessing and diagnosing ICD-11 posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and complex PTSD (CPTSD). The 11 th revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) includes a new diagnosis of complex posttraumatic stress disorder (CPTSD). The International Trauma Interview (ITI) is a novel clinician-administered diagnostic interview for the assessment of ICD-11 PTSD and CPTSD. The aim of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the ITI in a Lithuanian sample in relation to interrater agreement, latent structure, internal reliability, as well as convergent and discriminant validity. In total, 103 adults with a history of various traumatic experiences participated in the study. The sample was predominantly female (83.5%), with a mean age of 32.64 years (SD = 9.36). For the assessment of ICD-11 PTSD and CPTSD, the ITI and the self-report International Trauma Questionnaire (ITQ) were used. Mental health indicators, such as depression, anxiety, and dissociation, were measured using self-report questionnaires. The latent structure of the ITI was evaluated using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). In order to test the convergent and discriminant validity of the ITI we conducted a structural equation model (SEM). Overall, based on the ITI, 18.4% of participants fulfilled diagnostic criteria for PTSD and 21.4% for CPTSD. A second-order two-factor CFA model of the ITI PTSD and disturbances in self-organization (DSO) symptoms demonstrated a good fit. The associations with various mental health indicators supported the convergent and discriminant validity of the ITI. The clinician-administered ITI and self-report ITQ had poor to moderate diagnostic agreement across different symptom clusters. The ITI is a reliable and valid tool for assessing and diagnosing ICD-11 PTSD and CPTSD.

Background: Pharmacological approaches are widely used for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) despite uncertainty over efficacy. Objectives: To determine the efficacy of all pharmacological approaches, including monotherapy, augmentation and head-to-head approaches (drug versus drug, drug versus psychotherapy), in reducing PTSD symptom severity. Method: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials were undertaken; 115 studies were included. Results: Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) were found to be statistically superior to placebo in reduction of PTSD symptoms but the effect size was small (standardised mean difference −0.28, 95% CI −0.39 to −0.17). For individual monotherapy agents compared to placebo in two or more studies, we found small statistically significant evidence for the antidepressants fluoxetine, paroxetine, sertraline, venlafaxine and the antipsychotic quetiapine. For pharmacological augmentation, we found small statistically significant evidence for prazosin and risperidone. Conclusions: Some medications have a small positive effect on reducing PTSD symptom severity and can be considered as potential monotherapy treatments; these include fluoxetine, paroxetine, sertraline, venlafaxine and quetiapine. Two medications, prazosin and risperidone, also have a small positive effect when used to augment pharmacological monotherapy. There was no evidence of superiority for one intervention over another in the small number of head-to-head comparison studies. * Our review found evidence of a small positive effect for a handful of medications, which can reduce the symptom severity in post-traumatic stress disorder. * These were fluoxetine, paroxetine, sertraline, venlafaxine and the antipsychotic quetiapine when used as monotherapy, prazosin and risperidone for augmentation.