Explore the vast range of titles available.

Improving our understanding of the symptom-level relationships among posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), complex posttraumatic stress disorder (CPTSD), and posttraumatic growth (PTG) holds promise for identifying opportunities for effective interventions. We sought to better understand the network of relationships among symptoms of PTSD and CPTSD, and features of PTG. An international online sample of adults who endorsed the experience of at least one traumatic experience (  = 704; 57% women) completed measures of PTSD, CPTSD, and PTG on two occasions, a month apart. We specified three domains of symptoms corresponding to PTSD, CPTSD and PTG, and estimated partial correlation networks and bridge symptoms between these domains. We also assessed the invariance of the network structure across the one-month interval. Data and code used for the present analyses are available for verification and further research, consistent with FAIR principles. Stability indices and invariance tests across the one-month interval provided confidence that the network is robust and that the magnitude of edges can be meaningfully interpreted. A majority of the edges between PTSD symptoms and PTG were positive, whereas the majority of edges between CPTSD-specific symptoms and PTG were negative. Bootstrap tests identified symptoms with significantly greater bridge strength than others. These included intrusive memories/images, avoidance of external reminders of trauma, difficulties feeling close to others and changed priorities of what is important in life. If further research confirms that these relationships are causal, then there is the intriguing possibility that reducing PTSD symptoms may have the paradoxical effect of potentially undermining PTG. To best promote PTG alongside PTSD/CPTSD, our findings suggest that CPTSD-specific symptoms are more promising intervention targets than PTSD symptoms.

Perceived social support is an established predictor of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) after exposure to a traumatic event. Gender is an important factor that could differentiate responses to social support, yet this has been little explored. Symptoms of complex PTSD are also common following trauma but have been under-researched in this context. Large scale studies with culturally diverse samples are particularly lacking. In a multi-country sample, we examined: (a) gender differences in perceived social support and both posttraumatic stress symptom severity (PTSS) and complex posttraumatic stress symptom severity (CPTSS); (b) associations between social support and PTSS/CPTSS; and (c) the potential moderating role of gender in the relationship between perceived social support and trauma-related distress. A total of 2483 adults ( = 30yrs, 69.9% females) from 39 countries, who had been exposed to mixed trauma types, completed the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support and the International Trauma Questionnaire (which captures PTSS/CPTSS). Regression analyses examined associations between gender, perceived social support, and PTSS/CPTSS; and tested for gender by social support interactions in predicting PTSS/CPTSS scores. Models were adjusted for age and socioeconomic status. In our cross-country sample, females had greater PTSS/CPTSS than males (  = .23 [95% CI 0.16, 0.30],  < .001;  = .20 [0.12, 0.27],  < .001; respectively), but there was no evidence of gender differences in perceived social support (  = .05 [-0.05, 0.16],  = .33). For both genders, low perceived social support was associated with higher PTSS/CPTSS (females:  = -.16 [-0.20, -0.12],  < .001;  = -.27 [-0.30, -0.24],  < .001; respectively; males:  = -.22 [-0.29, -0.15],  < .001;  = -.31 [-0.36, -0.26],  < .001; respectively), and for PTSS only we found weak evidence that this association was stronger for males vs. females (  = .07 [0.04, 0.14,  = .04). Individuals who feel more socially supported have lower trauma-related distress, and this association is similar in males and females. PTSD/CPTSD interventions may benefit from augmenting perceived social support, regardless of gender.

Background: The introduction of the diagnosis of complex posttraumatic stress disorder (CPTSD) by ICD-11 is a turning point in the field of traumatic stress studies. It's therefore important to examine the validity of CPTSD in refugee groups exposed to complex trauma (CT) defined as a repeated, prolonged, interpersonal traumatic event. Objective: The objective of this study was to compare DSM-5 and ICD-11 post-traumatic stress disorder diagnoses and to evaluate the discriminant validity of ICD-11 PTSD and CPTSD constructs in a sample of treatment-seeking refugees living in Italy. Method: The study sample included 120 treatment-seeking African refugees living in Italy. All participants were survivors of at least one CT. PTSD and CPTSD diagnoses were assessed according to both DSM-5 and ICD-11 criteria. Results: Findings revealed that 79% of the participants met the DSM-5 criteria for PTSD, 38% for ICD-11 PTSD and 30% for ICD-11 CPTSD. Generally, ICD-11 CPTSD items evidenced strong sensitivity and negative predictive power, low specificity and positive predictive power. Latent class analysis results identified two distinct groups: (1) a PTSD class, (2) a CPTSD class. None of the demographic and trauma-related variables analysed was significantly associated with diagnostic group. On the other hand, the months spent in Italy were significantly associated with PCL-5 score. Conclusions: Findings extend the current evidence base to support the discriminant validity of PTSD and CPTSD amongst refugees exposed to torture and other gross violations of human rights. The results suggest also that, in the post-traumatic phase, the time spent in a 'safe place' condition contributes to improve the severity of post-traumatic symptomatology, but neither this variable nor other socio-demographic factors seem to contribute to the emergence of complex PTSD. Further investigations are needed to clarify which specific vulnerability factors influence the development of PTSD or CPTSD in refugees exposed to complex trauma. * Complex PTSD (CPTSD) diagnosis newly introduced 80 by ICD-11 has been scarcely evaluated with treatmentseeking refugees exposed to complex trauma (CT).* This study evaluated the 85 validity of ICD-11 PTSD and CPTSD in a sample of African refugees exposed to CT and recently arrived in Italy.* Findings indicated that 90 complex trauma leads to CPTSD in a minority of refugees only, approximately in one third of cases.* Latent class analysis results identified two distinct groups PTSD and CPTSD supporting the ICD-11 classification.

Background: The recently published ICD-11 includes substantial changes to the diagnosis of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and introduces the diagnosis of Complex PTSD (CPTSD). The International Trauma Interview (ITI) has been developed for clinicians to assess these new diagnoses but has not yet been evaluated. Objectives: To evaluate the psychometric properties of the Swedish translation of the ITI by examining the interrater agreement, latent structure, internal consistency, and convergent and discriminant validity. Methods: In a prospective study, 186 adults who had experienced a potentially traumatic event were assessed with the ITI and answered questionnaires for symptoms of posttraumatic stress, other psychiatric disorders, functional disability, and quality of life (QoL). Results: The diagnostic rate was 16% for PTSD and 6% for CPTSD. Interrater agreement was satisfactory (α = .76), and confirmatory factor analysis indicated that a two-factor second-20 order model consistent with the ICD-11 model of CPTSD provided acceptable fit to the data. Composite reliability analysis demonstrated that the ITI possessed acceptable internal reliability, and associations with measures of other psychiatric disorders, insomnia, functional disability, and QoL supported the concurrent validity of the ITI. Conclusion: Swedish ITI shows promise as a clinician-administered instrument to assess and diagnose ICD-11 PTSD and CPTSD. * The Swedish version of the International Trauma Interview measures two latent factors reflecting symptoms of PTSD and disturbances in self organization (DSO).* PTSD symptoms were most strongly associated with measures of fear, anxiety, and insomnia, and DSO symptoms with measures of depression, general psychiatric distress, greater functional impairment, and reduced quality of life.* The Swedish version of the International Trauma Interview shows promise as a method of assessing ICD-11 PTSD and CPTSD.

This letter to the editor responds to a recent EJPT editorial and following commentary which express concerns about the validity of the ICD-11 complex PTSD (CPTSD) diagnosis. Achterhof and colleagues caution that latent profile analyses and latent class analyses, which have been frequently used to demonstrate the discriminative validity of the ICD-11 PTSD and CPTSD constructs, have limitations and cannot be relied on to definitively determine the validity of the diagnosis. Ford takes a broader perspective and introduces the concept of 'cPTSD' which describes a wide ranging set of symptoms identified from studies related to DSM-IV, DSM-V and ICD-11 and proposes that the validity of the ICD-11 CPTSD is in question as it does not address the multiple symptoms identified from previous trauma-related disorders. We argue that ICD-11 CPTSD is a theory-driven, empirically supported construct that has internal consistency and conceptual coherence and that it need not explain nor resolve the inconsistencies of past formulations to demonstrate its validity. We do agree with Ford and with Achterhof and colleagues that no one single statistical process can definitively answer the question of whether CPTSD is a valid construct. We reference several studies utilizing many different statistical approaches implemented across several countries, the overwhelming majority of which have supported the validity of ICD-11 as a unique construct. We conclude with our own cautions about ICD-11 CPTSD research to date and identify important next steps.

Background: Chronic and repeated trauma are well-established risk factors for complex posttraumatic stress disorder (CPTSD) in adult samples. Less is known about how trauma history and other factors contribute to the development of CPTSD in adolescence. Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the potential contribution of trauma history and social factors to CPTSD in adolescents. Method: In a cross-sectional community study of 1299 adolescents aged 12-16 years, PTSD (n = 97) and CPTSD (n = 108) was assessed with the Child and Adolescent version of the International Trauma Questionnaire (ITQ-CA). Trauma exposure, family functioning, school problems, and social support as potential discriminating factors between the PTSD and CPTSD groups were investigated. Results: Cumulative trauma exposure did not discriminate between PTSD and CPTSD in this sample. CPTSD was associated with family problems (such as financial difficulties and conflicts in the home), school problems (bullying and learning difficulties), and lack of social support. Conclusions: Our study indicates that factors other than cumulative trauma are important for the development of CPTSD in adolescence. Interventions targeting adolescent's social environment both at home and at school may be beneficial. Social factors, such as family problems, school problems, and lack of social support are important predictors of complex posttraumatic stress in adolescence following traumatic events.

The International Trauma Interview (ITI) is a structured clinician-administered measure developed to assess posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and complex PTSD (CPTSD) as defined in the 11th version of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11). This study aimed to investigate a psychometric evaluation of the ITI and to finalise the English language version. The latent structure, internal consistency, interrater agreement, and convergent and discriminant validity were evaluated with data from a convenience sample, drawn from an existing research cohort, of 131 trauma exposed participants from the United Kingdom reporting past diagnosis for PTSD or who had screened positively for traumatic stress symptoms. A range of self-report measures evaluating depression, panic, insomnia, dissociation, emotion dysregulation, negative cognitions about self, interpersonal functioning and general wellbeing were completed. Confirmatory factor analysis supported an adjusted second-order two-factor model of PTSD and disturbances in self-organisation (DSO) symptoms, allowing affect dysregulation to also load onto the PTSD factor, over alternative models. The ITI scores showed acceptable internal consistency, and interrater reliability was strong. Findings for convergent and discriminant validity were mostly as predicted for PTSD and DSO domains. Correlations with the ITQ were good but coefficients for the level of agreement of PTSD diagnosis and CPTSD diagnosis between the ITI and the ITQ were weaker, and item level agreement was variable. Results provide support for the reliability and validity of the ITI as a measure of ICD-11 PTSD and CPTSD. Final revisions of the ITI are described.

Complex PTSD (CPTSD) has been incorporated in the 11th edition of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) as a mental health condition distinct from PTSD. The objective of the current study is to determine whether individuals classified as having CPTSD can benefit from an intensive trauma-focused treatment, resulting in decreased PTSD and CPTSD symptoms, and loss of diagnoses. Patients diagnosed with PTSD (N = 308) took part in an intensive 8-day treatment programme combining prolonged exposure, EMDR therapy, psycho-education, and physical activity. The treatment was not phase-based in that it did not contain a stabilization phase or skill training prior to therapy. CPTSD diagnosis was assessed by means of the International Trauma Questionnaire (ITQ) and PTSD diagnosis was assessed with both the ITQ and CAPS-5. Treatment response was measured with the CAPS-5, PCL-5, and ITQ. Symptoms of both PTSD and CPTSD significantly decreased from pre- to post-treatment resulting in a significant loss of CAPS-5 based PTSD (74.0%) and ITQ-based PTSD and CPTSD diagnoses (85.0% and 87.7%, respectively). No adverse events occurred in terms of suicides, suicide attempts, or hospital admissions. The results are supportive of the notion that the majority of patients classified as having CPTSD strongly benefit from an intensive trauma-focused treatment for their PTSD.

Background: The WHO International Classification of Diseases, 11th version (ICD-11), includes a trauma-related diagnosis of complex posttraumatic stress disorder (CPTSD) distinct from posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Results from previous studies support the validity of this distinction. However, no studies to date have evaluated the ICD-11 model of PTSD and CPTSD in treatment-seeking military veterans. Objective: To determine if the distribution of symptoms in treatment-seeking Danish veterans was consistent with the ICD-11 PTSD and CPTSD symptom profiles. Based on previous studies, we hypothesized that separate classes representing PTSD and CPTSD would be found that membership of a potential CPTSD-class would be predicted by a larger number of childhood traumas, and that a potential distinction between PTSD and CPTSD would be supported by differences in sociodemographic and functional outcomes. Method: Participants (N = 1,541) were formerly deployed Danish soldiers who completed proxy measures of ICD-11 PTSD and disturbances in self-organization (DSO) symptoms, along with self-report measures of traumatic life events, prior to starting treatment at the Military Psychology Department of the Danish Defence. Results: All hypotheses were supported. Latent profile analysis (LPA) revealed separate classes representing PTSD and CPTSD. In comparison to the PTSD-class, membership of the CPTSD-class was predicted by more childhood traumatic experiences, and members of this class were more likely being single/divorced/widowed and more likely to use psychotropic medication. Besides a PTSD-class and a CPTSD-class, LPA revealed a Low Symptoms-class, a Moderate DSO-class, a Hyperarousal-class, and a High DSO-class, with clear differences in functional outcomes between classes. Conclusion: Findings replicate previous studies supporting the distinction between ICD-11 PTSD and CPTSD. In addition, there seem to be groups of treatment-seeking military veterans that do not fulfil full criteria for a trauma-related disorder. Further research should explore subsyndromal PTSD and CPTSD profiles in veterans and other populations. * The present study evaluated the ICD-11 model of PTSD and CPTSD in a sample of treatment-seeking military veterans. * Latent profile analysis revealed a CPTSD-class, a PTSD-class, a High DSO-class, a Hyperarousal-class, a Moderate DSO-class, and a Low Symptoms-class. * CPTSD is a more debilitating condition than PTSD. * Compared to the PTSD-class, membership of the CPTSD-class was predicted by increased exposure to childhood traumatic experiences.

On 6 December 2019 we start the 10th year of the European Journal of Psychotraumatogy (EJPT), a full Open Access journal on psychotrauma. This editorial is part of a special issue celebrating the 10 years anniversary of the journal and acknowledging some of our most impactful articles of the past decade. In this editorial the editors present a decennial review of the field addressing a range of topics that are core to both the journal and to psychotraumatology as a discipline. These include neurobiological developments (genomics, neuroimaging and neuroendocrine research), forms of trauma exposure and impact across the lifespan, mass trauma and early interventions, work-related trauma, trauma in refugee populations, and the potential consequences of trauma such as PTSD or Complex PTSD, but also resilience. We address innovations in psychological, medication (enhanced) and technology-assisted treatments, mediators and moderators like social support and finally how new research methods help us to gain insights in symptom structures or to better predict symptom development or treatment success. We aimed to answer three questions 1. Where did we stand in 2010? 2. What did we learn in the past 10 years? 3. What are our knowledge gaps? We conclude with a number of recommendations concerning top priorities for the future direction of the field of psychotraumatology and correspondingly the journal. * Celebrating 10 years of the European Journal of Psychotraumatology the editors present a decennial review of core topics in the field and conclude with recommendations concerning top priorities for future research.