Collaborative interventions for physically injured trauma survivors: a pilot randomized effectiveness trial

Primary care utilization and detection of emotional distress after adolescent traumatic injury: identifying an unmet need

OBJECTIVE

Few investigations have assessed the primary care detection of adolescent posttraumatic emotional distress after an injury. We aimed to determine (1) the level of attachment to primary care providers (PCPs) and school providers among this group of high-risk adolescents, (2) the emotional status of this population postinjury, (3) continuity of care between trauma center and community care, and (4) PCPs' detection of emotional problems in adolescents after an injury.

METHODS

This was a prospective cohort study of traumatically injured adolescents aged 12 to 18 who were admitted to a level I regional trauma center. Adolescents were screened for posttraumatic stress symptoms, depressive symptoms, and alcohol use on the surgical ward and 4 to 6 months postinjury. PCPs were contacted by telephone 4 to 6 months postinjury to assess follow-up care and the detection of emotional distress.

RESULTS

In the surgical ward, 39.4% of the adolescent patients or their parents reported no identifiable source of regular medical care. Only 24.3% of the patients had visited a PCP during the 4 to 6 months after injury. At 4 to 6 months postinjury, 30% of the adolescents were experiencing high posttraumatic stress symptom levels, 11% were experiencing high depressive symptom levels, and 17% had high levels of alcohol use. PCPs did not detect any new emotional distress or problem drinking during postinjury office visits.

CONCLUSIONS

Injured adolescents represent a high-risk pediatric population, a substantial number of whom develop mental health problems postinjury. Furthermore, almost 40% of adolescents in our study reported no source of primary care. These results suggest that referrals from trauma centers to PCPs are necessary and that an increase in awareness of and screening for adolescent emotional distress postinjury during follow-up appointments and at school should be routine components of postinjury care.

Effects of medical crisis intervention on anxiety, depression, and posttraumatic stress symptoms: a meta-analysis

A meta-analysis of 11 studies (N=2124) investigating the impact of individual crisis intervention with medical patients yielded a significant, overall moderate effect size, d=0.44. The strongest effect of individual crisis intervention was on posttraumatic stress symptoms (d=0.57) and anxiety symptoms (d=0.52). Specific moderating factors, such as single versus multiple sessions, single versus multiple components of intervention, and level of interventionists' training, were also analyzed. In sum, the results support highly trained interventionists continuing to provide multi-session interventions in order to mitigate posttraumatic symptomatology following traumatic events.

The detection and treatment of posttraumatic distress and substance intoxication in the acute care inpatient setting

Each year, approximately 2.5 million Americans require inpatient admissions after sustaining traumatic physical injuries. Few investigations have assessed the routine detection and treatment of acute care inpatients with high levels of posttraumatic distress. A representative sample of 101 hospitalized patients with acute injuries was screened for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and depressive symptoms, as well as substance intoxication. Patients' medical records were reviewed for documentation of psychiatric symptoms and diagnoses and the initiation of early evaluation and treatment. High levels of PTSD and/or depressive symptoms were present in over 50% of patients. Although providers frequently noted symptomatic distress, few symptomatic patients received formal diagnoses, evaluations or treatment. Patients who had positive substance toxicology screens on admission infrequently received in-depth evaluation or treatment. A substantial number of injured trauma survivors have high levels of symptomatic distress that are inconsistently evaluated and treated in the acute care medical setting. Mental health interventions appear to be feasibly and effectively delivered from trauma centers. Therefore, ongoing investigation and policy initiatives informing the detection and treatment of patients with psychiatric disturbances in acute care could substantially enhance the quality of mental health care for injured survivors of individual and mass trauma.

Posttraumatic distress, alcohol disorders, and recurrent trauma across level 1 trauma centers

BACKGROUND

Injured survivors of individual and mass trauma receive their initial evaluation in acute care. Few investigations have comprehensively screened for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms and related comorbidities across sites.

METHODS

This investigation included 269 randomly selected injury survivors hospitalized at two level 1 trauma centers. All patients were screened for PTSD, depressive, and peritraumatic dissociative symptoms during their surgical inpatient admission. Prior traumatic life events and alcohol abuse/dependence also were assessed.

RESULTS

In this study, 58% of the patients demonstrated high levels of immediate posttraumatic distress or alcohol abuse/dependence. Regression analyses identified greater prior trauma, female gender, nonwhite ethnicity, and site as significant independent predictors for high levels of posttraumatic distress.

CONCLUSIONS

High levels of posttraumatic distress, recurrent trauma, and alcohol abuse/dependence were present in more than half of acute care inpatients. Early mental health screening and intervention procedures that target both PTSD and alcohol use should be developed for acute care settings.

[Posttraumatic stress disorder: an evidence-based approach]

The interventions used in the clinical management of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) focus on: 1. Prevention of the development of the disorder, after a traumatic event 2. Treatment of the disorder, once it is already established, 3. Maintenance of long term functioning and quality of life. A variety of psychotherapies and pharmacological treatments have been proposed as therapeutic options in the treatment of PTSD. However, many of these treatment modalities lack scientific background. In this article authors present the treatment modalities of PTSD which are supported by scientific evidence and discuss its applications and drawbacks.

Early Psychosocial and Pharmacological Interventions After Traumatic Events

1. There is no evidence to suggest that routine provision of single-session psychological interventions after traumatic events prevents the development of psychological sequelae. Some such evidence exists regarding multiple-session, cognitive-behavioral interventions. 2. There is no evidence to suggest that routine use of pharmacological agents prevents development of psychological sequelae in traumatized individuals. 3. Given the current evidence base, development of stepped-care programs focusing on education, screening, and treatment is warranted. 4. Currently, the main role of mental health professionals early on is to ensure emotionally supportive systems of care are in place, which will help identify individuals who appear most distressed so evidence-based interventions can be offered.

Posttraumatic disorders following injury: an empirical and methodological review

Although there has been a marked increase in research on psychological disorders following physical injury in recent years, there are many discrepancies between the reported findings. This paper reviews the prevalence outcomes of recent studies of the mental health sequelae of physical injury with a focus on posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), acute stress disorder (ASD), and depression. The review critically outlines some of the methodological factors that may have contributed to these discrepancies. The phenomenological overlap between organic and psychogenic symptoms, the use of narcotic analgesia, the role of brain injury, the timing and content of assessments, and litigation are discussed in terms of their potential to confound findings with this population. Recommendations are proposed to clarify methodological approaches in this area. It is suggested that a clearer understanding of the psychological effects of physical injury will require the widespread adoption of more rigorous, standardized and transparent methodological procedures.