Delivering treatment to morally injured UK military personnel and Veterans: The clinician experience

Restore and Rebuild (R&R): a protocol for a phase 2, randomised control trial to compare R&R as a treatment for moral injury-related mental health difficulties in UK military veterans to treatment as usual

BACKGROUND

Exposure to potentially morally injurious events is increasingly recognised as a concern across a range of occupational groups, including UK military veterans. Moral injury-related mental health difficulties can be challenging for clinicians to treat and there is currently no validated treatment available for UK veterans. We developed Restore and Rebuild (R&R) as a treatment for UK veterans struggling with moral injury-related mental health difficulties. This trial aims to examine whether it is feasible to conduct a pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT) of R&R treatment compared with a treatment-as-usual (TAU) control group.

METHODS

We will use a feasibility single-blind, single-site RCT design. The target population will be UK military veterans with moral injury-related mental health difficulties. We will recruit N=46 veteran patients who will be randomly allocated to R&R (n=23) or TAU (n=23). Patients randomised to R&R will receive the 20-session one-to-one treatment, delivered online. Veterans allocated to TAU, as there are currently no manualised treatments for moral injury-related mental health problems available, will receive the one-to-one treatment (online) typically provided to veterans who enter the mental health service for moral injury-related mental health difficulties. We will collect outcome measures of moral injury, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), alcohol misuse, common mental disorders and trauma memory at pretreatment baseline (before randomisation), end of treatment, 12 weeks and 24 weeks post-treatment. The primary outcome will be the proportion of patients who screen positive for PTSD and moral injury-related distress post-treatment.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This trial will establish whether R&R is feasible, well-tolerated and beneficial treatment for veterans with moral injury-related mental health difficulties. If so, the results of the trial will be widely disseminated and R&R may improve access to effective care for those who struggle following moral injury and reduce the associated negative consequences for veterans, their families and wider society.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN99573523.

Professionals' perspectives on relevant approaches to psychological care in moral injury: A qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

Despite the increasing consensus that moral injury (MI) is a unique type of psychological stressor, there is an ongoing debate about best practices for psychological care. This qualitative study explored the perceptions of UK and US professionals in the field of MI investigating advances and challenges in treatment or support delivery and issues relating to treatment/support feasibility and acceptability.

METHODS

15 professionals were recruited. Semi-structured, telephone/online interviews were carried out, and transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Two interconnected themes emerged: perceived barriers to appropriate care for MI cases and recommendations for providing effective care to MI patients. Professionals highlighted the challenges that occur due to the lack of empirical experience with MI, the negligence of patients' unique individual needs and the inflexibility in existing manualised treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings illustrate the need to evaluate the effectiveness of current approaches and explore alternative pathways, which will effectively support MI patients in the long-term. Key recommendations include the use of therapeutic techniques which lead to a personalised and flexible support plan to meet patients' needs, increase self-compassion and encourage patients to reconnect with their social networks. Interdisciplinary collaborations (e.g., religious/spiritual figures), could be a valuable addition following patients' agreement.

Restore and Rebuild (R&R) - a feasibility pilot study of a co-designed intervention for moral injury-related mental health difficulties

BACKGROUND

Moral injury can significantly negatively impact mental health, but currently no validated treatment for moral injury-related mental health difficulties exists in a UK context. This study aimed to examine whether the Restore and Rebuild (R&R) treatment was feasible to deliver, acceptable and well tolerated by UK military veterans with moral injury related mental health difficulties.

METHOD

The R&R treatment was delivered to 20 patients who reported distress related to exposure to a morally injurious event(s) during military service. R&R is a 20-session psychotherapy with key themes of processing the event, self compassion, connecting with others and core values. Treatment was delivered online, weekly, one-to-one by a single therapist. Qualitative interviews with patients and the therapist who delivered R&R were conducted to explore acceptability and analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Following treatment, patients experienced a significant reduction in symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, alcohol misuse and moral injury related distress. R&R was found to be well tolerated by patients and improved their perceived wellbeing.

CONCLUSIONS

These results provide preliminary evidence that veterans struggling with moral injury related mental ill health can benefit from R&R treatment.

Veterans' experiences of moral injury, treatment and recommendations for future support

INTRODUCTION

Moral injury (MI) significantly impacts the lives of many UK military veterans however, there is a lack of manualised treatment to address the needs of this population. To develop future treatments that are acceptable and well tolerated, veterans should be consulted on their experiences of existing psychological treatments and suggestions for future treatments.

METHODS

10 UK military veterans were interviewed about their experiences of receiving treatment for psychological difficulties after MI, and beliefs about core components of future treatments. Thematic analysis of these interviews were conducted.

RESULTS

2 superordinate themes were identified: experiences of previous mental health treatment and perceptions of the proposed treatments. Reflections on cognitive behavioural therapy were mixed, with some describing that it did not ameliorate their guilt or shame. In future treatments, focusing on values, using written letters and including therapy sessions with close companions were considered beneficial. Veterans reported that a strong rapport with therapist was key for MI treatment.

CONCLUSION

Findings provide a useful account of how current post-trauma treatments may be experienced by patients with MI. Although limited by sample size, the results highlight therapeutic approaches that may be helpful in future and provide important considerations for therapists treating MI.

Effectiveness of treatments for symptoms of post-trauma related guilt, shame and anger in military and civilian populations: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Individuals who have been exposed to a traumatic event can develop profound feelings of guilt, shame and anger. Yet, studies of treatments for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) have largely investigated changes in PTSD symptoms relating to a sense of ongoing fear or threat and the effectiveness of such treatments for post-trauma related guilt, shame or anger symptom reduction is comparatively not well understood.

METHODS

This review systematically examined the effectiveness of existing treatment approaches for three symptoms associated with exposure to traumatic events: guilt, shame and anger. Studies included had to be published after 2010 with a sample size of n=50 or greater to ensure stable treatment outcome estimates.

RESULTS

15 studies were included, consisting of both civilian and (ex-) military population samples exposed to a wide range of traumatic events (eg, combat-related, sexual abuse). Findings indicated a moderate strength of evidence that both cognitive-based and exposure-based treatments are similarly effective in reducing symptoms. Cognitive-based treatments were found to effectively reduce post-trauma related guilt and anger, while exposure-based treatments appeared effective for post-trauma related guilt, shame and anger.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest the importance of confronting and discussing the traumatic event during therapy, rather than using less directive treatments (eg, supportive counselling).Nonetheless, while these results are promising, firm conclusions regarding the comparative effectiveness and long-term impact of these treatments could not be drawn due to insufficient evidence. Further empirical research is needed to examine populations exposed to traumatic events and investigate which treatment approaches (or combination thereof) are more effective in the long-term.

Development of an intervention for moral injury-related mental health difficulties in UK military veterans: a feasibility pilot study protocol

Background: Experiencing potentially morally injurious events (PMIEs) has been found to be significantly associated with poor mental health outcomes in military personnel/veterans. Currently, no manualised treatment for moral injury-related mental health difficulties for UK veterans exists. This article describes the design, methods and expected data collection of the Restore & Rebuild (R&R) protocol, which aims to develop procedures to treat moral injury related mental ill health informed by a codesign approach. Methods: The study consists of three main stages. First, a systematic review will be conducted to understand the best treatments for the symptoms central to moral injury-related mental ill health (stage 1). Then the R&R manual will be co-designed with the support of UK veteran participants with lived experience of PMIEs as well as key stakeholders who have experience of supporting moral injury affected individuals (stage 2). The final stage of this study is to conduct a pilot study to explore the feasibility and acceptability of the R&R manual (stage 3). Results: Qualitative data will be analysed using thematic analysis. Conclusions: This study was approved by the King's College London's Research Ethics Committee (HR-20/21-20850). The findings will be disseminated in several ways, including publication in academic journals, a free training event and presentation at conferences. By providing information on veteran, stakeholder and clinician experiences, we anticipate that the findings will not only inform the development of an acceptable evidence-based approach for treating moral injury-related mental health problems, but they may also help to inform broader approaches to providing care to trauma exposed military veterans.

Supporting nurse leaders to recognise and mitigate the effects of moral injury

The concept of moral injury has been around for several decades, yet its effect on nurses remains under-recognised. Moral injury is defined as the biopsychosocial harm that arises from a violation of one's moral code, meaning that a person is powerless to uphold and enact what they believe is morally right. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has brought the issue of moral injury into focus because many nurses and other healthcare professionals have encountered potentially morally injurious events, resulting in increased pressure and emotional demands. It is essential that nurse leaders recognise moral injury if its effects are to be addressed. This article describes moral injury and its effects on nurses, and offers nurse leaders a practical framework for mitigating this issue. The framework aims to support nurse leaders to increase their understanding of moral injury, address any ethical challenges, ensure they are adequately prepared to provide support to nurses, and enhance their awareness of various interventions that can mitigate moral injury.

Identifying and mitigating moral injury risks in military behavioral health providers

The term "moral injury" was initially used to describe the multifaceted pain that service members feel after perpetrating, witnessing, or failing to prevent acts that conflict with their moral codes. More recently the term has been used to describe healthcare providers' pain stemming from their experiences serving on the frontlines of the healthcare system when: a medical error causes serious harm to patients, systems continuously impede their abilities to provide proper care, or providers assess that they have acted in ways that conflict with their professional ethics or oaths to "do no harm." This article explores moral injury risk at the intersection of military service and healthcare by examining challenges that military behavioral healthcare providers face. Leveraging moral injury definitions previously applied to service members (personal or witnessed transgressions) and in two healthcare contexts ("second victim" to adverse client outcomes and system-driven moral distress), as well as literature on ethical challenges in military behavioral health, this paper uncovers situations that may amplify military behavioral health providers' risks for moral injury. It concludes by offering policy and practice recommendations germane to military medicine aimed at alleviating pressures military behavioral healthcare providers face and mitigating moral injuries' potential ripple effects on provider wellness, retention and care quality.

Moral Injury, Chaplaincy and Mental Health Provider Approaches to Treatment: A Scoping Review

The aim of this research was to describe the evidence examining the approaches taken by mental health providers (MHPs) and chaplains to address symptoms related to moral injury (MI) or exposure to potentially morally injurious events (PMIEs). This research also considers the implications for a holistic approach to address symptoms related to MI that combines mental health and chaplaincy work. A scoping review of literature was conducted using Medline, PsycINFO, Embase, Central Register of Controlled Trials, Proquest, Philosphers Index, CINAHL, SocINDEX, Academic Search Complete, Web of Science and Scopus databases using search terms related to MI and chaplaincy approaches or psychological approaches to MI. The search identified 35 eligible studies: 26 quantitative studies and nine qualitative studies. Most quantitative studies (n = 33) were conducted in military samples. The studies examined interventions delivered by chaplains (n = 5), MHPs (n = 23) and combined approaches (n = 7). Most studies used symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and/or depression as primary outcomes. Various approaches to addressing MI have been reported in the literature, including MHP, chaplaincy and combined approaches, however, there is currently limited evidence to support the effectiveness of any approach. There is a need for high quality empirical studies assessing the effectiveness of interventions designed to address MI-related symptoms. Outcome measures should include the breadth of psychosocial and spiritual impacts of MI if we are to establish the benefits of MHP and chaplaincy approaches and the potential incremental value of combining both approaches into a holistic model of care.

A clinical trial comparing trauma-informed guilt reduction therapy (TrIGR), a brief intervention for trauma-related guilt, to supportive care therapy

INTRODUCTION

Trauma-related guilt is common, associated with posttraumatic mental health problems, and can persist after posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) treatment. We compared the efficacy of two six-session psychotherapies, Trauma-Informed Guilt Reduction (TrIGR) and Supportive Care Therapy (SCT), for reducing trauma-related guilt. TrIGR helps patients accurately appraise their role in the trauma and re-engage in values. In SCT, patients guide session content.

METHODS

A total of 184 veterans seeking VA mental health services were enrolled across two sites; 145 veterans (mean age: 39.2 [8.1]; 92.4% male; 84.8% with PTSD) who endorsed guilt related to a traumatic event that occurred during a post 9/11 Iraq or Afghanistan deployment were randomized and assessed at baseline, posttreatment, 3- and 6-month follow-up.

RESULTS

Linear mixed models using intent-to-treat analyses showed guilt decreased in both conditions with a greater decrease for TrIGR (treatment × time, -0.22; F _{1, 455.2}  = 18.49, p = .001; d = 0.92) than supportive therapy. PTSD and depressive symptoms showed the same pattern. TrIGR had significantly higher likelihood of PTSD treatment response (67% vs. 40%), loss of PTSD diagnosis (50% vs. 14%), and meaningful change in depression (54% vs. 27%) than supportive therapy. Psychological distress and trait shame improved in both conditions. Quality of life did not change.

CONCLUSIONS

Targeting guilt appears to be an effective means for reducing posttraumatic symptoms and distress.

Companions in the Abyss: A Feasibility and Acceptability Study of an Online Therapy Group for Healthcare Providers Working During the COVID-19 Pandemic

INTRODUCTION

In the context of the global pandemic of the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus (COVID-19), healthcare providers (HCPs) have experienced difficult moral and ethical dilemmas. Research is highlighting the importance of moral injury (MI)-a trauma syndrome related to transgressing personal morals and values-in understanding the psychological harm and occupational impairment experienced by HCPs. To date, MI treatments have largely been developed for military personnel and veterans and rely on in-person one-on-one psychotherapy.

PURPOSE

This project aims to explore the feasibility and acceptability of an evidence-informed online Acceptance and Commitment Therapy-based group therapy for MI in HCPs called "Accepting Moral Pain and Suffering for Healthcare Providers" (AMPS-HCP).

METHOD

This feasibility and acceptability study included three separate phases with the first two phases focused on the development of the psychotherapeutic intervention and the third phase focused on the evaluation of the psychotherapeutic intervention. Eight participants (including registered nurses, practical nurses and respiratory therapists) completed seven 90-min sessions in an online group format. The focus of these sessions included ACT and MI psychoeducation and experientials. Qualitative semi-structured interview data was thematically analyzed while demographic and quantitative self-reported outcome data underwent descriptive analysis and non-parametric testing.

RESULTS

Results show that the intervention was highly feasible and acceptable to healthcare providers who worked on the frontline during COVID-19. Feasibility (referrals, eligibility, retention, participation engagement) was strong (8 out of 10 participants; 80% vs. desired >70% eligibility) and overall, 80% of participants completed 71% of the intervention. Data further supported the applicability and acceptability of the intervention. Preliminary data suggests that AMPS-HCP may supports HCPs to address MI.

DISCUSSION

This study is the first to report on the development and evaluation of an online MI group intervention for registered nurses, registered practical nurses, and respiratory therapists working during COVID-19. Results showed the use of both the online and group components of the intervention were acceptable and feasible during the third wave of COVID-19.