Service innovations

EMDR Individual Protocol for Paraprofessional Use: A Randomized Controlled Trial With First Responders

The eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) individual protocol for paraprofessional use in acute trauma situations (EMDR-PROPARA) is part of a project developed at the initiative of Dr. Francine Shapiro. This randomized clinical trial examined the effectiveness of the protocol administered by experienced EMDR therapists. There were 39 traumatized first responders on active duty randomly assigned to receive two 90-min sessions of either EMDR-PROPARA or of supportive counseling. Participants in the EMDR-PROPARA group showed benefits immediately after treatment, with their scores on the Short PTSD Rating Interview (SPRINT) showing further decreases at 3-month follow-up. In comparison, supportive counseling participants experienced a nonsignificant decrease after treatment and an increase in the SPRINT scores at the second follow-up. The significant difference between the two treatments provides preliminary support for EMDR-PROPARA’s effectiveness in reducing severity of posttraumatic symptoms and subjective global improvement. More controlled research is recommended to evaluate further the efficacy of this intervention.

Early psychological interventions to treat acute traumatic stress symptoms

BACKGROUND

The amelioration of psychological distress following traumatic events is a major concern. Systematic reviews suggest that interventions targeted at all of those exposed to such events are not effective at preventing post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Recently other forms of intervention have been developed with the aim of treating acute traumatic stress problems.

OBJECTIVES

To perform a systematic review of randomised controlled trials of all psychological treatments and interventions commenced within three months of a traumatic event aimed at treating acute traumatic stress reactions. The review followed the guidelines of the Cochrane Collaboration.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Systematic searches were performed of of CCDAN Registers up to August 2008. Editions of key journals were searched by hand over a period of two years; personal communication was undertaken with key experts in the field; online discussion fora were searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of any psychological intervention or treatment designed to reduce acute traumatic stress symptoms, with the exception of single session interventions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were entered and analysed for summary effects using Review Manager 5.0 software. Standardised mean differences were calculated for continuous variable outcome data. Relative risks were calculated for dichotomous outcome data. When statistical heterogeneity was present a random effects model was applied.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifteen studies (two with long term follow-up studies) were identified examining a range of interventions.In terms of main findings, twelve studies evaluated brief trauma focused cognitive behavioural interventions (TF-CBT). TF-CBT was more effective than a waiting list intervention (6 studies, 471 participants; SMD -0.64, 95% CI -1.06, -0.23) and supportive counselling (4 studies, 198 participants; SMD -0.67, 95% CI -1.12, -0.23). Effects against supportive counselling were still present at 6 month follow-up (4 studies, 170 participants; SMD -0.64, 95% CI -1.02, -0.25). There was no evidence of the effectiveness of a structured writing intervention when compared against minimal intervention (2 studies, 149 participants; SMD -0.15, 95% CI -0.48, 0.17).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was evidence that individual TF-CBT was effective for individuals with acute traumatic stress symptoms compared to both waiting list and supportive counselling interventions. The quality of trials included was variable and sample sizes were often small. There was considerable clinical heterogeneity in the included studies and unexplained statistical heterogeneity observed in some comparisons. This suggests the need for caution in interpreting the results of this review. Additional high quality trials with longer follow up periods are required to further test TF-CBT and other forms of psychological intervention.

Multiple session early psychological interventions for the prevention of post-traumatic stress disorder

BACKGROUND

The prevention of long-term psychological distress following traumatic events is a major concern. Systematic reviews have suggested that individual Psychological Debriefing is not an effective intervention at preventing post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Recently other forms of intervention have been developed with the aim of preventing PTSD.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the efficacy of multiple session early psychological interventions commenced within three months of a traumatic event aimed at preventing PTSD. Single session individual/group psychological interventions were excluded.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Computerised databases were searched systematically, the most recent search was conducted in August 2008. The Journal of Traumatic Stress and the Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology were handsearched for the last two years. Personal communication was undertaken with key experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of any multiple session early psychological intervention or treatment (two or more sessions) designed to prevent symptoms of PTSD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were entered using Review Manager software. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed individually by two review authors. Data were analysed for summary effects using Review Manager 4.2. Mean difference was used for meta-analysis of continuous outcomes and relative risk for dichotomous outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

Eleven studies with a total of 941 participants were found to have evaluated brief psychological interventions aimed at preventing PTSD in individuals exposed to a specific traumatic event, examining a heterogeneous range of interventions. Eight studies were entered into meta-analysis. There was no observable difference between treatment and control conditions on primary outcome measures for these interventions at initial outcome (k=5, n=479; RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.60 to 1.17). There was a trend for increased self-report of PTSD symptoms at 3 to 6 month follow-up in those who received an intervention (k=4, n=292; SMD 0.23; 95% CI 0.00 to 0.46). Two studies compared a memory structuring intervention against supportive listening. There was no evidence supporting the efficacy of this intervention.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest that no psychological intervention can be recommended for routine use following traumatic events and that multiple session interventions, like single session interventions, may have an adverse effect on some individuals. The clear practice implication of this is that, at present, multiple session interventions aimed at all individuals exposed to traumatic events should not be used. Further, better designed studies that explore new approaches to early intervention are now required.