Moral Injury in Trauma-Exposed, Treatment-Seeking Police Officers and Military Veterans: Latent Class Analysis

Treatment of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder: A State-of-the-art Review

This narrative state-of-the-art review paper describes the progress in the understanding and treatment of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Over the last four decades, the scientific landscape has matured, with many interdisciplinary contributions to understanding its diagnosis, etiology, and epidemiology. Advances in genetics, neurobiology, stress pathophysiology, and brain imaging have made it apparent that chronic PTSD is a systemic disorder with high allostatic load. The current state of PTSD treatment includes a wide variety of pharmacological and psychotherapeutic approaches, of which many are evidence-based. However, the myriad challenges inherent in the disorder, such as individual and systemic barriers to good treatment outcome, comorbidity, emotional dysregulation, suicidality, dissociation, substance use, and trauma-related guilt and shame, often render treatment response suboptimal. These challenges are discussed as drivers for emerging novel treatment approaches, including early interventions in the Golden Hours, pharmacological and psychotherapeutic interventions, medication augmentation interventions, the use of psychedelics, as well as interventions targeting the brain and nervous system. All of this aims to improve symptom relief and clinical outcomes. Finally, a phase orientation to treatment is recognized as a tool to strategize treatment of the disorder, and position interventions in step with the progression of the pathophysiology. Revisions to guidelines and systems of care will be needed to incorporate innovative treatments as evidence emerges and they become mainstream. This generation is well-positioned to address the devastating and often chronic disabling impact of traumatic stress events through holistic, cutting-edge clinical efforts and interdisciplinary research.

The Middle-Out Approach to reconceptualizing, assessing, and analyzing traumatic stress reactions

Alternative models of traumatic stress and broader psychopathology have been proposed to address issues of heterogeneity, comorbidity, clinical utility, and equitable representation. However, systematic and practical methods and guidelines to organize and apply these models remain scarce. The Middle-Out Approach is a novel, integrative, contextually informed framework for organizing and applying existing empirical methods to evaluate current and alternative traumatic stress reactions. Rather than beginning to identify traumatic stress reactions from the top-down (i.e., disorder-first approach) or bottom-up (i.e., symptom-first approach), constructs are evaluated from the middle out (i.e., presentation-first approach), unconstrained by higher-order disorders or lower-order diagnostic symptoms. This approach provides innovation over previous methods at multiple levels, including the conceptualization of traumatic stress reactions as well as the type of assessments and data sources used and how they are used in statistical analyses. Conceptualizations prioritize the identification of middle-order phenotypes, representing person-centered clinical presentations, which are informed by the integration of multidimensional, transdiagnostic, and multimodal (e.g., psychosocial, physiological) assessments and/or data sources. Integrated data are then analyzed concurrently using person-centered statistical models to identify precise, discrete, and representative health outcomes within broader heterogeneous samples. Subsequent variable-centered analyses are then used to identify culturally sensitive and contextually informed correlates of phenotypes, their clinical utility, and the differential composition within and between broader traumatic stress reactions. Examples from the moral injury literature are used to illustrate practical applications that may increase clinical utility and the accurate representation of health outcomes for diverse individuals and communities.

Development of an online supportive treatment module for moral injury in military veterans and police officers

BACKGROUND

Military members and police officers often operate in high stakes situations and under high levels of physical and psychological stress. Consequently, they may be confronted with morally injurious experiences and develop moral injury. Most treatments for moral injury are cognitive-behavioral, face-to-face treatments, which may be supported by online interventions. Online interventions have shown promise in the treatment of trauma-related psychopathology, but few such interventions for moral injury yet exist.

OBJECTIVE

To develop and conduct a preliminary evaluation of an online treatment module for moral injury in treatment-seeking military veterans and police officers, to be used in conjunction with regular face-to-face treatment.

METHOD

An online module was developed based on the moral injury literature, using elements from seven existing treatments. A preliminary evaluation was conducted using both quantitative and qualitative methods, and focusing on perceived feasibility, acceptability and engagement of the module, as well as potential benefits and harms. The concept module was evaluated by 15 assessors, including patient representatives, multidisciplinary caregivers and experts.

RESULTS

The module was rated favorably, with mean evaluation scores ranging from 7.9 to 8.8 on a 10-point scale. Several suggestions for improvement were made, especially concerning privacy issues, safety instructions, patient-therapist collaborations, and role plays, and the module was adapted accordingly.

CONCLUSION

Using input from literature, patient representatives and experts, we developed an online treatment module for moral injury in military veterans and police officers, to be used in conjunction with face-to-face therapy. Acceptability and feasibility will be further examined in a future pilot study.

Caught between is and ought: The Moral Dissonance Model

Considerable academic effort has been invested in explaining the causes of, and processes behind moral injury. These efforts are mostly focused on assessment and treatment within a clinical setting. Collective and social factors contributing to moral injury are often overlooked in current literature. This perspective article considers the role of contextual factors associated with moral injury and proposes a framework that describes their relation to individual aspects. The resulting Moral Dissonance Model (MDM) draws on existing theories and frameworks. The MDM explains how dissonance can occur when the actual behavior-the response to a morally challenging situation-contradicts with morally desirable behavior. Individual and collective factors, which change over time, contribute to the experience of dissonance. The inability to sufficiently solve dissonance can lead to moral injury, but not as a matter of course. The MDM can help to understand the underlying processes of moral distress. It raises awareness of the influence of public debate and controversy, and the resulting changing societal attitudes over time. Its implications and future use are discussed.