The Effectiveness of Debriefing on the Mental Health of Rescue Teams: A Systematic Review.

3区 综合性期刊
Francesca Ancarani, Pedro Garijo Añaños, Bain Gutiérrez, Juan Pérez-Nievas, Germán Vicente-Rodríguez, Fernando Gimeno Marco
{"title":"The Effectiveness of Debriefing on the Mental Health of Rescue Teams: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Francesca Ancarani, Pedro Garijo Añaños, Bain Gutiérrez, Juan Pérez-Nievas, Germán Vicente-Rodríguez, Fernando Gimeno Marco","doi":"10.3390/ijerph22040590","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background</b>: Rescue teams and emergency services face high levels of mental health problems due to their frequent exposure to traumatic situations. Critical incident stress debriefing (CISD) is widely used as a psychological intervention for emergency responders and military personnel exposed to traumatic events. However, its effectiveness remains controversial, with systematic reviews yielding mixed results and some evidence of negative and harmful outcomes. This systematic review, conducted according to PRISMA guidelines, evaluates the evidence on the efficacy of CISD in mitigating psychological distress and preventing post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). <b>Methods</b>: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed and PsycINFO from inception to November 2024. Eligibility criteria included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies assessing the impact of CISD on PTSD, anxiety, depression, and psychological distress. Two independent reviewers screened studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias using the PEDro scale. Data narrative synthesis was applicable. <b>Results</b>: A total of 6 out of 371 studies were included, comprising 4751 participants. The PEDro scale showed that one study was of high methodological quality, four were of acceptable quality, and two had deficiencies. The findings revealed mixed outcomes: while some studies reported a reduction in PTSD symptoms, others found no significant effect or even potential harm. Heterogeneity in intervention implementation, population characteristics, and study quality influenced the results. Risk of bias was moderate to high in several studies, with limitations in sample size and follow-up duration. No specific effects have been studied in mountain rescue teams. <b>Conclusions</b>: Current evidence does not unequivocally support the efficacy of CISD in preventing PTSD and psychological distress. Given methodological concerns and potential adverse effects, alternative debriefing methods, such as Battlemind debriefing, warrant further exploration. Future research should focus on well-powered RCTs with standardized intervention protocols to enhance reliability.</p>","PeriodicalId":49056,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health","volume":"22 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12026970/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph22040590","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Rescue teams and emergency services face high levels of mental health problems due to their frequent exposure to traumatic situations. Critical incident stress debriefing (CISD) is widely used as a psychological intervention for emergency responders and military personnel exposed to traumatic events. However, its effectiveness remains controversial, with systematic reviews yielding mixed results and some evidence of negative and harmful outcomes. This systematic review, conducted according to PRISMA guidelines, evaluates the evidence on the efficacy of CISD in mitigating psychological distress and preventing post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Methods: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed and PsycINFO from inception to November 2024. Eligibility criteria included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies assessing the impact of CISD on PTSD, anxiety, depression, and psychological distress. Two independent reviewers screened studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias using the PEDro scale. Data narrative synthesis was applicable. Results: A total of 6 out of 371 studies were included, comprising 4751 participants. The PEDro scale showed that one study was of high methodological quality, four were of acceptable quality, and two had deficiencies. The findings revealed mixed outcomes: while some studies reported a reduction in PTSD symptoms, others found no significant effect or even potential harm. Heterogeneity in intervention implementation, population characteristics, and study quality influenced the results. Risk of bias was moderate to high in several studies, with limitations in sample size and follow-up duration. No specific effects have been studied in mountain rescue teams. Conclusions: Current evidence does not unequivocally support the efficacy of CISD in preventing PTSD and psychological distress. Given methodological concerns and potential adverse effects, alternative debriefing methods, such as Battlemind debriefing, warrant further exploration. Future research should focus on well-powered RCTs with standardized intervention protocols to enhance reliability.

救援人员心理健康述职的有效性:系统评价。
背景:救援队和紧急服务人员由于经常接触创伤情况而面临严重的心理健康问题。重大事件应激汇报(CISD)作为一种心理干预手段被广泛应用于紧急救援人员和暴露于创伤事件的军事人员。然而,其有效性仍然存在争议,系统评价得出的结果好坏参半,并有一些负面和有害后果的证据。本系统综述根据PRISMA指南进行,评估CISD在减轻心理困扰和预防创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)方面疗效的证据。方法:系统检索PubMed和PsycINFO自成立至2024年11月。入选标准包括随机对照试验(rct)和队列研究,评估CISD对PTSD、焦虑、抑郁和心理困扰的影响。两名独立审稿人筛选研究,提取数据,并使用PEDro量表评估偏倚风险。数据叙事综合适用。结果:共纳入371项研究中的6项,包括4751名参与者。PEDro量表显示一项研究的方法学质量高,四项质量可接受,两项有缺陷。研究结果显示了不同的结果:虽然一些研究报告说PTSD症状减轻了,但另一些研究发现没有明显的效果,甚至没有潜在的危害。干预实施、人群特征和研究质量的异质性影响了结果。几项研究的偏倚风险为中等至高,样本量和随访时间有限。在山地救援队中没有研究具体的影响。结论:目前的证据并不明确支持CISD在预防PTSD和心理困扰方面的有效性。考虑到方法上的问题和潜在的不利影响,其他汇报方法,如《Battlemind》汇报,值得进一步探索。未来的研究应侧重于采用标准化干预方案的随机对照试验,以提高可靠性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14422
期刊介绍: International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (IJERPH) (ISSN 1660-4601) is a peer-reviewed scientific journal that publishes original articles, critical reviews, research notes, and short communications in the interdisciplinary area of environmental health sciences and public health. It links several scientific disciplines including biology, biochemistry, biotechnology, cellular and molecular biology, chemistry, computer science, ecology, engineering, epidemiology, genetics, immunology, microbiology, oncology, pathology, pharmacology, and toxicology, in an integrated fashion, to address critical issues related to environmental quality and public health. Therefore, IJERPH focuses on the publication of scientific and technical information on the impacts of natural phenomena and anthropogenic factors on the quality of our environment, the interrelationships between environmental health and the quality of life, as well as the socio-cultural, political, economic, and legal considerations related to environmental stewardship and public health. The 2018 IJERPH Outstanding Reviewer Award has been launched! This award acknowledge those who have generously dedicated their time to review manuscripts submitted to IJERPH. See full details at http://www.mdpi.com/journal/ijerph/awards.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信