8-day intensive treatment programme for PTSD and complex PTSD vs treatment as usual: a clinical trial.

IF 4.1 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY
Hannes Gahnfelt, Sandra Weineland, Per F G Carlsson, Christina Blomdahl
{"title":"8-day intensive treatment programme for PTSD and complex PTSD vs treatment as usual: a clinical trial.","authors":"Hannes Gahnfelt, Sandra Weineland, Per F G Carlsson, Christina Blomdahl","doi":"10.1080/20008066.2025.2553422","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Intensive treatment programmes (ITP) have emerged as a treatment option for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and Complex PTSD (CPTSD) during the last decade. Results are promising, but further studies with control group are needed.<b>Objective:</b> To compare the effect of an 8-day ITP with traditionally spaced treatments for PTSD.<b>Method:</b> Participants with PTSD or CPTSD (<i>n</i> = 101) in a Swedish psychiatric outpatient clinic received either 8-day ITP, including prolonged exposure, eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing therapy, physical activity and psychoeducation, or traditionally spaced treatment (TAU). Participants were allocated by shared decision-making.<b>Results:</b> A significant reduction in PTSD symptoms was observed at posttreatment, with large effect sizes in both conditions. Symptom reduction was maintained at follow-up. There was no significant difference between treatment groups in degree of symptom reduction at posttreatment and follow-up. In the ITP, 73.3% did not meet criteria for PTSD at follow-up, and 74.4% in TAU. There was a significant difference in dropout rates between treatment groups: 4.3% in ITP and 24.1% in TAU.<b>Conclusions:</b> Results indicate that ITP can be considered an effective treatment in healthcare settings where multiple treatment options are available. Randomised control studies to isolate treatment effects and finding underlying factors explaining the difference in dropout rates are important directions for future research.</p>","PeriodicalId":12055,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Psychotraumatology","volume":"16 1","pages":"2553422"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12444955/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Psychotraumatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20008066.2025.2553422","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/9/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Intensive treatment programmes (ITP) have emerged as a treatment option for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and Complex PTSD (CPTSD) during the last decade. Results are promising, but further studies with control group are needed.Objective: To compare the effect of an 8-day ITP with traditionally spaced treatments for PTSD.Method: Participants with PTSD or CPTSD (n = 101) in a Swedish psychiatric outpatient clinic received either 8-day ITP, including prolonged exposure, eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing therapy, physical activity and psychoeducation, or traditionally spaced treatment (TAU). Participants were allocated by shared decision-making.Results: A significant reduction in PTSD symptoms was observed at posttreatment, with large effect sizes in both conditions. Symptom reduction was maintained at follow-up. There was no significant difference between treatment groups in degree of symptom reduction at posttreatment and follow-up. In the ITP, 73.3% did not meet criteria for PTSD at follow-up, and 74.4% in TAU. There was a significant difference in dropout rates between treatment groups: 4.3% in ITP and 24.1% in TAU.Conclusions: Results indicate that ITP can be considered an effective treatment in healthcare settings where multiple treatment options are available. Randomised control studies to isolate treatment effects and finding underlying factors explaining the difference in dropout rates are important directions for future research.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

创伤后应激障碍和复杂创伤后应激障碍8天强化治疗方案与常规治疗:临床试验。
背景:在过去十年中,强化治疗方案(ITP)已成为创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)和复杂创伤后应激障碍(CPTSD)的一种治疗选择。结果是有希望的,但需要进一步的对照组研究。目的:比较8天ITP与传统间隔治疗PTSD的效果。方法:在瑞典精神科门诊的PTSD或CPTSD患者(n = 101)接受8天的ITP,包括延长暴露时间、眼动脱敏和再加工治疗、体育活动和心理教育,或传统间隔治疗(TAU)。参与者是通过共同决策分配的。结果:治疗后观察到创伤后应激障碍症状显著减轻,两种情况下都有很大的效应量。随访时症状持续减轻。两组患者治疗后与随访时症状减轻程度无显著差异。在ITP中,73.3%的人在随访时不符合PTSD标准,而在TAU中,74.4%的人不符合PTSD标准。治疗组之间的辍学率有显著差异:ITP为4.3%,TAU为24.1%。结论:结果表明,在有多种治疗选择的医疗机构中,ITP可以被认为是一种有效的治疗方法。通过随机对照研究分离治疗效果并寻找解释辍学率差异的潜在因素是未来研究的重要方向。
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
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
12.00%
发文量
153
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Psychotraumatology (EJPT) is a peer-reviewed open access interdisciplinary journal owned by the European Society of Traumatic Stress Studies (ESTSS). The European Journal of Psychotraumatology (EJPT) aims to engage scholars, clinicians and researchers in the vital issues of how to understand, prevent and treat the consequences of stress and trauma, including but not limited to, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depressive disorders, substance abuse, burnout, and neurobiological or physical consequences, using the latest research or clinical experience in these areas. The journal shares ESTSS’ mission to advance and disseminate scientific knowledge about traumatic stress. Papers may address individual events, repeated or chronic (complex) trauma, large scale disasters, or violence. Being open access, the European Journal of Psychotraumatology is also evidence of ESTSS’ stand on free accessibility of research publications to a wider community via the web. The European Journal of Psychotraumatology seeks to attract contributions from academics and practitioners from diverse professional backgrounds, including, but not restricted to, those in mental health, social sciences, and health and welfare services. Contributions from outside Europe are welcome. The journal welcomes original basic and clinical research articles that consolidate and expand the theoretical and professional basis of the field of traumatic stress; Review articles including meta-analyses; short communications presenting new ideas or early-stage promising research; study protocols that describe proposed or ongoing research; case reports examining a single individual or event in a real‑life context; clinical practice papers sharing experience from the clinic; letters to the Editor debating articles already published in the Journal; inaugural Lectures; conference abstracts and book reviews. Both quantitative and qualitative research is welcome.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信