ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Novel interventions should be developed for people who have undergone psychological trauma. In a previous case study, we found that the number of intrusive memories of trauma could be reduced with a novel intervention. The intervention included a brief memory reminder, a visuospatial task and mental rotation, and targeted trauma memory hotspots one at a time in separate sessions. OBJECTIVE: This case series (N=3) extended the first case study with 3 new cases to determine whether a similar pattern of beneficial results is observed. We explored whether the brief intervention would result in reduced numbers of intrusive memories and whether it would impact symptoms of posttraumatic stress, depression and anxiety, and general functioning. Acceptability of the intervention was also explored. METHODS: A total of 3 women completed the study: 2 with posttraumatic stress disorder and other comorbidities and 1 with subthreshold posttraumatic stress disorder. The primary outcome was the change in the number of intrusive memories from the baseline phase to the intervention phase and at the 1-month follow-up, with an assessment of the intrusion frequency at 3 months. Participants monitored the number of intrusive memories in a daily diary for 1 week at baseline, for maximum of 6 weeks during the intervention phase and for 1 week at the 1-month and 3-month follow-ups. The intervention was delivered in person or digitally, with guidance from a clinical psychologist. A repeated AB design was used (A was a preintervention baseline phase and B intervention phase). Intrusions were targeted individually, creating repetitions of an AB design. RESULTS: The total number of intrusive memories was reduced from the baseline to the intervention phase for all participants. The total number for participant 3 (P3) reduced from 38.8 per week during the baseline phase to 18.0 per week in the intervention phase. It was 13 at the 3-month follow-up. The total number for P4 reduced from 10.8 per week at baseline to 4.7 per week in the intervention phase. It was 0 at the 3-month follow-up. The total number for P5 was reduced from 33.7 at baseline to 20.7 per week in the intervention phase. It was 8 at the 3-month follow-up. All participants reported reduction in posttraumatic stress symptoms in the postintervention phase. Depression and anxiety symptoms reduced in 2 of the 3 participants in the postintervention phase. Acceptability was favorable. CONCLUSIONS: We observed good compliance with the intervention and intrusive memory diary in all 3 cases. The number of intrusive memories was reduced for all participants during the intervention phase and at the 1-month follow-up, with some improvement in other symptoms and functioning. Further research should explore the remote delivery of the intervention and whether nonspecialists can deliver the intervention effectively.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and efforts to contain it have substantially affected the daily lives of most of the world's population. OBJECTIVE: We describe the impact of the first COVID-19 wave and associated social restrictions on the mental health of a large adult population. METHODS: We performed a cohort study nested in a prospective randomized clinical trial, comparing responses during the first COVID-19 wave to previous responses. We calculated the odds ratio (OR) of the population moving up one severity category on validated instruments used to measure stress (PSS-10), anxiety (GAD-7), depression (PHQ-9), and Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS). Responses were linked to inpatient and outpatient ICD-10 codes from registries. Models were adjusted for age, sex, comorbidities, and pre-existing diagnoses of mental illness. RESULTS: Of 63,848 invited participants, 42,253 (66%) responded. The median age was 60 (inter-quartile range 53-68) and 19,032 (45%) were male. Responses during the first wave of COVID-19 did not suggest increased stress (OR 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.93-1.01; p = 0.28) or anxiety (OR 1.01; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.05; p = 0.61), but were associated with decreased depression (OR 0.89; 95% CI, 0.85-0.93, p < 0.0001) and increased satisfaction with life (OR 1.12; 95% CI, 1.08-1.16, p < 0.0001). A secondary analysis of repeated measures data showed similar results. CONCLUSIONS: Social restrictions were sufficient to contain the pandemic but did not negatively impact validated measures of mental illness or psychiatric well-being. However, responses to individual questions showed signs of fear and stress. This may represent a normal, rather than pathological, population response to a stressful situation.