Promoting Recovery from Disasters, Pandemics, and Trauma: A Systematic Review of Brief Psychological Interventions to Reduce Distress in Adults, Children, and Adolescents.

A substantial number of survivors of disasters, pandemics, and other severe stressors develop persistent distress that impairs mental health and well-being. However, only a few brief psychological interventions target distress or subclinical symptoms. This systematic review aimed to identify and describe brief psychological interventions to reduce distress or subclinical symptoms in survivors of disasters, pandemics, and other severe stressors. Based on a systematic literature search (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PSYNDEX, PTSDpubs, and Web of Science), we reviewed published studies and study protocols on self-help, psychosocial support, or brief psychotherapeutic interventions to reduce distress and/or subclinical symptoms following natural hazards and man-made disasters, pandemics, or other traumatic events. We included 27 published studies or study protocols (n = 15 RCTs, n = 3 controlled pre-post studies, and n = 9 uncontrolled pre-post studies) describing 22 interventions. We found evidence for reducing psychological distress and/or subclinical symptoms in 9 out of 15 RCTs, 2 out of 3 controlled pre-post studies, and 9 out of 9 uncontrolled pre-post studies. One RCT provided evidence of increasing well-being. Innovative brief interventions have been developed to reduce distress and/or subclinical symptoms that have an emerging evidence base.

Waiting Lists for Psychotherapy and Provider Attitudes Toward Low-Intensity Treatments as Potential Interventions: Survey Study.

BACKGROUND: Common mental disorders, including depression and anxiety, are leading causes of disability worldwide. Digital mental health interventions, such as web-based self-help and other low-intensity treatments (LITs) that are not digital (eg, bibliotherapy), have the potential to reach many individuals by circumventing common barriers present in traditional mental health care. It is unclear how often LITs are used in clinical practice, or whether providers would be interested in their use for treatment waiting lists. OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to (1) describe current practices for treatment waiting lists, (2) describe providers' attitudes toward digital and nondigital LITs for patients on a waiting list, and (3) explore providers' willingness to use digital and nondigital LITs and their decisions to learn about them. METHODS: We surveyed 141 practicing mental health care providers (eg, therapists and psychologists) and provided an opportunity for them to learn about LITs. RESULTS: Most participants reported keeping a waiting list. Few participants reported currently recommending digital or nondigital LITs, though most were willing to use at least one for patients on their waiting list. Attitudes toward digital and nondigital LITs were neutral to positive. Guided digital and nondigital LITs were generally perceived to be more effective but less accessible, and unguided interventions were perceived to be less effective but more accessible. Most participants selected to access additional information on LITs, with the most popular being web-based self-help. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest providers are currently not recommending LITs for patients on treatment waiting lists but would be willing to recommend them. Future work should explore barriers and facilitators to implementing digital and nondigital LITs for patients on treatment waiting lists.