Psychological comorbidity: Predictors of residential treatment response among U.S. service members with posttraumatic stress disorder.

Residential posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) research in military samples generally shows that in aggregate, PTSD symptoms significantly improve over the course of treatment but can remain at elevated levels following treatment. Identifying individuals who respond to residential treatment versus those who do not, including those who worsen, is critical given the extensive resources required for such programs. This study examined predictors of treatment response among 282 male service members who received treatment in a U.S. Department of Defense residential PTSD program. Using established criteria, service members were classified as improved, indeterminate (referent), or worsened in terms of self-reported PTSD symptoms. Multinomial logistic regression results showed that for PTSD symptoms, higher levels of pretreatment PTSD symptom severity were associated with significantly lower odds of being in the improved group, adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 0.955, p = .018. In addition, service members who completed treatment were significantly more likely to be in the improved group, aOR = 2.488, p = .048. Longer average pretreatment nightly sleep duration, aOR = 1.157, p = .035, and more severe pretreatment depressive symptoms, aOR = 1.109, p = .014, were associated with significantly higher odds of being in the improved group. These findings reveal clinical characteristics better suited for residential PTSD treatment and highlight implications for comorbid conditions.

A Taxometric Analysis of Experiential Avoidance.

Experiential avoidance, a trait-like construct referring to the tendency to rigidly avoid or change unpleasant internal experiences stemming from an unwillingness to experience them, is believed to contribute to the development and maintenance of various forms of psychopathology. Despite significant research on this construct, it remains unclear whether experiential avoidance is dimensional or categorical at the latent level. The current study examined the latent structure of experiential avoidance using three taxometric analytic approaches (MAXimum Eigenvalue, Mean Above Minus Below A Curve, Latent-Mode Factor Analysis) applied to data from two independent samples and using three widely used measures of experiential avoidance. The first sample (n = 922) completed the Multidimensional Experiential Avoidance Questionnaire (Gámez, Chmielewski, Kotov, Ruggero, & Watson, 2011), while the second sample (n = 615) completed the Brief Experiential Avoidance Questionnaire (Gámez et al., 2014) and Acceptance and Action Questionnaire-II (Bond et al., 2011). Across both samples and all three measures, experiential avoidance exhibited a dimensional structure. The clinical and research implications of this finding for experiential avoidance are discussed.

Presence and predictors of anxiety disorder onset following cancer diagnosis among anxious cancer survivors.

PURPOSE: Despite cancer survivors' frequent endorsement of anxiety symptoms, assessing the full range of anxiety disorders (AD), their timing of onset relative to cancer diagnosis, co-morbidity with mood disorder, and predictors of post-cancer onset, is rare or absent to date. This study provides a step toward addressing these gaps. METHODS: Cancer survivors at re-entry after primary treatment completion who screened positively for anxiety symptoms (N = 133) and sought care through an intervention trial completed standardized diagnostic interviews, dimensional assessment of disorder severity, and timing of disorder onset relative to cancer diagnosis. We evaluated sociodemographic and medical predictors of developing a first AD after cancer diagnosis. RESULTS: Most ADs began after cancer diagnosis (58%); for 68% of affected patients, this represented their first AD episode. The most common was generalized anxiety disorder (GAD; 41%), where "cancer-focused GAD" was distinguished from "typical GAD"; the next most common were specific phobia (14%) and social anxiety disorder (13%). A minority (31%) of ADs were comorbid with major depression. Relative to having no AD, experiencing more lingering treatment side effects predicted developing a first AD after cancer diagnosis. Relative to having an AD that began before cancer diagnosis, reporting a higher cancer stage predicted developing a first AD after diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer survivors at re-entry seeking care for anxiety symptoms manifested a broad range of ADs which most commonly developed after cancer diagnosis and were prompted by the experience of cancer. Such disorders represent an unusually late-life, cancer-linked etiology that warrants further investigation and clinical attention.

Beliefs about safety behaviours in the prediction of safety behaviour use.

BACKGROUND: Safety behaviours are ubiquitous across anxiety disorders and are associated with the aetiology, maintenance and exacerbation of anxiety. Cognitive behavioural models posit that beliefs about safety behaviours directly influence their use. Therefore, beliefs about safety behaviours may be an important component in decreasing safety behaviour use. Unfortunately, little empirical research has evaluated this theorized relationship. AIMS: The present study aimed to examine the predictive relationship between beliefs about safety behaviours and safety behaviour use while controlling for anxiety severity. METHOD: Adults with clinically elevated levels of social anxiety (n = 145) and anxiety sensitivity (n = 109) completed an online survey that included established measures of safety behaviour use, quality of life, and anxiety severity. Participants also completed the Safety Behaviour Scale (SBS), a measure created for the current study which includes a transdiagnostic checklist of safety behaviours, as well as questions related to safety behaviour use and beliefs about safety behaviours. RESULTS: Within both the social anxiety and anxiety sensitivity groups, positive beliefs about safety behaviours predicted greater safety behaviour use, even when controlling for anxiety severity. Certain beliefs were particularly relevant in predicting safety behaviour use within each of the clinical analogue groups. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that efforts to decrease safety behaviour use during anxiety treatment may benefit from identifying and modifying positive beliefs about safety behaviours.

Safety behaviors, experiential avoidance, and anxiety: A path analysis approach.

Avoidance has long been viewed as an etiological mechanism of anxiety disorders. Of more recent focus within this literature is the distinction between avoidance that is trait-based (experiential avoidance) versus contextual (safety behaviors). Whereas both experiential avoidance and safety behaviors have been studied within anxiety research, no known studies have evaluated the direct and indirect relationships of these forms of avoidance in predicting critical outcomes, particularly in conjunction with symptom severity. To address this gap, the current study assessed social anxiety and panic symptoms, experiential avoidance, use of preventive and restorative safety behaviors, and quality of life to determine the direct and indirect contributions of trait-based and contextual avoidance in predicting clinically relevant outcomes via path analysis. U.S. adults with elevated social anxiety or panic symptoms (n = 254) were recruited online. Results from path analysis showed that, across groups, the relationship between symptoms and quality of life was indirectly accounted for by use of preventive safety behaviors. Further, for participants with panic symptoms (but not for those with social anxiety symptoms), experiential avoidance predicted quality of life even after accounting for use of preventive safety behaviors. The results of this study indicate that trait-based and contextual avoidance contribute significantly to clinically relevant outcomes.

Dose response effects of cognitive-behavioral therapy in a school mental health program.

School mental health (SMH) programs have been shown to be effective in providing evidence-based interventions to underserved youth. However, limitations of SMH programs are that they can entail holiday breaks, typically do not operate through summer, and often require pulling students from class to receive therapy. These limitations suggest that treatment must be expeditious and potent. Although researchers have investigated dose response to treatment, no studies were located that addressed dose response to treatment in SMH programs. The present study addressed this gap by evaluating the dose response to SMH treatment in a sample of 133 adolescents. Adolescents were assessed at baseline, post-treatment, and at multiple time points throughout treatment. An average treatment response of a 26.81-point decrease in Youth Outcome Questionnaire (YOQ-30) score was found across 14 sessions of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT). Further, adolescents exhibited reliable change in YOQ-30 score within an average of 2.91 sessions. Finally, it was found that baseline scores on the Depression and Hyperactivity subscales of the Behavior Assessment System for Children, 2nd Edition, along with YOQ-30 score, predicted treatment response. These findings advance our understanding of dose response to CBT in SMH settings, and create opportunities to better inform effective treatment strategies in similar contexts.

A closer lens: Cancer survivors' supportive intervention preferences and interventions received.

OBJECTIVE: Cancer survivor preferences for formal interventions designed to provide psychological support remain relatively unknown. To address this gap, we evaluated cancer survivors' preferences for psychological intervention, whom they preferred to recommend such intervention, and how their preferences compared with what they currently received. METHODS: US cancer survivors (n = 345) who were at least 2 months post-treatment for diverse forms of cancer were recruited online to complete a survey study. RESULTS: Based on Wilcoxon signed-rank tests to distinguish among ranked preferences, cancer survivors rated individual professional counseling as their most-preferred form of psychological intervention (among 6 choices), p < .001, followed by professionally led cancer support groups and individual peer counseling. Anti-depressant or other psychiatric medication represented their least-preferred intervention, ps < .001, but was the one they were most likely to currently receive. Preference for individual professional counseling over psychiatric medication was evident even among the subgroups of cancer survivors screening positively for probable anxiety disorder (n = 188) or major depression (n = 137), ps < .001. Cancer survivors most preferred to learn about psychological interventions from their medical oncologist, p < .001, followed by primary care physician, cancer nurse, or another cancer survivor; they least preferred to learn from a social worker or on their own, ps < .001. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer survivors reported significant unmet need for psychological intervention, preference for non-pharmacological forms of such support, and a gap between their preferred forms of support and what they currently receive.

National attitudes towards mental health treatment: the importance of research evidence.

Most conceptualizations of evidence-based practice view it as a "three legged stool" consisting of: the use of best available research evidence, clinical expertise, and client preferences. Although empirical evidence and clinical expertise have received greater empirical attention, relatively little research has systematically explored client preferences. The present study analyzed self-reported treatment preferences for various clinical and non-clinical presentations. Adult participants (n = 1262) residing in the United States were presented with diagnostic vignettes and rated their relative preferences among 5 treatment variables, including: use of an empirically supported treatment (EST), quality of the client-therapist relationship, therapist empathy, therapist experience, and client speaking for the majority of therapy sessions. Results indicated that participants endorsed significant preference for receiving an EST over other treatment variables for all clinical disorders, with effect sizes ranging from small to large depending on the diagnosis. There was slightly greater variability in treatment preferences for non-clinical issues, though participants generally reported greater preference for receiving an EST. Follow-up questions provided further evidence for EST preferences. The implications of these results are discussed.