Psychological risk factors that characterize acute stress disorder and trajectories of posttraumatic stress disorder after injury: a study using latent class analysis.

Background: The course and different characteristics of acute and posttraumatic stress disorder (ASD, PTSD) in trauma populations are unclear. Objective: The aims were to identify longitudinal trajectories of PTSD, to establish a risk profile for ASD and PTSD based on patients' sociodemographic, clinical, and psychological characteristics, and to study the effect of ASD and dissociation on PTSD during 12 months after trauma. Method: Patients completed questionnaires after inclusion and at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months afterwards. Trajectories were identified using repeated measures latent class analysis (RMLCA). The risk profile was based on a ranking of importance of each characteristic using Cohen's d effect sizes and odds ratios. The impact of ASD and dissociation on PTSD was examined using logistic regression analyses. Results: Altogether, 267 patients were included. The mean age was 54.0 (SD = 16.1) and 62% were men. The prevalence rate of ASD was approximately 21.7% at baseline, and 36.1% of trauma patients exhibited PTSD at 12 months after injury. Five trajectories were identified: (1) no PTSD symptoms, (2) mild, (3) moderate, (4) subclinical, and (5) severe PTSD symptoms. These trajectories seemed to remain stable over time. Compared with patients in other trajectories, patients with ASD and (subclinical) PTSD were younger and scored higher on anxiety, depressive symptoms, neuroticism, and trait anxiety. Regarding dissociation symptoms, inability to recall memories about the event was significantly more present than an altered sense of reality, (105 (40.7%) versus 56 (21.7%), p = .031), although that symptom had the strongest likelihood for PTSD. Patients with dissociation were significantly at risk for PTSD than patients without dissociation (OR = 4.82; 95%CI: 1.91-12.25). Conclusions: Psychological factors characterized ASD and trajectories of PTSD during 12 months post-trauma. Healthcare providers who are aware of these findings could early identify patients at risk for ASD and PTSD and refer them for patient-centred interventions.

Antecedentes: El curso y las diferentes características del trastorno de estrés agudo y postraumático (TEA, TEPT) en poblaciones traumatizadas no están claros.Objetivo: Los objetivos fueron identificar las trayectorias longitudinales del TEPT, establecer un perfil de riesgo para el TEA y el TEPT basado en las características sociodemográficas, clínicas y psicológicas de los pacientes, y estudiar el efecto del TEA y la disociación en el TEPT durante los 12 meses posteriores al trauma.Método: Los pacientes completaron cuestionarios tras la inclusión y a los 3, 6, 9 y 12 meses después. Las trayectorias se identificaron mediante un análisis de clases latentes de medidas repetidas (RMLCA). El perfil de riesgo se basó en una clasificación de la importancia de cada característica utilizando los tamaños del efecto d de Cohen y cocientes de probabilidades (odds ratios). El impacto del TEA y la disociación en el TEPT se examinó mediante análisis de regresión logística.Resultados: En total, se incluyeron 267 pacientes. La edad media era de 54,0 (SD = 16,1) y el 62% eran hombres. La tasa de prevalencia de TEA fue de aproximadamente el 21,7% al inicio, y el 36,1% de los pacientes traumatizados presentaban TEPT a los 12 meses de la lesión. Se identificaron cinco trayectorias: (1) sin síntomas de TEPT, (2) leve, (3) moderada, (4) subclínica y (5) síntomas graves de TEPT. Estas trayectorias parecían permanecer estables a lo largo del tiempo. En comparación con los pacientes de otras trayectorias, los pacientes con TEA y TEPT (subclínico) eran más jóvenes y puntuaban más alto en ansiedad, síntomas depresivos, rasgos de neuroticismo y ansiedad. En cuanto a los síntomas de disociación, la incapacidad de recordar el suceso estaba significativamente más presente que la alteración del sentido de la realidad (105 (40,7%) frente a 56 (21,7%), p = 0,031), aunque este síntoma tenía la probabilidad más alta de TEPT. Los pacientes con disociación tenían un riesgo significativo de TEPT que los pacientes sin disociación (OR = 4,82; IC 95%: 1,91-12,25).Conclusiones: Los factores psicológicos caracterizaron el TEA y las trayectorias del TEPT durante los 12 meses posteriores al trauma. Los profesionales de la salud que conozcan estos hallazgos podrían identificar precozmente a los pacientes con riesgo de TEA y TEPT y remitirlos a intervenciones centradas en el paciente.

Patients' experiences and wellbeing after injury: A focus group study.

BACKGROUND: Injury can have physical, psychological and social consequences. It is unclear which factors have an impact on patients' wellbeing after injury. This study aimed to explore, using focus groups, patients' experiences and wellbeing after injury and which factors, impede or facilitate patients' wellbeing. METHODS: Trauma patients, treated in the shock room of the Elisabeth-TweeSteden Hospital, the Netherlands, participated in focus groups. Purposive sampling was used. Exclusion criteria were younger than 18 years old, severe traumatic brain injury, dementia, and insufficient knowledge of the Dutch language. The interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using coding technique open, axial, and selective coding, based on phenomenological approach. RESULTS: Six focus groups (3 to 7 participants) were held before data saturation was reached. In total, 134 patients were invited, 28 (21%) agreed to participate (Median age: 59.5; min. 18 -max. 84). Main reasons to decline were fear that the discussion would be too confronting or patients experienced no problems regarding the trauma or treatment. Participants experienced difficulties on physical (no recovery to pre-trauma level), psychological (fear of dying or for permanent limitations, symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder, cognitive dysfunction), social (impact on relatives and social support) wellbeing. These are impeding factors for recovery. However, good communication, especially clarity about the injury and expectations concerning recovery and future perspectives could help patients in surrendering to care. Patients felt less helpless when they knew what to expect. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study that explored patients' experiences and wellbeing after injury. Patients reported that their injury had an impact on their physical, psychological, and social wellbeing up to 12 months after injury. Professionals with the knowledge of consequences after injury could improve their anticipation on patients' need.

Psychometric properties of the psychosocial screening instrument for physical trauma patients (PSIT).

BACKGROUND: Early detection of psychosocial problems post-injury may prevent them from becoming chronic. Currently, there is no psychosocial screening instrument that can be used in patients surviving a physical trauma or injury. Therefore, we recently developed a psychosocial screening instrument for adult physical trauma patients, the PSIT. The aim of this study was to finalize and psychometrically examine the PSIT. METHODS: All adult (≥ 18 years) trauma patients admitted to a Dutch level I trauma center from October 2016 through September 2017 without severe cognitive disorders (n = 1448) received the PSIT, Impact of Events Scale-Revised (IES-R), Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES), State-Trait Anxiety Inventory-State (STAI-S), and the World Health Organization Quality of Life-Abbreviated version (WHOQOL-Bref). After 2 weeks, a subgroup of responding participants received the PSIT a second time. The internal structure (principal components analysis, PCA; and confirmatory factor analysis, CFA), internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha, α), test-retest reliability (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient, ICC), construct validity (Spearman's rho correlations), diagnostic accuracy (Area Under the Curve, AUC), and potential cut-off values (sensitivity and specificity) were examined. RESULTS: A total of 364 (25.1%) patients participated, of whom 128 completed the PSIT again after 19.5 ± 6.8 days. Test-retest reliability was good (ICC = 0.86). Based on PCA, five items were removed because of cross-loadings ≥ 0.3. Three subscales were identified: (1) Negative affect (7 items; α = 0.91; AUC = 0.92); (2) Anxiety and Post-Traumatic Stress Symptoms (4 items; α = 0.77; AUC = 0.88); and (3) Social and self-image (4 items; α = 0.79; AUC = 0.92). CFA supported this structure (comparative fit index = 0.96; root mean square error of approximation = 0.06; standardized rood mean square residual = 0.04). Four of the five a priori formulated hypotheses regarding construct validity were confirmed. The following cut-off values represent maximum sensitivity and specificity: 7 on subscale 1 (89.6% and 83.4%), 3 on subscale 2 (94.4% and 90.3%), and 4 on subscale 3 (85.7% and 90.7%). CONCLUSION: The final PSIT has good psychometric properties in adult trauma patients.

The course, prediction, and treatment of acute and posttraumatic stress in trauma patients: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Trauma patients suffer from acute stress disorder (ASD) and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), but it is unknown how these disorders develop over time and when treatment is effective. Our aim was to systematically review (1) the course and predictors of ASD and PTSD after trauma and (2) which and when psychological treatments are effective. METHODS: Embase, Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, PsycInfo, Cinahl, Cochrane, PubMed, and Google Scholar were searched up to September 14, 2015. Quality was assessed with STROBE and CONSORT checklists. RESULTS: Overall, 45 (68%) observational studies and 21 (32%) intervention studies were included. Forty-seven (85%) were of lower (level of evidence (LoE) 3) or poor quality (LoE 4). ASD was found during hospitalization (range 1-37%) and about 30% experienced PTSD 1 month after trauma (LoE 3). The onset of PTSD was within 3 months but also up to 12 months after trauma (LoE 3). Especially in patients with ASD, patients showed PTSD symptoms after 6 years (LoE 3). ASD and PTSD were associated with sociodemographic factors (e.g., being female, younger age, financial problems, and low income), reduced cognitive functioning, and physical (e.g., pain), social (e.g., low social support), and psychological problems (e.g., hyperarousal) or disorders (e.g., ASD). Early treatment in the first weeks after trauma can be preventive for PTSD, but effective treatment for ASD is still unclear. Compared to other psychological treatments, the most effective and examined treatment for PTSD was cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). CONCLUSIONS: A large number of studies of lower or poor quality present inconsistent findings on the course of ASD and PTSD. Predictors for ASD and PTSD were identified. Early treatment can be preventive for PTSD, as CBT is the most effective treatment. However, good qualitative observational and intervention studies are lacking and needed. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic review, level III.

Biopsychosocial predictors of sexual function and quality of sexual life: a study among patients with colorectal cancer.

OBJECTIVE: A low sexual function (SF) has been reported in patients with colorectal cancer. However, research often focusses on clinical predictors of SF, hereby omitting patients' subjective evaluation of SF [i.e., the quality of sexual life (QoSL)] and psychosocial predictors of SF and QoSL. In addition, research incorporating a biopsychosocial approach to SF and QoSL is scarce. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate (I) relatedness between SF and the QoSL, (II) the course of SF and QoSL, and (III) biopsychosocial predictors of SF and QoSL. METHODS: Patients completed questionnaires assessing sociodemographic factors (i.e., age, sex) and personality characteristics (i.e., neuroticism, trait anxiety) before surgery. Questionnaires assessing psychological (i.e., anxious and depressive symptoms, body image, fatigue) and social (i.e., sexual activity, SF, non-sensuality, avoidance of sexual activity, non-communication, relationship function) aspects were measured preoperative and 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Clinical characteristics were obtained from the Eindhoven Cancer Registry (ECR). Bivariate correlations evaluated relatedness between SF and QoSL. Linear mixed-effects models examined biopsychosocial predictors of SF and QoSL. RESULTS: SF and QoSL are related constructs (r=0.206 to 0.642). Compared to preoperative scores, SF did not change over time (P>0.05). Overall, patients' QoSL decreased postoperatively (P=0.001). A higher age (ß=-0.02, P=0.006), fatigue (ß=-0.02, P=0.034), not being sexually active (ß=-0.081, P<0.001), and having a stoma (ß=0.37, P=0.035) contributed to a lower SF. Having rectal cancer (ß=-1.64, P=0.003), depressive symptoms (ß=-0.09, P=0.001), lower SF (ß=1.05, P<0.001), and more relationship maladjustment (ß=-0.05, P=0.027) contributed to a lower QoSL (P<0.05). In addition, partners' SF (ß=0.24, P<0.001) and QoSL (ß=0.30, P<0.001) were predictive for patients' SF and QoSL, respectively. A significant interaction between time and gender was reported for both outcomes (P's=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: SF and QoSL are related but distinctive constructs. The course of SF and QoSL differed. Different biopsychosocial predictors were found for SF and QoSL. The contribution of partner-related variables to patients' outcomes suggests interdependence between patients and partners. Men and women showed different SF and QoSL trajectories. We recommend that health care professionals, when discussing sexuality, realize that SF and QoSL are no interchangeable terms and should, therefore, be discussed as two separate entities. In addition, it is favored that clinicians focus not only on biological predictors of SF and QoSL, but obtain a broader perspective in which they also pay attention to psychosocial factors that may impair SF and QoSL. More in depth research on interdependence between patients and partners, biopsychosocial predictors of partners' SF and QoSL, and gender effects is needed.

The preoperative sexual functioning and quality of sexual life in colorectal cancer: a study among patients and their partners.

INTRODUCTION: Even though the body of literature on sexual functioning is growing, information on the preoperative sexual functioning and the quality of sexual life after colorectal cancer is lacking. Research focusing on female patients and on partners is also rather scarce. AIM: This cross-sectional study aimed to describe the preoperative sexual functioning, quality of sexual life, and relationship functioning for male and female colorectal cancer patients and their partners. In addition, the mean scores of the patients and partners were compared with mean norm scores. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer (N = 136) and their partners (N = 106) were recruited before surgical treatment in six Dutch hospitals. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Men completed the International Index of Erectile Functioning, while women completed the Female Sexual Function Index. All partnered participants completed the Golombok-Rust Inventory of Sexual Satisfaction and the Maudsley Marital Questionnaire. The mean scores were compared with mean norm scores derived from the manuals of the questionnaires. RESULTS: All participants were in a heterosexual relationship. Female patients reported a lower quality of sexual life compared with male patients. Male partners reported a lower sexual functioning and a lower quality of sexual life compared with male patients. Colorectal cancer patients and partners (both sexes) reported a lower sexual functioning and a lower quality of sexual life compared with norm populations but scored similar on relationship functioning. CONCLUSION: A lower sexual functioning and a lower quality of sexual life are already reported preoperatively; however, relationship functioning was comparable with a norm population. Therefore, all the impairment seen after treatment should not be solely attributed to the effects of treatment.