Development and refinement of the mobile anger reduction intervention for veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder.

OBJECTIVE: Problematic anger is commonly reported among veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and is associated with numerous psychosocial impairments. There is a clear need to develop innovative and effective anger interventions. One of the cognitive mechanisms associated with anger is the hostile interpretation bias, which is the tendency to interpret ambiguous interpersonal situations as hostile. The current study presents a successive cohort design methodology to develop and refine a mobile treatment application, entitled Mobile Anger Reduction Intervention (MARI), which uses interpretation bias modification techniques to modify hostile interpretation bias. METHOD: Two cohorts (total N = 13) of veterans with PTSD and problematic anger used the MARI application for 4 weeks. After each cohort, qualitative and quantitative data were used to modify the MARI application. The intervention is described, as well as the qualitative and quantitative findings and subsequent changes made to the mobile application based on participant feedback. RESULTS: Treatment adherence was high (90% of participants completed all sessions). Participants reported that they found the treatment helpful and easy to use and experienced improvements in hostile interpretation bias and problematic anger. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the utility of a successive cohort treatment design for the development of mobile interventions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Systematic Decision-Making for Using Technological Strategies to Implement Evidence-Based Interventions: An Illustrated Case Study.

Technology can improve implementation strategies' efficiency, simplifying progress tracking and removing distance-related barriers. However, incorporating technology is meaningful only if the resulting strategy is usable and useful. Hence, we must systematically assess technological strategies' usability and usefulness before employing them. Our objective was therefore to adapt the effort-vs-impact assessment (commonly used in systems science and operations planning) to decision-making for technological implementation strategies. The approach includes three components - assessing the effort needed to make a technological implementation strategy usable, assessing its impact (i.e., usefulness regarding performance/efficiency/quality), and deciding whether/how to use it. The approach generates a two-by-two effort-vs-impact chart that categorizes the strategy by effort (little/much) and impact (small/large), which serves as a guide for deciding whether/how to use the strategy. We provide a case study of applying this approach to design a package of technological strategies for implementing a 5 A's tobacco cessation intervention at a Federally Qualified Health Center. The effort-vs-impact chart guides stakeholder-involved decision-making around considered technologies. Specification of less technological alternatives helps tailor each technological strategy within the package (minimizing the effort needed to make the strategy usable while maximizing its usefulness), aligning to organizational priorities and clinical tasks. Our three-component approach enables methodical and documentable assessments of whether/how to use a technological implementation strategy, building on stakeholder-involved perceptions of its usability and usefulness. As technology advances, results of effort-vs-impact assessments will likely also change. Thus, even for a single technological implementation strategy, the three-component approach can be repeatedly applied to guide implementation in dynamic contexts.

Using Interpretation Bias Modification to Reduce Anger in Veterans with Posttraumatic Stress Disorder: A Pilot Study.

Difficulty controlling anger is the most commonly reported reintegration concern among veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). One of the mechanisms associated with problematic anger is a tendency to interpret ambiguous interpersonal situations as hostile, known as the hostile interpretation bias (HIB). A computer-based interpretation bias modification (IBM) intervention has been shown to successfully reduce HIB and anger but has not been tested in veterans with PTSD. The current study was a pilot trial of this IBM intervention modified to address problematic anger among veterans with PTSD. Veterans with PTSD and a high level of anger (N = 7) completed eight sessions of IBM treatment over the course of 4 weeks. Participants completed self-report questionnaires at pre- and posttreatment assessment visits, as well as a treatment acceptability interview at posttreatment. Veterans experienced large reductions in hostile interpretation bias and anger from pre- to posttreatment, ds = 1.03-1.96, although these estimates may be unstable due to the small sample size. The feasibility for recruitment, retention, and treatment completion were high. Questionnaire and interview data demonstrated that most participants were satisfied with the treatment and found it helpful and easy to use. Overall, IBM for anger was feasible and acceptable to veterans with PTSD and was associated with reductions in hostile interpretations and self-reported anger outcomes. Further research examining this approach is warranted.