Department of Educational Psychology, University of Utah, UT 84112, USA.
J Consult Clin Psychol. 2013 Jun;81(3):394-404. doi: 10.1037/a0031474. Epub 2013 Jan 21.
Many patients drop out of treatments for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD); some clinicians believe that trauma-focused treatments increase dropout.
We conducted a meta-analysis of dropout among active treatments in clinical trials for PTSD (42 studies; 17 direct comparisons).
The average dropout rate was 18%, but it varied significantly across studies. Group modality and greater number of sessions, but not trauma focus, predicted increased dropout. When the meta-analysis was restricted to direct comparisons of active treatments, there were no differences in dropout. Differences in trauma focus between treatments in the same study did not predict dropout. However, trauma-focused treatments resulted in higher dropout compared with present-centered therapy (PCT), a treatment originally designed as a control but now listed as a research-supported intervention for PTSD.
Dropout varies between active interventions for PTSD across studies, but variability is primarily driven by differences between studies. There do not appear to be systematic differences across active interventions when they are directly compared in the same study. The degree of clinical attention placed on the traumatic event does not appear to be a primary cause of dropout from active treatments. However, comparisons of PCT may be an exception to this general pattern, perhaps because of a restriction of variability in trauma focus among comparisons of active treatments. More research is needed comparing trauma-focused interventions to trauma-avoidant treatments such as PCT.
许多创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)患者退出治疗;一些临床医生认为,以创伤为中心的治疗会增加退出率。
我们对 PTSD 临床试验中的积极治疗(42 项研究;17 项直接比较)的退出情况进行了荟萃分析。
平均退出率为 18%,但在研究之间差异显著。团体模式和更多的疗程,但不是创伤焦点,预测增加退出。当荟萃分析仅限于积极治疗的直接比较时,退出率没有差异。同一研究中治疗方法之间的创伤焦点差异并不预示着退出。然而,与以当下为中心的治疗(PCT)相比,以创伤为中心的治疗导致更高的退出率,PCT 最初是作为对照设计的,但现在被列为 PTSD 的研究支持干预措施。
研究之间 PTSD 的积极干预措施的退出率存在差异,但变异性主要是由研究之间的差异驱动的。当在同一研究中直接比较时,积极干预措施之间似乎没有系统的差异。对创伤事件的临床关注程度似乎不是退出积极治疗的主要原因。然而,PCT 的比较可能是这种一般模式的一个例外,可能是因为积极治疗比较中对创伤焦点的变异性有限。需要更多的研究比较以创伤为中心的干预措施与创伤回避治疗,如 PCT。