School of Psychology, Queen's University Belfast, UK.
Belfast Health and Social Care Trust, UK.
Trauma Violence Abuse. 2023 Dec;24(5):3132-3150. doi: 10.1177/15248380221129580. Epub 2022 Nov 11.
The relationship between posttraumatic stress (PTS) and posttraumatic growth (PTG) has been extensively studied; however, the nature of the relationship remains unclear. Inconsistencies in the literature could be, in part, due to the use of variable level approaches. Person centered methods may further our understanding of this relationship, as they enable the identification of clinically meaningful subgroups based on PTS/PTG scores. This review aimed to identify commonly found subgroups of PTS and PTG, clinically relevant factors that distinguish the subgroups and to critically appraise the utility of categorizing individuals into subgroups based on PTS/PTG scores. Five databases (Embase, Medline, Web of Science, PILOTS, and PsycINFO) were searched. Seven studies (with a total of eight study samples; = 6,776) met the eligibility criteria. A narrative synthesis of the findings revealed that the majority of the analyses ( = 6) found three patterns of PTS/PTG. These were categorized as: (1) low PTS/PTG (representing 26.89% of the entire sample), (2) high PTS/PTG (weighted mean percentage = 20.05%), and (3) low PTS/high PTG (weighted mean percentage = 43.1%). The role of social support was examined in five studies and higher social support was consistently found to predict membership in the low PTS/high PTG class. All five studies that examined the role of trauma characteristics found that it was a significant predictor of class membership. These findings could inform the developments of tailored interventions. The utility of person-centered approaches was discussed and recommendations to improve the application and reporting of such methods were made.
创伤后应激（PTS）和创伤后成长（PTG）之间的关系已经得到了广泛的研究；然而，这种关系的性质仍不清楚。文献中的不一致可能部分归因于使用变量水平方法。以个体为中心的方法可以进一步加深我们对这种关系的理解，因为它们可以根据 PTS/PTG 得分识别出基于临床有意义的亚组。本综述旨在确定 PTS 和 PTG 的常见亚组、区分亚组的临床相关因素，并批判性地评价基于 PTS/PTG 得分对个体进行分类的效用。检索了五个数据库（Embase、Medline、Web of Science、PILOTS 和 PsycINFO）。符合入选标准的有 7 项研究（共 8 项研究样本； = 6776 人）。对研究结果的叙述性综合表明，大多数分析（ = 6）发现 PTS/PTG 有三种模式。这些被归类为：（1）低 PTS/PTG（占整个样本的 26.89%），（2）高 PTS/PTG（加权平均百分比 = 20.05%），和（3）低 PTS/高 PTG（加权平均百分比 = 43.1%）。有 5 项研究检验了社会支持的作用，发现较高的社会支持始终是属于低 PTS/高 PTG 类别的预测因素。所有五项研究都发现创伤特征是类别成员的重要预测因素。这些发现可以为定制干预措施的发展提供信息。讨论了以人为中心的方法的实用性，并提出了改进此类方法的应用和报告的建议。
