Davis Rebecca S, Devaney John, Halligan Sarah L, Meiser-Stedman Richard, Oliveira Paula, Smith Patrick, Stallard Paul, Kandiyali Rebecca, Phillips Alice, John Aalia, Hiller Rachel M
Department of Psychology, University of Bath, Bath, UK.
School of Social and Political Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Br J Clin Psychol. 2025 Mar;64(1):86-109. doi: 10.1111/bjc.12494. Epub 2024 Jul 25.
Young people in care (i.e., in the child welfare system) are a group who have often experienced very high rates of potentially traumatic events, including maltreatment. It is well-documented that they have high rates of trauma-related mental health difficulties, such as posttraumatic stress. To address the needs of the large number of young people who may benefit from support, scalable interventions are crucial. But also important is that they are effective and deliverable - particularly given the complexity of this group and services. We assessed a five-session group CBT-based intervention for PTSD. The primary goal was to understand core procedural and protocol uncertainties to address prior to a definitive trial.
Participants were 34 10-17 year olds in care, with moderate to severe posttraumatic stress symptoms, and their caregiver. We ran seven groups (four online), delivered in social care and NHS-based mental health teams. Data were collected via pre-, post-, 3-month follow-up questionnaires and qualitative interviews.
Of the 34 participants allocated to the intervention, 27 (80%) attended at least three of the five sessions (most attended all). Caregiver attendance was lower (50%). There was generally good completion of assessment measures. Qualitatively, most participants were positive about the intervention, and many reported improvements in areas such as coping, sleep, and willingness to talk about experiences. However, there were important concerns about the lack of ongoing support, given this was a low-intensity intervention for a group who often had complex needs.
The intervention and research protocols were acceptable to most young people and carers. With modifications, a future definitive trial would likely be possible. However, key considerations include: how (and whether) to screen for PTSD; the trial design; and the option to embed high-intensity support (e.g., via assessing a stepped-care model).
受照料的年轻人(即在儿童福利系统中的年轻人)是一个经常经历高比例潜在创伤性事件(包括虐待)的群体。有充分记录表明,他们有与创伤相关的心理健康问题的高发生率,如创伤后应激障碍。为满足大量可能从支持中受益的年轻人的需求,可扩展的干预措施至关重要。但同样重要的是,这些干预措施要有效且可行——尤其是考虑到这个群体和服务的复杂性。我们评估了一种基于五节认知行为疗法小组治疗的创伤后应激障碍干预措施。主要目标是了解在进行确定性试验之前需要解决的核心程序和方案不确定性。
参与者为34名年龄在10至17岁、受照料且有中度至重度创伤后应激症状的年轻人及其照料者。我们开展了七个小组(四个在线小组),由社会护理和国民保健服务体系的心理健康团队提供。通过前后测问卷以及3个月随访问卷和定性访谈收集数据。
在分配到干预措施的34名参与者中,27名(80%)参加了五节课程中的至少三节(大多数参加了全部课程)。照料者的参与率较低(50%)。评估措施的完成情况总体良好。从定性方面来看,大多数参与者对干预措施持积极态度,许多人报告在应对、睡眠以及谈论经历的意愿等方面有改善。然而,鉴于这是针对一个通常有复杂需求群体的低强度干预措施,对于缺乏持续支持存在重要担忧。
大多数年轻人和照料者对干预措施和研究方案是认可的。经过修改,未来进行确定性试验可能是可行的。然而,关键考虑因素包括:如何(以及是否)筛查创伤后应激障碍;试验设计;以及纳入高强度支持的选项(例如,通过评估一种逐步护理模式)。