ArticleTrials2020
A combined individual and group-based stabilization and skill training intervention versus treatment as usual for patients with long lasting posttraumatic reactions receiving outpatient treatment in specialized mental health care - a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.
Article in Trials, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03887559 (Adding a Group Based Stabilization and Skill Training Intervention for Patients With Long Lasting Posttraumatic Reactions Receiving Outpatient Treatment in Specialized Mental Health Care - A Randomized Controlled Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Adding a Group Based Stabilization and Skill Training Intervention for Patients With Long Lasting Posttraumatic Reactions Receiving Outpatient Treatment in Specialized Mental Health Care - A Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Gaining consensus on emotional wellbeing themes and preferences for digital intervention type and content to support the mental health of young people with long-term health conditions: A Delphi study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Article
- A digital Norwegian version of the client satisfaction questionnaire 8: factor validity and internal reliability in outpatient mental health care.BMC psychiatry · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSuffering linked to previous interpersonal trauma is common among patients in mental health care. Diagnostic labels may vary, but the clinical picture is often characterized by long-lasting and complex psychological and somatic symptoms, subjective distress and reduced quality of health and life. A substantial proportion of patients do not recover after individual treatment in ordinary specialized mental healthcare settings, despite the proven usefulness of individual trauma-specific treatments. The therapeutic factors that arise in group settings, such as normalization, shame reduction and corrective relational experiences, may be particularly useful for trauma survivors. However, evidence in support of group treatment for trauma survivors is scarce. This study aims to test whether combining a novel group intervention to individual treatment is superior to conventional individual out-patient treatment in an ordinary community mental health hospital.
methodsIn a single-site, non-blinded, randomized controlled trial (RCT), the effect of a combined group-based stabilization and skill-training (SST) intervention added to individual treatment will be compared to conventional treatment (treatment as usual, TAU) alone. Participants (N = 160) with ongoing and long-lasting reactions related to known adverse life events from the past will be recruited among patients at general outpatient clinics in a community mental health centre at St. Olav's University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway. Following baseline assessment and randomization, participants will complete follow-up measures at 4, 8, 13 and 19 months post-baseline. The primary outcome is personal recovery (The questionnaire about the process of recovery , QPR). Secondary outcomes include (1) self-reported symptoms of posttraumatic stress, general mental and somatic health symptoms, well-being, functional impairment and client satisfaction, (2) immunological and endocrine response measured in blood samples and (3) national registry data on occupational status, use of mental health services and pharmacological treatment. Additionally, mechanisms of change via posttraumatic cognitions will be examined. DISCUSSION: The addition of a group-based intervention to individual treatment for trauma survivors might prove to be an efficient way to meet the need of long-lasting high-intensity treatment in a large group of patients in mental health care, thereby reducing their suffering and increasing their psychosocial functioning.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03887559. Registered on 25 March 2019.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.