Journal of military, veteran and family health · 2024
[Not Available].
Аннотация на английскомСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Gray Richard M, Bourke Frank
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The Reconsolidation of Traumatic Memories (RTM) Protocol is a brief non-traumatizing intervention for the intrusive symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). It is supported by nearly 25 years of anecdotal and clinical reports. This study reports the first scientific evaluation of the protocol.
METHODS: A 30-person pilot study using male Veterans with a pre-existing diagnosis of PTSD. Intake criteria included interviews and confirmatory re- diagnosis using the PTSD Checklist - Military version (PCL-M). Of 33 people who met the inclusion criteria, 26 completed treatment using the RTM protocol. A small (n = 5) wait-list control group was included. All participants were reassessed following treatment using the PCL-M.
RESULTS: Of 26 program completers, 25 (96%) were symptom free at 6-week follow-up. Mean PCL-M score at intake was 61 points. At the 6-week follow-up, the mean PCL-M score was 28.8, with a mean reduction in scores of 33 points. Hedges' g was computed for 6-week follow-up and showed a 2.9 SD difference from intake to follow-up. A wait-list control analysis indicated non-significant symptom changes during the 2-week wait period.
DISCUSSION: Results suggest that RTM is a promising intervention worthy of further investigation.
METHODS: A 30-person pilot study using male Veterans with a pre-existing diagnosis of PTSD. Intake criteria included interviews and confirmatory re- diagnosis using the PTSD Checklist - Military version (PCL-M). Of 33 people who met the inclusion criteria, 26 completed treatment using the RTM protocol. A small (n = 5) wait-list control group was included. All participants were reassessed following treatment using the PCL-M.
RESULTS: Of 26 program completers, 25 (96%) were symptom free at 6-week follow-up. Mean PCL-M score at intake was 61 points. At the 6-week follow-up, the mean PCL-M score was 28.8, with a mean reduction in scores of 33 points. Hedges' g was computed for 6-week follow-up and showed a 2.9 SD difference from intake to follow-up. A wait-list control analysis indicated non-significant symptom changes during the 2-week wait period.
DISCUSSION: Results suggest that RTM is a promising intervention worthy of further investigation.