Behavioural and cognitive psychotherapy · 2021
Pilot evaluation of a group stabilisation intervention for refugees and asylum seekers with PTSD.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Griggs Mary, Liu Cheng, Cooper Kate
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is commonly experienced by asylum seekers and refugees (ASR). Evidence supports the use of cognitive behavioural therapy-based treatments, but not in group format for this population. However, group-based treatments are frequently used as a first-line intervention in the UK.
AIMS: This study investigated the feasibility of delivering a group-based, manualised stabilisation course specifically developed for ASR. The second aim was to evaluate the use of routine outcome measures (ROMs) to capture psychological change in this population.
METHOD: Eighty-two participants from 22 countries attended the 8-session Moving On After Trauma (MOAT) group-based stabilisation treatment. PHQ-9, GAD-7, IES-R and idiosyncratic outcomes were administered pre- and post-intervention.
RESULTS: Seventy-one per cent of participants (n = 58) attended five or more of the treatment sessions. While completion rates of the ROMs were poor - measures were completed at pre- and post-intervention for 46% participants (n = 38) - a repeated-measures MANOVA indicated significant improvements in depression (p = .001, ηp2 = .262), anxiety (p = .000, ηp2 = .390), PTSD (p = .001, ηp2 = .393) and idiosyncratic measures (p = .000, ηp2 = .593) following the intervention.
CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary evidence indicates that ASR who attended a low-intensity, group-based stabilisation group for PTSD experienced lower mental health scores post-group, although the lack of a comparison group means these results should be interpreted with caution. There are significant challenges in administering ROMs to individuals who speak many different languages, in a group setting. Nonetheless, groups have benefits including efficiency of treatment delivery which should also be considered.
AIMS: This study investigated the feasibility of delivering a group-based, manualised stabilisation course specifically developed for ASR. The second aim was to evaluate the use of routine outcome measures (ROMs) to capture psychological change in this population.
METHOD: Eighty-two participants from 22 countries attended the 8-session Moving On After Trauma (MOAT) group-based stabilisation treatment. PHQ-9, GAD-7, IES-R and idiosyncratic outcomes were administered pre- and post-intervention.
RESULTS: Seventy-one per cent of participants (n = 58) attended five or more of the treatment sessions. While completion rates of the ROMs were poor - measures were completed at pre- and post-intervention for 46% participants (n = 38) - a repeated-measures MANOVA indicated significant improvements in depression (p = .001, ηp2 = .262), anxiety (p = .000, ηp2 = .390), PTSD (p = .001, ηp2 = .393) and idiosyncratic measures (p = .000, ηp2 = .593) following the intervention.
CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary evidence indicates that ASR who attended a low-intensity, group-based stabilisation group for PTSD experienced lower mental health scores post-group, although the lack of a comparison group means these results should be interpreted with caution. There are significant challenges in administering ROMs to individuals who speak many different languages, in a group setting. Nonetheless, groups have benefits including efficiency of treatment delivery which should also be considered.