A timely determination of the risk of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a prerequisite for efficient service delivery and prevention. We provide a risk estimate tool allowing a calculation of individuals' PTSD likelihood from early predictors. Members of the International Consortium to Predict PTSD (ICPP) shared individual participants' item-level data from ten longitudinal studies of civilian trauma survivors admitted to acute care centers in six countries. Eligible participants (N=2,473) completed an initial clinical assessment within 60 days of trauma exposure, and at least one follow-up assessment 4-15 months later. The Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-IV (CAPS) evaluated PTSD symptom severity and diagnostic status at each assessment. Participants' education, prior lifetime trauma exposure, marital status and socio-economic status were assessed and harmonized across studies. The study's main outcome was the likelihood of a follow-up PTSD given early predictors. The prevalence of follow-up PTSD was 11.8% (9.2% for male participants and 16.4% for females). A logistic model using early PTSD symptom severity (initial CAPS total score) as a predictor produced remarkably accurate estimates of . Adding respondents' female gender, lower education, and exposure to prior interpersonal trauma to the model yielded higher PTSD likelihood estimates, with similar model accuracy (predicted vs. raw probabilities: r=0.941). The current model could be adjusted for other traumatic circumstances and accommodate risk factors not captured by the ICPP (e.g., biological, social). In line with their use in general medicine, risk estimate models can inform clinical choices in psychiatry. It is hoped that quantifying individuals' PTSD risk will be a first step towards systematic prevention of the disorder.

BackgroundPosttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) develops in 10-20% of injury patients. We developed a novel, self-guided Internet-based intervention (called Trauma TIPS) based on techniques from cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) to prevent the onset of PTSD symptoms.ObjectiveTo determine whether Trauma TIPS is effective in preventing the onset of PTSD symptoms in injury patients.MethodsAdult, level 1 trauma center patients were randomly assigned to receive the fully automated Trauma TIPS Internet intervention (n=151) or to receive no early intervention (n=149). Trauma TIPS consisted of psychoeducation, in vivo exposure, and stress management techniques. Both groups were free to use care as usual (nonprotocolized talks with hospital staff). PTSD symptom severity was assessed at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months post injury with a clinical interview (Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale) by blinded trained interviewers and self-report instrument (Impact of Event Scale—Revised). Secondary outcomes were acute anxiety and arousal (assessed online), self-reported depressive and anxiety symptoms (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), and mental health care utilization. Intervention usage was documented.ResultsThe mean number of intervention logins was 1.7, SD 2.5, median 1, interquartile range (IQR) 1-2. Thirty-four patients in the intervention group did not log in (22.5%), 63 (41.7%) logged in once, and 54 (35.8%) logged in multiple times (mean 3.6, SD 3.5, median 3, IQR 2-4). On clinician-assessed and self-reported PTSD symptoms, both the intervention and control group showed a significant decrease over time (P<.001) without significant differences in trend. PTSD at 12 months was diagnosed in 4.7% of controls and 4.4% of intervention group patients. There were no group differences on anxiety or depressive symptoms over time. Post hoc analyses using latent growth mixture modeling showed a significant decrease in PTSD symptoms in a subgroup of patients with severe initial symptoms (n=20) (P<.001).ConclusionsOur results do not support the efficacy of the Trauma TIPS Internet-based early intervention in the prevention of PTSD symptoms for an unselected population of injury patients. Moreover, uptake was relatively low since one-fifth of individuals did not log in to the intervention. Future research should therefore focus on innovative strategies to increase intervention usage, for example, adding gameplay, embedding it in a blended care context, and targeting high-risk individuals who are more likely to benefit from the intervention.Trial RegistrationInternational Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN): 57754429; http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN57754429 (Archived by WebCite at http://webcitation.org/6FeJtJJyD).

We conclude that the DAR5, which abbreviates the original DAR to half its original length, has similar psychometric properties and is therefore to be preferred especially for use with persons who are under stress, cognitively impaired or less mature. The study findings regarding the optimum number of response categories have implications for the development of other instruments.

BackgroundFollowing traumatic exposure, a proportion of trauma victims develops posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Early PTSD risk screening requires sensitive instruments to identify everyone at risk for developing PTSD in need of diagnostic follow-up.AimsThis study compares the accuracy of the 4-item SPAN, 10-item Trauma Screening Questionnaire (TSQ) and 22-item Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R) in predicting chronic PTSD at a minimum sensitivity of 80%.MethodInjury patients admitted to a level-I trauma centre (N = 311) completed the instruments at a median of 23 days and were clinically assessed for PTSD at 6 months. Areas under the curve and specificities at 80% sensitivity were compared between instruments.ResultsAreas under the curve in all instruments were adequate (SPAN: 0.83; TSQ: 0.82; IES-R: 0.83) with no significant differences. At 80% sensitivity, specificities were 64% for SPAN, 59% for TSQ and 72% for IES-R.ConclusionThe SPAN, TSQ and IES-R show similar accuracy in early detection of individuals at risk for PTSD, despite differences in number of items. The modest specificities and low positive predictive values found for all instruments could lead to relatively many false positive cases, when applied in clinical practice.

The European countries have a long history of exposure to large-scale trauma. In the early 1990s the increasing awareness of the consequences of trauma within the mental health community led to the foundation of local societies for psychotraumatology across Europe and the European Society of Traumatic Stress Studies (ESTSS), which celebrated its 25th anniversary in 2018. The focus of this article is to describe the current state of care for survivors of trauma in the 15 European countries where ESTSS member societies have been established. Brief descriptions on the historical burden of trauma in each country are followed by an overview of the care system for trauma survivors in the countries, the state-of-the-art of interventions, current challenges in caring for survivors and the topics that need to be most urgently addressed in the future. The reports from the different countries demonstrate how important steps towards a better provision of care for survivors of trauma have been made in Europe. Given the cultural and economic diversity of the continent, there are also differences between the European countries, for instance with regard to the use of evidence-based treatments. Strategies to overcome these differences, like the new ESTSS training curricula for care-providers across Europe, are briefly discussed.