No abstract

BackgroundAdverse childhood experiences (ACEs) are associated with posttraumatic and complex posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms in adulthood (PTSD/cPTSD), as well as reduced epistemic trust (trust in the authenticity and personal relevance of interpersonally transmitted information) and impaired personality functioning. The present work aims to investigate the predictive value of epistemic trust—the capacity for social learning—on the mediating effect of personality functioning in the association of ACEs and PTSD/cPTSD.MethodsWe conducted structural equation modeling (SEM) based on representative data of the German population (N = 2,004). Personality functioning (OPD-SQS) was applied as a mediator between ACEs and PTSD/cPTSD (ITQ), while epistemic trust (ETMCQ) was added as predictor for OPD-SQS. TLI, CFI, and RMSEA (95%-CI) determined the models’ fit.ResultsN = 477 (23.8%) participants reported at least one ACE and n = 218 (10.9%) reported ≥4 ACEs. Fit indices were good for both PTSD (TLI = 0.96; CFI = 0.99; RMSEA = 0.06; 95%CI: 0.041–0.078) and cPTSD (TLI = 0.96; CFI = 0.99; RMSEA = 0.06; 95%CI: 0.043–0.081). ACEs were significantly associated with cPTSD (β = 0.44, p < 0.001) and PTSD (β = 0.29, p < 0.001), explaining 20 and 8% of its variance. Adding personality functioning as a mediator increased the explained variance of cPTSD and PTSD to 47 and 19% while the direct association between ACEs and cPTSD/PTSD decreased (β = 0.21/β = 0.17), thus, indicating a partial mediation. Including epistemic trust substantially increased the explained variance for personality functioning (41%) compared to ACEs as a single predictor (16%).ConclusionWe add to previous research emphasizing the association between ACEs and PTSD/cPTSD symptoms. Offering insights on underlying mechanisms, we show that epistemic trust and personality functioning are relevant mediators. Since both are modifiable by psychotherapy, knowledge about the role of these constructs can inform research on psychotherapeutic interventions and prevention.

No abstract

Background Diabetes is one of the most common diseases worldwide and is associated with increased morbidity, mortality, and reduced quality of life. Many patients experience high diabetes-related distress as well as depression and anxiety symptoms, which are associated with poor diabetes self-management. As disease management is a central component in diabetes treatment, poor management enhances the occurrence of micro- and macrovascular complications. This emphasizes the relevance of reducing diabetes-related distress and providing adequate treatment options addressing the individual psychosocial burden of patients with diabetes. Since patients’ perspectives diverge significantly from those of practitioners in terms of relevant treatment aspects, the patient perspective on, for example, barriers to and facilitators of diabetes treatment is crucial for adequate and effective treatment as well as improvements to self-management and therefore, needs to be further explored. Objective This study aims to examine diabetes-related distress, the course of distress throughout diabetes management, as well as barriers and facilitating factors in dealing with diabetes from the individual perspective of patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Methods The study employs a mixed methods design combining qualitative and quantitative data. Semistructured interviews (N=40) will be conducted with patients with type 1 diabetes (n=20) and patients with type 2 diabetes (n=20). The primary outcomes comprise (1) diabetes-related distress, (2) the severity of distress, (3) the course of distress throughout diabetes management, (4) barriers, and (5) facilitating factors. Questionnaires will provide data on the following secondary outcomes: diabetes-related emotional distress (the Problem Areas in Diabetes scale), symptoms of depression and anxiety (Patient Health Questionnaire, German version), personality functioning (Operationalized Psychodynamic Diagnosis-Structure Questionnaire), mentalizing capacities (Mentalization Questionnaire), epistemic trust (Epistemic Trust, Mistrust and Credulity Questionnaire) and experiences of child maltreatment (Childhood Trauma Questionnaire), and the overall health status of the patient (routine medical data). Results As of April 2022, the conceptualization phase of the study was finalized. Ethics approval was received in January 2022 from the local ethics committee of the Justus Liebig University Giessen – Faculty of Medicine (AZ 161/21). Conclusions This study will provide insights into the individual perspective of patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes regarding their experiences with diabetes management and what they perceive to be relevant, obstructive, or beneficial. The insights gained could help further tailor diabetes treatment to the individual needs of patients with diabetes and therefore optimize diabetes self-management. Trial Registration German Clinical Trial Register DRKS00024999; https://tinyurl.com/2wb4xdh8 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) PRR1-10.2196/38477

No abstract