Interpersonal Psychotherapy (IPT) for PTSD: A Case Study

Rafaeli, Alexandra Klein; Markowitz, John C.

doi:10.1176/appi.psychotherapy.2011.65.3.205

Cited by 12 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…They highlighted the importance of enabling survivors to recount only what they feel comfortable with, while the full story is told via the emotions that surface. This finding echoes Rafaeli and Markowitz's (2011) conclusion that interpersonal psychotherapy may relieve PTSD symptoms without the use of exposure treatment. It is also borne out in Mark's account, detailing his completion of therapy by working through the psychophysiological impact of the trauma without discussing the narrative in its entirety.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

Survivor‐led relational psychotherapy and embodied trauma: A qualitative inquiry

Forde

Duvvury

2020

Couns and Psychother Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

Survivor‐led relational psychotherapy and embodied trauma: A qualitative inquiry

Forde

Duvvury

2020

Couns and Psychother Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There was some diversity among active interventions that were directly compared in this meta-analysis, but comparisons were primarily of trauma-specific and neutral (repeated discussions of the trauma memory are not required but may be allowed) interventions. Increasing the number of trials with emerging therapies for PTSD (Schnyder, 2005) that do not include a focus on the trauma memory, such as IPT (Markowitz, 2010; Rafaeli & Markowitz, 2011), behavioral activation (Jakupcak et al, 2006), acceptance and commitment therapy and mindfulness-based approaches (Walser & Westrup, 2007), and now PCT, may provide a more thorough test of whether treatments with varying degree of focus on trauma differ in their ability to retain patients.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Meta-analysis of dropout in treatments for posttraumatic stress disorder.

Imel

Laska

Jakupcak

et al. 2013

Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

527

367

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective Many patients dropout of treatments for Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and some clinicians believe that ‘trauma focused’ treatments increase dropout. Method We conducted a meta-analysis of dropout among active treatments in clinical trials for PTSD (42 studies; 17 direct comparisons). Results The average dropout rate was 18%, but it varied significantly across studies. Group modality and greater number of sessions, but not trauma focus, predicted increased dropout. When the meta-analysis was restricted to direct comparisons of active treatments, there were no differences in dropout. Differences in trauma focus between treatments in the same study did not predict dropout. However, trauma focused treatments resulted in higher dropout as compared to Present Centered Therapy (PCT) – a treatment originally designed as a control, but now listed as a research supported intervention for PTSD. Conclusion Dropout varies between active interventions for PTSD across studies, but differences are primarily driven by differences between studies. There do not appear to be systematic differences across active interventions when they are directly compared in the same study. The degree of clinical attention placed on the traumatic event does not appear to be a primary cause of dropout from active treatments. However comparisons of PCT may be an exception to this general pattern, perhaps due to a restriction of variability in trauma focus among comparisons of active treatments. More research is needed comparing trauma focused interventions to trauma avoidant treatments such as PCT.

show abstract

“…When their manual limits specific techniques that might address particular symptoms, therapists may have to rely more on non-specific “common factors” of psychotherapy to help their patients (Markowitz and Milrod, 2011). As a less focused, less structured psychotherapy, IPT may have flexible advantages for atypically presenting PTSD patients (Rafaeli and Markowitz, 2011) – if it proves efficacious for PTSD.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Treating Patients Who Strain the Research Psychotherapy Paradigm

Markowitz¹,

Kaplowitz²,

Suh³

et al. 2012

Journal of Nervous &Amp; Mental Disease

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Clinical trials of psychotherapy require diagnostic homogeneity, which implies a convergence of clinical presentations. Yet research study patients present diversely, and patients who do not fit a treatment paradigm may greatly complicate delivery of the study psychotherapy. The research literature has not addressed this issue. Methods The authors use case illustrations of three psychotherapies – Prolonged Exposure, Relaxation Therapy, and Interpersonal Psychotherapy – from an ongoing psychotherapy outcome trial of posttraumatic stress disorder to describe psychotherapeutic responses to complex, “atypical” patients who strain standard treatment paradigms. Results Therapists required flexibility, and occasionally deviations from strict protocol, in treating heterodox patients. Conclusions Such heterogeneity of presentation may have implications for psychotherapy outcome in research trials. Despite lack of discussion in the literature, many trials may face such issues.

show abstract

Interpersonal Psychotherapy (IPT) for PTSD: A Case Study

Cited by 12 publications

References 27 publications

Survivor‐led relational psychotherapy and embodied trauma: A qualitative inquiry

Survivor‐led relational psychotherapy and embodied trauma: A qualitative inquiry

Meta-analysis of dropout in treatments for posttraumatic stress disorder.

Treating Patients Who Strain the Research Psychotherapy Paradigm

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About