Treaments for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder

Treaments for Post Traumatic Stress DisorderPosttraumatic stress disorder occurs when individuals birth intrusive effect of a disturbing event that they imbibe experienced for much than one month. posttraumatic stress disorder is withal pronounced by an individuals determined avoidance of any stimuli that might remind them of the aforementioned event, on with a marked shift in mood and behavior which is sad to the people around them. over the years, a outcome of the deflowerutic techniques have been habitd to treat posttraumatic stress disorder. Due to their effectiveness, characterisation therapies and eye drift desensitization and re fulfiling (EMDR) ar 2 of the most widely apply of these techniques. These have been utilized to treat soldiers as well as civilians who have experienced trauma. However, the nuances of their application, in terms of their effectiveness against specific demographics have insofar to be determined. This paper bequeath critic all toldy ev aluate a number of unalike studies conducted using picture show techniques, EMDR, or both and determine their effectiveness in treating individuals with PTSD. Even though EMDR has its roots in image therapy, for the purposes of this cartoon, EMDR and painting therapies will be regarded as two distinctive therapeutic techniques (CITE).One of the biggest issues faced by PTSD discourse research is a large number of studies with subpar methodologies. Due to this, Foa and Meadows (1997) published seven standards that should be present in any research that deals with discourse outcomes of PTSD. They are known as the Gold Standards for treatment outcome studies. According to Foa and Meadows, every suitable PTSD research should have clearly defined symptoms true and valid measures use of nonparasitic evaluators trained assessors manualized, replicable, specific treatment programs treatment adherence and an unbiased denomination to treatment.Ready et al. (2012) provides an effectiv e utilization of conference-based exposure therapy which sets the precedent in favor of exposure techniques among veteran soldiers. Their decisiveness to divide the participants into three groups of ten ensures that every individual pot form personal connections with some other members of the group given the limited time of the treatment program. The meek group coat overly allows the participants, who would typically avoid social situations, to not feel overwhelmed when asked to share their experiences. On the other hand, the lack of any gender variation within the adjudicate group reduces external rigourousness and adds to the stereotype that only men who have been in combat suffer from PTSD. Given the comorbidity of PTSD and substance abuse (CITE), using drug abuse as exclusion criteria further decreases its external rigorousness.Allocating the first part of the program to forming support groups among participants is an effective use of the small sample size. It also hel ps in prolonging the social and emotional support that participants get during the program so that they will continue to support each other after its conclusion. Using each individuals presentations as a form of exposure allows for a highly personalized exposure treatment while allowing them to envision that others have faced the same situations that they have. However, since they are required to listen to it as homework, it dejection only be effective with highly motivated participants. Seeing the long-term effectiveness of this type of exposure technique, Ready et al. (2012) proposed that the number of times that participants are required to listen to the presentations be increased from 10 to 20, which would theoretically increase the regulate at which symptoms of PTSD would disappear. Overall, group based exposure therapy (GBET) is shown to be an effective short-term and long-term treatment for PTSD.Through research conducted in a Ugandan refugee camp, Neuner et al. (2008) dem onstrated that, even with laypersons with minimal training in psychotherapy, exposure techniques such as narrative exposure therapy ( straighten out) can be employ to treat PTSD. precisely nine research assistants, all laypersons, were employed to conduct this field of view among a sample size of 277 individuals. succession they were given a 6 week crash course on therapeutic techniques and communication skills, the use of unqualified personal to treat psychological disorders is unethical and could have negatively affected the participants being treated. Furthermore, it would have been punter to use research assistants who werent from the camps that the understand was being conducted on this would have decreased threats to the validity of the subject such as demand characteristics and participant expectations. However, the subject of PTSD wasnt alien to the laypersons since all of them had been diagnosed with it at one point or another, meaning that they could empathize with t he participants via personal experience. Since follow-up assessments showed that 70% of the participants who underwent NET can no longer be diagnosed with PTSD, this type of psychotherapy can be employ in war-torn regions where professional help isnt readily available. But the validity of the final results can be questioned collectible to the large number of participants who could not be located for the post-test and follow-up sessions, even though the study had adjusted for attrition during participant selection.Another exposure technique, known as imagery rescripting and exposure therapy (IRET), was used by Long et al. (2011) to treat nightmares associated with PTSD. Like in the aforementioned case of Ready et al. (2012), this program also suffered from the issue of being all male. Furthermore, the temporal relevance of the study can be questioned since the participants were primarily veterans of the Vietnam warfare and none of the participants had participated in active combat since the early 1990s. magic spell IRET had great success in lessen the frequency of nightmares and increasing the quality of relief, it wasnt shown to have any effect on other symptoms associated with PTSD. The validity of these findings can be further questioned by the fact that the mean age for the participants were 62.1 years meaning that their sleep disturbances may be the result of factors other than PTSD. Despite all of this, the self-employed and individualized exposure techniques used in this study, along with the extensive psychoeducation that preceded it, makes it a highly effective tool to treat nightmares associated with PTSD, even in individuals who have been suffering from it for decades.Rothbaum, Astin, and Marstellar (2005) attempted to compare the efficacy of prolonged exposure therapy (PE) to EMDR with respect to the treatment of rape victims. One of the things that stood out from this study was the fact that every assessment and evaluation that is required dur ing the course of the study was conducted by independent, blind evaluators. In humanitarian to that the integrity of the specific therapies was measured by assessors who rated them highly. The sample size used was appropriate but a high dropout rate, combined with a few peculiar additions to the sample groups negatively affects the validity and reliability of the study three participants who would not have otherwise been able to steal a fashion the exclusion criteria were allowed to participate in the study. It also used the participants subjective opinion on the most momentous events in their lives, on which the treatments were focused on, which stands out due to the lengths they went to make the results of this study independent and objective. Furthermore, the remarkable success at which both PE and EMDR was able to treat the participants, raises questions on the reliability of the treatment process 95% of the PE group and 75% of the EMDR group of patients who have been sufferi ng from PTSD for over a decade, were no longer diagnosable as PTSD patients after a treatment process that lasted a few weeks. Despite all that, the efficacy of both exposure techniques and EMDR in treatment compared to no treatment cannot be questioned.Ahmad, Larsson, and Sundlein-Wahlstens (2006) study, which was conducted using participants between the ages of 6 to 16, demonstrated that PTSD is prevalent even among children. The randomized controlled disposition of the study along with the independent assessments makes it high in internal validity. Participants on the control group of this also showed improvements they however, improved in non PTSD related symptoms. Moreover, the inventory that was administered had been modified in such a way that it can be understood and used easily with children. Furthermore, a more extensive evaluation can be carried out in the form of longitudinal studies or case studies regarding the relationship between PTSD in children and the history of mental illness in their family. Like many other programs which tested different treatments of PTSD, this study lacked a larger sample size, and utilized extensive exclusion criteria this could affect its generalizability. In addition to this, they failed to make independent assessments of their follow-up evaluations, affecting its claim of having blind assessments.Similar to Rothbaum, Astin, and Marstellars (2005) study which used the victims subjective opinion of their worst experience in order to conduct their PTSD assessment, this study also decided to focus on one single incident that the young participants or their guardians deemed significant. This is an effective method of administering EMDR, since it is more efficient in treating specific memories that are distressing to the participants. However, in a broader perspective, while a case can be made to the point that subjective opinions of individuals most distressing events are relevant to treating PTSD since its the individu als themselves who are experiencing them, it should also be pointed out that what an individual considers to be the most significant event in his/her career need not be the most significant event in terms of psychological and emotional trauma. Therefore, it should be best to conduct extensive cathode-ray oscilloscope checks before any kind of decision is made regarding the significance of any life events.In a study published by Taylor et al. (2003), a side by side comparison of prolonged exposure therapy and EMDR with respect to specific symptoms of PTSD was conducted to determine which technique was more effective against each of them. Compared to most other studies conducted regarding PTSD, this study had a fairly large sample size (n=60) with the majority of them being Caucasian and women. While the study employed an impressive sample size, since the participants were primarily diagnosed with chronic and severe forms of PTSD, the external validity of the results can be brought into question. However, since most of the participants of the study had chronic PTSD, it reduces the possibility that the changes that were observed in the pretests and posttests are purely due to temporal changes. The validity can be further questioned due to the difference in educational qualifications of the two therapists who administered these therapeutics techniques. However, independent expert assessment of their interrater reliability produced high scores, disproving these doubts. Moreover, the treatments were administered using standardized manuals which increased the validity of the study by ensuring that all participants received near as similar treatments as possible. This study is the first study to have achieved the aforementioned gold Standard for PTSD outcome treatment research (CITE). This studys observed reductions in PTSD symptoms for all three subject groups were determined by the authors as a result of the effect of unintended exposure during relaxation training and EMDR techniques. This contradicts with the belief that in EMDR, eye gallery enhances the retrieval of episodic memory and increases cognitive flexibility (CITE).While exposure techniques and eye movement desensitizing and reprocessing (EMDR) are similar to each other in many ways and are efficacious in their treatment of PTSD, their approaches, implementations, and goals are quite different from one another. EMDR treats PTSD by asking the patients to subjectively look at the memory or experience that they think is causing them the most distress and treating them so that they are desensitized to this exceptional experience. The root of their PTSD is determined to be their most distressing memory and by desensitizing them to that experience and the re-experiencing that follows it, they are shown to have significant decrease in symptoms of PTSD. While some specialized exposure therapies employ similar approaches, others such as the NET and GBET explores an individuals whole lif e or a particular period in which they were susceptible to distressing experiences respectively. This method allows the therapist to play a part in determining the most significant event in an individuals life and adjusting the treatment process accordingly. In addition to that, since Taylor et al. (2003) showed that prolonged exposure therapy was more effective than EMDR in diminution the levels of re-experiencing and avoidance, the authors of the study concluded that it is the superior therapeutic technique. All in all, both exposure techniques and EMDR are very good at what they are supposed to do but exposure techniques are better at it. Therefore, a hypothesis can be derived from the above discussed studies which states that specialized exposure techniques are more efficacious in the treatment of PTSD than EMDR across social and temporal demographics.