It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Background: Co-occurring posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and substance use disorders (SUD) are associated with a more severe course and worse outcome than either disorder alone. In Europe, few treatments have been evaluated for PTSD and SUD. Seeking Safety, a manualized, integrated, cognitive-behavioural treatment, has been shown to be effective in studies in the USA.
Objective: To test the efficacy of Seeking Safety plus treatment as usual (TAU) in female outpatients with PTSD and SUD compared to Relapse Prevention Training (RPT) plus TAU and TAU alone.
Method: In five German study centres a total of N = 343 women were randomized into one of the three study conditions. PTSD severity (primary outcome), substance use, depression and emotion dysregulation (secondary outcomes) were assessed at baseline, post-treatment, as well as at three months and six months post-treatment.
Results: Treatment participants attended M = 6.6 sessions (Seeking Safety) and M = 6.1 sessions (RPT). In an intent-to-treat analysis, Seeking Safety plus TAU, RPT plus TAU and TAU alone showed comparable decreases in PTSD severity over the course of the study. Seeking Safety plus TAU showed superior efficacy to TAU alone on depression and emotion regulation and RPT plus TAU was more effective than TAU alone on number of substance-free days and alcohol severity. Minimum-dose analyses suggest additional effects of both programmes among participants who attended at least eight group sessions.
Conclusions: With respect to PTSD symptoms, a brief dose of Seeking Safety and RPT in addition to TAU was not superior to TAU alone in women with PTSD and SUD. However, Seeking Safety and RPT showed greater reductions than TAU alone in other domains of psychopathology and substance use outcomes respectively. Future studies should investigate further variables, such as what aspects of each treatment appeal to particular patients and how best to disseminate them.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Center for Interdisciplinary Addiction Research, Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
2 Institute of Medical Biometry and Epidemiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
3 Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy Bethel, Ev. Klinikum Bielefeld, Bielefeld, Germany
4 Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Paracelsus University Nuremberg, Nürnberg, Germany; Department of Psychiatry, Socialpsychiatry and Psychotherapy, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany
5 Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Addiction Medicine, Lehrkrankenhaus der Universität Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
6 Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, LVR-Klinik Essen, University Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
7 Department of Addictive Disorders and Psychiatry, LVR-Klinik Cologne, Cologne, Germany