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: Dialectical Behaviour Therapy for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (DBT-PTSD) is a phase-based treatment for PTSD. The DBT-PTSD treatment programme’s efficacy has not been tested during standard operation, outside of laboratory outcome studies.
Objective: The present pilot study investigated the transportability of the DBT-PTSD treatment to a real word clinical setting in a residential mental health centre.
Methods: The DBT-PTSD treatment was compared to a treatment as usual (TAU) condition in a non-randomized study. Overall, 156 patients from a residential mental health centre were included. Propensity score matching was used to match participants in the two treatment arms based on baseline characteristics. Primary and secondary outcomes (PTSD and other symptoms) were assessed at the time of admission and at the time of discharge.
Results: The DBT-PTSD treatment outperformed the TAU condition in the improvement of all primary outcomes, as indicated by a significant time and group interaction. There were notable differences in the effect sizes between the unmatched and matched sample as well as between the available and the intent-to-treat (ITT) data analyses. The effect sizes in the ITT data analyses were much lower. Both treatment groups showed similar improvements in secondary outcomes.
Conclusions: This study provides initial evidence for the transportability of the DBT-PTSD treatment to a naturalistic clinical care setting, but with considerably lower effect sizes than in previously published laboratory RCTs. The higher efficacy of DBT-PTSD compared to TAU may largely depend on patient’s adherence to treatment.
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 Department of Psychology and Psychodynamics, Division of Clinical Psychology, Karl Landsteiner University of Health Sciences, Krems an der Donau, Austria
2 Department of Psychology and Psychodynamics, Division of Clinical Psychology, Karl Landsteiner University of Health Sciences, Krems an der Donau, Austria; Karl Landsteiner University of Health Sciences, University Hospital for Psychosomatic Medicine Eggenburg, Eggenburg, Austria