MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4288072663 · doi:10.1101/2021.11.08.21266074

Feasibility and acceptability of Narrative Exposure Therapy to treat individuals with PTSD who are homeless or vulnerably housed: A pilot randomized controlled trial

2021· preprint· en· W4288072663 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Nicole E. Edgar, Alexandria Bennett, Nicole Dunn, Sarah MacLean, Simon Hatcher

Notice bibliographique

RevuemedRxiv · 2021
Typepreprint
Langueen
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiqueHomelessness and Social Issues
Établissements canadiensCarleton UniversityInstitute for Christian StudiesUniversity of TorontoUniversity of OttawaOttawa Hospital
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésRandomized controlled trialMedicineMental healthPopulationPsychiatryPhysical therapyClinical psychologyInternal medicine

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Background Annually, there are least 235,000 individuals experiencing homelessness in Canada. These individuals are more likely to have complex health issues, including mental health issues such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Diagnosed PTSD rates in the homeless are more than double that of the general population, ranging between 21% and 53%. In the homeless population, complex PTSD (cPTSD) appears to be more common than PTSD. One treatment option for cPTSD is Narrative Exposure Therapy (NET), a brief trauma focused psychotherapy which attempts to place the trauma within a narrative of the person’s life. Previous studies suggest NET may be an effective option for those who are homeless. In this study, our primary aim was to assess the feasibility and acceptability of delivering community-based NET to individuals with PTSD who were homeless or vulnerably housed. Methods This pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) enrolled participants who were 18 years of age or older, currently homeless or vulnerably housed, and with active symptoms of PTSD. Participants were randomized to either NET alone or NET plus the addition of a genealogical assessment. Demographic and clinical data were collected at the baseline visit. Symptoms of PTSD, drug use and housing status were re-assessed at follow-up visits. Rates of referral, consent and retention were also examined as part of feasibility. Results Twenty-two potential participants were referred to the study. Six were not able to be contacted, one was excluded prior to contact, and the remaining 15 consented to participate. Of these, one was a screen failure and 14 were randomized equally to the treatment arms. One randomized participant was withdrawn for safety. The main point of attrition was prior to starting therapy (3/13). Once therapy was initiated, retention was high with 80% of participants completing all six sessions of therapy. Seven participants completed all follow-up sessions. Conclusion Delivering NET in a community-based setting and completing genealogical assessments was both feasible and acceptable to those who are homeless or vulnerably housed. Once therapy had been initiated, participants were likely to stay engaged. A large RCT should be conducted to evaluate effectiveness and feasibility on an increased scale. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov , identifier NCT03781297 . Registered: December 19, 2018, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03781297 . Key messages regarding feasibility What uncertainties existed regarding the feasibility? Narrative Exposure Therapy (NET) is an individual trauma focused psychotherapy recommended in guidelines for the treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). However, in people who are homeless or vulnerably housed, there have been no randomised controlled trials of trauma focused therapies for PTSD. We wanted to find out if it was feasible to recruit and retain people who were homeless with PTSD in a randomized controlled trial of a trauma informed therapy. We wanted to test the acceptability and feasibility of offering NET alone compared to NET plus a genealogical assessment. We also wanted to see if it was acceptable and practical to incorporate a genealogical assessment as part of NET. What are the key feasibility findings? The key feasibility finding is that it is feasible to recruit and retain people who are homeless into a randomized controlled trial of a trauma informed therapy. However, recruitment could be improved by a better process for engaging potential participants between referral and enrollment as about a third of the referred population were lost at this stage. Not having trained therapists available also delayed recruitment. What are the implications of the feasibility findings for the design of the main study? We will explicitly develop materials for use at the referral step by potential referrers. This will include an online training video which will address issues of trust and how to address them when discussing the potential study. We will also develop a process for training and recruiting therapists. Since this study was completed, we have done two further training workshops to create a pool of potential therapists in Ottawa. We will also engage with another site in Ontario to widen the population base of potential participants.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,007
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Essai randomisé · Signal consensuel: Essai randomisé
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,011
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,036

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0070,011
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0030,003
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,002
Communication savante0,0020,002
Science ouverte0,0020,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0030,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0110,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,093
Tête enseignante GPT0,407
Écart entre enseignants0,314 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeEssai randomisé
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2021
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuemedRxiv→Même sujetHomelessness and Social Issues→Travaux en français237 207→