A Warm Water Immersion Intervention for Symptoms of PTSD in Military Veterans: A Qualitative Descriptive Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) is a substantial problem for Veterans and active members of armed forces across the globe, resulting in debilitating mental and physical comorbidities. Evidence-based treatments have demonstrated some success; however, many Veterans remain symptomatic mandating the urgent need for innovative treatment strategies. Purpose The purpose of this study was to explore the lived experience of military Veterans with PTSD symptoms who participated in a therapeutic warm water immersion intervention aimed at reducing their symptoms. Methods and Procedures A standardized warm 33 ° C (92 ° F) water immersion intervention to the chest, lasting 45 min was implemented. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with the 13 participants (age 23–41) after engaging in the intervention. Using a qualitative descriptive design informed by phenomenology, thematic analysis was completed, applying criteria of rigor throughout the process. Results Five main themes explicated the participants’ experience: the rhythm of relaxed, embracing the properties of the water, the pain floats away, acclimatize to calmness, and a place to set your mind. Participants described a sense of relaxation, calmness, pain reduction, and a means to control intrusive thoughts. All indicated they would recommend the intervention and provided feedback on how to refine it. Conclusions As a component of a larger study, these qualitative findings revealed the potential for therapeutic effects of a novel water immersion intervention. The findings serve to inform revisions to the intervention for future research and practice. Immersion provides a fast-acting, non-stigmatizing adjunct therapy for Veterans who continue to experience symptoms during and after standard evidence-based treatment.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".