Comparison of different indicators of treatment outcome in treating PTSD

Bačić, Ivana. (2008). Comparison of different indicators of treatment outcome in treating PTSD. Diploma Thesis. Filozofski fakultet u Zagrebu, Department of Psychology. [mentor Ljubotina, Damir].

Preview

PDF (Croatian) Download (273kB) | Preview

Abstract

The aim of this study was examination and comparison of the different indicators of treatment effectiveness for war veterans suffering from PTSD. The sample consisted of 138 subjects who participated in group psychotherapy. The data was gathered at baseline and followed up after 3 and 12 months. To asses treatment outcomes of psychotherapy we used several quantitative (The Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale, Brief Symptom Inventory, Impact of Event Scale-Revised, Manchester Short Assessment of Quality of Life) and one qualitative indicator of treatment effectiveness. The initial expectations of the treatment were also considered. The analysis of changes in posttraumatic stress symptoms showed significant improvement after 12 months of therapy at CAPS (t = 3.19; p < 0.01) and significant decrease of quality of life after 12 months at MANSA (t = 2.09; p < 0.05). A longer exposure to the therapy (12 against 3 monthts of duration) resulted in more positive changes at these indicators: BSI (t = 2.32; p < 0.05), IES-R (t = 3.67; p < 0.01) and subjective indicator of treatment outcome (Wilcoxon z = -2.96; p < 0.001). The corelation coefficients between different quantitative indicators od treatment effectiveness (CAPS, BSI, IES-R, MANSA) indicated a medium level of correspondence (range of values mainly between 0.4 and 0.7). The corelations between qualitative and any quantitative indicators of treatment outcome were not obtained (they were extremely low and statisticaly unsignficant at both measure points). The participants who expected group support and information exchange, symptom and health improvement as well as general and multiple improvement proved significantly higher at self perceived levels of improvement than participants who did not have any expectations, were not assured what they expect or had minimum and negative expectations.

Actions (login required)

View Item