New paper, co-authored by Uvia founder Dr Michael Bloomfield: exploring clinicians views on reintegration
The concept of complex post-traumatic stress disorder (CPTSD) was first proposed by Herman in 1992, but it was only recently added as an official diagnosis in the ICD-11 in 2018. The main differences between PTSD and CPTSD include self-organization symptoms such as affect dysregulation, impairments in self-concept, and disturbances in relationships, which CPTSD must exhibit along with three core symptoms of PTSD (re-experiencing the trauma, avoidance, and elevated arousal/hypervigilance). The ISTSS has established that treatment for CPTSD is likely to involve more diverse interventions and a longer duration than PTSD due to the disorder's clinical severity. A phase-based approach was first proposed for treating CPTSD and consists of three phases: stabilisation, trauma memory processing, and reintegration. However, there is conflicting evidence on the superiority of this approach and a lack of research on the composition and effectiveness of reintegration interventions.
The study explored the views of expert clinicians on reintegration interventions for Complex Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (CPTSD). The experts agreed that reintegration should be based on the individual, but the definition, composition and evaluation of reintegration was inconsistent. Many experts suggested that the best way to evaluate reintegration is by using a combination of standardized functioning measures and personal goals. The participants had varying opinions on the term reintegration and some preferred the terms "integration," "reclaiming," or "rebuilding." Experts agreed that the interventions should be tailored to the individual, but there is a gap between what has been evaluated in research and what experts have suggested. Key principles of delivering reintegration included starting the process at the beginning of therapy, and delivering it alongside other trauma-focused interventions.
See the full article at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/20008066.2023.2165024