Evaluation of the Effects of Post-Immediate Psychotherapeutic Interventions in Secondary Prevention of Psychotraumatic Disorders (IPPI A)
|The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been evaluated by the U.S. Federal Government. Read our disclaimer for details.|
|ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00455390|
Recruitment Status : Unknown
Verified April 2007 by Groupe Francais d'Epidemiologie Psychiatrique.
Recruitment status was: Recruiting
First Posted : April 3, 2007
Last Update Posted : April 3, 2007
Argumentation The frequency of post-traumatic syndrome disorder (PTSD) is estimated around 1% of the entire European population. In some specific populations, this percentage increases (soldiers – 15 to 22%, war or persecuted refugees – 80%, post office or bank employees submitted to an hold-up – 17%, firemen – 10 to 30%, emergency care employees – 11%, people who underwent a terrorist attack or any violence – 20 to 65%...)
Prevention is yet poor, secondary prevention trying to avoid a post traumatic disorder apparition early after the traumatic event. There is currently two types of secondary prevention :
- Mitchell’s debriefing based upon stress and its theories, using cognitive and behavioural approaches
- French debriefing (post-immediate psychotherapeutic intervention) based on the traumatism, never realised before second day post event and applied by mental health professionals.
The current controversy of the Mitchell’s debriefing leads us to evaluate the post-immediate psychotherapeutic intervention, never evaluated yet.
Scientific Objectives Primary objective: To verify that post-immediate psychotherapeutic interventions (proposed after 2 days and before the end of first month post event) decrease incidence, duration and intensity of psychotraumatic disorders at one year, versus a control group.
Secondary objectives :
- To document the efficacy of these interventions regarding professional, social and familial adaptation.
- To identify predictive factors of response to this strategy.
Method Experimental Design National multicentered, randomized, single blind study Study Population 330 men or women aged 18 to 65, subjected to a potentially traumatic event (criteria A1, DSM IV) and having presented an emotional reaction (intense fear, impotency or horror, criteria A2, DSM IV). This event must have happened within 8 days prior randomization. Patients treated with βblockers and patients suffering from psychopathologic disorders won’t be considered for the study.
Outcome measures Primary outcome: PTSD frequency (on the basis of questionnaire CAPS).
- Complete and subsyndormic PTSD occurence (CAPS),
- Intensity of psychotraumatic disorders (Sheehan scale),
- Psychopathologic disorder frequency (CIDI SF),
- Evolution of anxiety/depression (HAD scale),
- Alcoholization frequency (CAGE scale),
- Frequency of somatic adverse events,
- Access to health care (number and types of contacts).
Expected benefits The post-immediate psychotherapeutic intervention shall avoid psychological disorders apparition or improve its symptoms. This would decrease consequences on personal life (social, relational and professional).
The study results will allow a better knowledge of these post traumatic disorders.
|Condition or disease||Intervention/treatment||Phase|
|PTSD Post Traumatic Syndrome Disorder||Procedure: Post-immediate Psychotherapeutic Intervention||Phase 3|
Group 1: Post-immediate psychotherapeutic intervention, 2 to 3 seances within the first month following the potentially traumatic event. Each intervention last about 45 minutes.
Group 2-control: no psychotherapeutic intervention, only 2 to 3 supporting sessions.
- men or women aged 18 to 65,
- subjected to a potentially traumatic event (criteria A1, DSM IV),
- having presented an emotional reaction (intense fear, impotency or horror, criteria A2, DSM IV),
- potentially traumatic event happening within 8 days prior randomization.
Non inclusion criteria
- patients treated with βblockers ,
- patients suffering from psychopathologic disorders within 15 days prior randomization (Axe I DSM IV),
- physical injuries avoiding patient’s participation to the study,
- hospitalization > 72 hours post event,
- traumatic event related to a process of victimisation (domestic violences),
- no informed consent signed
Randomized, single blind trial on two parallel groups. Randomization stratified on sex and human design.
Number of patients:
330 in 18 clinical centres
|Study Type :||Interventional (Clinical Trial)|
|Enrollment :||330 participants|
|Intervention Model:||Parallel Assignment|
|Official Title:||Evaluation of the Effects of Post-Immediate Psychotherapeutic Interventions in Secondary Prevention of Psychotraumatic Disorders|
|Study Start Date :||January 2007|
|Estimated Study Completion Date :||April 2009|
- PTSD frequency (questionnaire CAPS at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months )
- Complete and subsyndormic PTSD occurence (CAPS at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months)
- Intensity of psychotraumatic disorders (Sheehan scale at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months).
- Psychopathologic disorder frequency (CIDI SF at baseline and at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months).
- Evolution of anxiety/depression (HAD scale after first therapy session and at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months).
- Alcoholization frequency (CAGE scale at baseline and at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months).
- Frequency of somatic adverse events (at each visit).
- Access to health care (number and types of contacts, at each visit).
To learn more about this study, you or your doctor may contact the study research staff using the contact information provided by the sponsor.
Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier (NCT number): NCT00455390
|Contact: Jean-Pierre VIGNAT, MDH||+33 4 37 90 11 email@example.com|
|Hôpital Edouard Herriot - SAMU||Recruiting|
|Lyon, Rhone-Alpes, France, 69100|
|Contact: Nathalie PRIETO, MDH +33 4 72 11 63 87 firstname.lastname@example.org|
|Principal Investigator:||Nathalie PRIETO, MDH||Hospices Civils de Lyon|