Labels

abc ( 2 ) acceptance ( 1 ) act ( 1 ) Action ( 1 ) activity chart ( 1 ) Activity schedule ( 1 ) Addis ( 1 ) anger ( 2 ) antecedents ( 1 ) Antony and Barlow ( 1 ) Anxiety ( 3 ) anxiety continuum ( 1 ) anxiety versus fear ( 1 ) anxiety;treatment resistant anxiety ( 1 ) assertiveness ( 1 ) attention ( 1 ) attention training ( 1 ) attentional focus ( 2 ) Avoidance ( 1 ) Avoidant behaviours ( 2 ) BDD ( 1 ) Beck ( 1 ) Becker ( 1 ) behavioural activation ( 4 ) behavioural antidepressant ( 1 ) Behavioural Experiments ( 1 ) behaviourism ( 2 ) Boom and Bust ( 1 ) Brief Cognitive Behaviour Therapy ( 1 ) CBASP ( 1 ) CBT ( 4 ) Checking ( 1 ) Chronic ( 1 ) Chronic Depression ( 1 ) Chronic Pain ( 1 ) client script ( 1 ) Cognitive Restructuring ( 4 ) Cognitive Therapy ( 1 ) Cognitive Therapy for Psychiatric Problems: Hawton ( 1 ) Cognitive Therapy of Anxiety Disorders: Adrian Wells ( 1 ) Compassion ( 1 ) compassion focussed therapy ( 1 ) Compulsion ( 1 ) Conditions of worth ( 1 ) consequences ( 1 ) CPT ( 1 ) CT ( 1 ) CTS-R ( 1 ) Curwen ( 1 ) depression ( 4 ) Detatched mindfulness ( 1 ) Discrimative stimuli ( 1 ) Disorder specific ( 1 ) doing ( 1 ) dorothy rowe ( 1 ) drivers for attentional style ( 1 ) driving phobia ( 1 ) Dugas ( 1 ) Empirical study ( 1 ) Enhancement and rebound effect ( 1 ) ERP ( 1 ) Establishing operations ( 1 ) exposure ( 5 ) exposure therapy ( 2 ) extinction ( 1 ) Farmer and Chapman ( 1 ) Fennell ( 1 ) forgiveness ( 2 ) freeze ( 1 ) GAD ( 3 ) Goals form ( 1 ) Graded Task assignment ( 2 ) Handbook ( 1 ) Health Anxiety ( 2 ) Heimberg ( 1 ) helplessness ( 1 ) IAPT ( 1 ) Imaginal Exposure ( 2 ) impossible situation ( 1 ) incompatible behaviour ( 1 ) insomnia ( 1 ) Interpersonal Discrimation Excerise ( 1 ) Intolerance of uncertainty ( 1 ) Intrusive thoughts ( 1 ) Jacobson ( 1 ) kassinove ( 2 ) learned helplessness ( 1 ) Learning CBT ( 1 ) Learning Theory ( 1 ) Major Concerns ( 1 ) Martell ( 3 ) Mastery of your Specific Phobia: Craske ( 1 ) McCullough ( 1 ) MCT ( 1 ) meta-cognitions ( 2 ) MI ( 1 ) mindfulness ( 4 ) Modifying Affects ( 1 ) Modifying Behaviour ( 1 ) Modifying Images ( 1 ) Motivational Interviewing ( 1 ) Motivational Interviewing Preparing people for change: Miller and Rollnick ( 1 ) Negative Automatic Thoughts ( 1 ) Obsession ( 1 ) OCD ( 9 ) OCD a guide for professionals:Wilhelm and Steketee ( 1 ) Outside in ( 1 ) Overcoming ( 1 ) Overcoming depression one step at a time ( 1 ) Overcoming OCD ( 1 ) overcoming stress ( 1 ) overdoing ( 1 ) Oxford Guide to behavioural experiments in Cognitive Therapy: ( 1 ) Pacing ( 1 ) Pain ( 1 ) Palmer ( 1 ) panic ( 1 ) panic disorder ( 1 ) paul gilbert ( 3 ) Perfectionism ( 1 ) Phobia ( 1 ) Piaget ( 1 ) Premack principle ( 1 ) Problem orientation ( 1 ) Problem solving ( 3 ) Procrastination ( 1 ) PTSD ( 3 ) Quick reference guide ( 1 ) Rape ( 1 ) reinforcement ( 1 ) Resick ( 1 ) rollo may ( 1 ) RTA ( 1 ) rumination ( 3 ) Salkovskis ( 1 ) Salkovskis et al ( 1 ) Sally Winston ( 1 ) Salomons Essay ( 2 ) Schemas ( 1 ) Self-directed behaviour ( 1 ) seligman ( 1 ) shaping ( 1 ) Shnicke ( 1 ) Significant Other list ( 1 ) Simple Goal Orientated CBT ( 1 ) Situational Analysis ( 1 ) Sleep ( 1 ) social phobia ( 3 ) Socratic questioning ( 1 ) stimulus control ( 2 ) stimulus generalisation ( 1 ) stress ( 1 ) Structuring and Educating ( 1 ) Tafrate ( 2 ) Theories of Pain ( 1 ) Therapeutic Relationship ( 1 ) thinking ( 1 ) thinking errors list ( 1 ) Thoughts ( 1 ) time management ( 1 ) TRAC ( 1 ) TRAP ( 1 ) Trauma focussed CBT ( 1 ) Treatment for chronic depression ( 1 ) types of thought ( 1 ) value ( 1 ) Wells ( 1 ) Wind tunnel client behaviour ( 1 ) Worry ( 2 )

Friday, February 1, 2013

Does rumination maintain Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and what are the active ingredients?


Question drawn from the topic:
The role of rumination and worry in the maintenance of anxiety disorders


An original piece of work by:

Word count: 4391
 (Excluding title page, table of contents, abstract and references)



Table of Contents
Abstract               3
Introduction       5
Definition of terms          5
Context                5
Choice of Papers              6
Sources                6
Inclusion Criteria              7
Exclusion Criteria              7
Papers  8
Wells and Sembi (2004) 8
Critique                9
Segue   10
Michael et al. (2007)       10
Critique                11
Segue   12
Ehring et al. (2008)           12
Critique                14
Segue   14
Ehring et al. (2009)           14
Critique                15
Segue   16
Laposa and Rector (2012)             16
Critique                17
All Papers            17
Critique                17
Synthesis             19
Implications        21
Limitations of this review             22
Conclusions        22
References         24

Abstract

This essay reviews five papers that further the work done by (Ehlers & Mayou, 2002) whose study correlates rumination with Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). 
These five papers take rumination as a maintaining factor for PTSD and:
1.       See its clinical effectiveness.
2.       Improve its predictive ability.
3.       Establish what rumination’s active ingredients are.
The tentative findings from this paper are as follows:
Firstly there can be a clinical rationale for treating rumination first for trauma victims who haven’t developed PTSD.
Secondly the predictive aspect of rumination post trauma is strengthened when you take into account the following factors:
1.       Negative feelings before and after ruminating.
2.       Occurrence of “what if” and “why” questions.
3.       Compulsion levels to ruminate.
Thirdly there are two types of rumination, trauma rumination and depressive rumination (about causes and consequences of depression). The former is a cognitive avoidance strategy that prevents processing of the trauma memory. The latter prevents restructuring of the dysfunctional thoughts about the trauma. This leads to clinical utility of treating different types of rumination differently.
Due to the small number of papers reviewed, the small numbers of participants in the studies, and the weaknesses in these papers, the findings of this paper should be viewed as tentative and suggesting areas for further research.

Introduction


Definition of terms

1.       Rumination
Defined in the dictionary as “to meditate or ponder (upon)” (Hanks, 1988, p. 1334), it has become a technical psychological term and open to debate (Stöber, 1998), Watkins (2004). The definition used in this paper is rumination is perseverative, abstract, evaluative thought about the past (Nolen-Hoeksema et al. 2008, p.406).
2.       PTSD
a.       Diagnosable in the DSM-IV-TR (American Psychiatric Association, 2000) when “following a  traumatic event an individual needs to have one re-experiencing symptom, three avoidance or numbing symptoms, and at least two hyperarousal symptoms” (Grey 2009, p.2).
3.       Maintenance
a.       “the psychological processes which keep a problem going” (Westbrook, 2007, p.45).

Context

Ehlers and Steil (1995) suggested that rumination was a maintaining factor for PTSD.  The specific reasons for this are that it:
1.       Prevents disconfirmation of the negative appraisals of the trauma and its sequelae (Ehlers & Steil 1995).
2.       Increases intrusions (Steil, Ehlers, 2000) and prevents a change in intrusive images (Wells 1997, p.268).
3.       Increases threat monitoring and therefore hyperarousal (Wells & Sembi, 2004).
Later papers have supported the idea that rumination was a maintaining factor. For example, the prospective study of Clohessy and Ehlers (1999) shows how rumination levels predict PTSD severity with people in motor vehicle accidents (MVA). Their findings are supported by Murray, Ehlers, and Mayou (2002) who show the same relation with ambulance service workers.
However, these studies have two weaknesses. Firstly they take rumination as a single entity and secondly they are all prospective studies. These studies can be improved by examining the clinical utility of rumination maintaining PTSD. Likewise if we can understand rumination in more detail, this again will enable further clinical utility.
A more precise definition of rumination will also enable:
1.       Improved empirical data quality.
a.       If participants are unclear about what constitutes rumination how can they accurately report on it?
2.       Higher clinical efficacy.
a.       If there is a functional and dysfunctional aspect of rumination then we will more easily be able to target the latter.
This essay reviews papers that improve our understanding of rumination’s maintenance aspect and whether treating rumination has a positive impact on PTSD.

Choice of Papers

Sources

Derived from the following databases\search engines: Google scholar, Medline, Psychinfo and Ebsco.
Search terms: PTSD, rumination, maintenance, Post traumatic stress disorder.

Inclusion Criteria

1.       Recent papers, i.e. published post 2000.
2.       Either looks at the active ingredient of rumination or looks at the efficacy of treating rumination in PTSD.

Exclusion Criteria

1.       Children as participants as the aim of this paper targets adults.




Papers

Wells and Sembi (2004)

This paper aims to show that using three core treatments (discontinuing rumination, threat monitoring and increased mindfulness) will enable the natural process of recovery from PTSD, i.e., “Reflexive Adaptation Process (RAP)” (Wells & Sembi, 2004, p.307).
The authors used an AB design. Phase A incorporated four sessions and was a “no intervention” phase which provided a baseline. Phase B, meanwhile, incorporated eight sessions during which intervention was made.
The study examined six participants with the following shared characteristics:
·         All diagnosed with PTSD via the DSM-IV-TR (American Psychiatric Association, 2000) criteria.
·         All had suffered either a violent or sexual assault.
·         All had referred themselves to UK mental health services.
·         All diagnosed with Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) via the DSM-IV-TR (American Psychiatric Association, 2000) criteria.
Participants were excluded if they had prior experience of CBT, major head injuries or current substance misuse problems. There were follow up assessments at 3, 6, and 18–41 months. Treatment commenced 3–10 months post-trauma.

There was an intrinsic link to rumination between the three treatments they proposed. If you are more mindful, then you ruminate less (Borders et al., 2010). If you decrease threat monitoring, you decrease rumination (Harvey et al., 2007). Consequently, whilst three interventions were proposed their relatedness to rumination was seen as strong and the effect of each core treatment was to decrease rumination, directly or indirectly.  

Whilst the participants started with moderate to severe PTSD, they all improved with treatment. As Wells and Sembi note: “None of the patients met criteria for PTSD assessed by the PDS[1]   at 3, 6 and longer term follow-up.” (Wells & Sembi, 2004, p.316).

Critique

The paper explores the possibility of having a reduced treatment for PTSD, by focussing on reducing rumination with encouraging results.
The participants made progress even though they had MDD which is impressive as if there is comorbid depression this “dominates the clinical picture to the extent that it makes some forms of PTSD treatment impossible (for example, owing to extreme lack of energy, social withdrawal and inactivity)” (National Institute for Clinical Excellence, 2005, p.13).
However there are certain aspects about this paper that are a cause for concern and therefore bring into question the reliability and validity of the results:
1.       There is no control group, meaning we can’t rule out time being the active ingredient to recovery.
2.       The paper claims that multiple base lines from these 6 people and the period between trauma and treatment can obviate the need for a control group. However in the Davidson trauma scale figures (Davidson, 1996) which contained the most dramatic decreases, the Phase B gains in 5/6 clients were congruent with the Phase A gradient, which would indicate their natural recovery rate.
3.       Researcher bias. One of the authors of the paper is Adrian Wells; the results of the paper prove that his metacognitive theory is effective for PTSD. It is therefore difficult not to question the results due to the author testing his own theory. You would need corroborating evidence by more independent parties to verify his results.
4.       Generalizability is weak due to a sample size of 6, meaning the sample is unrepresentative of the general clinical population we would like to generalise these results to.
5.       He doesn’t measure rumination before and after treatment, nor does he measure threat monitoring or mindfulness which was his treatment package. To have certainty that these 3 treatments were the reason for the PDS scores, you need to see these scores dropping too. So we can’t rule out that it was another factor that accounted for the PDS scores decreasing.

Segue

The next paper looks to test an aspect of the meta-cognitive theory that Wells and Sembi (2004) use. It also looks to refine our understanding of the active ingredient of rumination.

Michael et al. (2007)

Michael’s paper sets out to examine the following questions:
1.       Do metacognitive positive\negative assumptions about rumination correlate with PTSD severity?
2.       How do the following aspects of rumination correlate with PTSD?
a.       Compulsion to continue ruminating.
b.      Occurrence of unproductive thinking.
c.       Occurrence of "what if” and “why" questions.
d.      Negative feelings before and after rumination.
3.       Does rumination correlate with the frequency of intrusive memories?
4.       How do trauma victims rumination levels who have and don’t have PTSD, compare?
The research examined the experiences of 81 participants in a cross sectional study (study 1) and 73 in a longitudinal study (study 2). Participants were recruited via flyers to members of Victim Support[2] in south England and Wales. They included both participants who had and did not have PTSD. All participants had been either physically or sexually assaulted and 26% in study 1 and 32% in study 2 had experienced prior assault.
The results showed that in the PTSD group, rumination was more common and people ruminated for longer than the non PTSD group.  Rumination levels by themselves didn’t correlate with PTSD severity. However when you added in negative feelings before and after ruminating, as well as occurrences of “what if” and “why” questions and compulsion to ruminate, then a correlation was found.  Also, it was discovered that positive beliefs about rumination were not correlated with the amount of time spent ruminating.

Critique

It was a strength of this study to show that people who have had trauma but not PTSD ruminate too and that rumination per se is not a sufficient condition to predict PTSD severity. Rather, what we need is to understand characteristics and consequences of rumination as detailed in the section above.
However, mentioning people who had previous accidents but not revealing whether or not they were traumatised raises questions as to whether these findings are generalizable to PTSD from type 1 or type 2 trauma.  
The cohort came from people who presented to Victim Support suggesting a motivation to self-care. What is not clear, however, is whether the lack of such motivation would yield the same results. The rumination data was collected via a rumination questionnaire which used a Likert Scale. However as Ogden and Lo (2001) show, Likert scales provide contradictory results when compared to free text accounts. Consequently, if the questions posed to the participants didn’t reflect their answers on a topic, inaccurate data could be collected.
Furthermore, the rumination questionnaire didn’t distinguish different types of rumination which, as we shall see in the following paper, have different relations to PTSD.  This omission would lead us to question what type of rumination (plus the various factors mentioned above) correlate to PTSD severity.

Segue

This paper moves us towards the position that rumination, the type of ruminating and its antecedents and consequences, predict PTSD severity. The next paper meanwhile, aims to investigate whether reduced concreteness is an active ingredient of rumination and can predict severity.

Ehring et al. (2008)

This paper aimed to show that rumination predicts the maintenance of PTSD and that an active ingredient of rumination is the reduced concreteness of its thought content. (Ehring et al., 2008, p.488).
The method was both a cross-sectional and longitudinal study on patients from Accident and Emergency (A&E) at Kings Cross hospital who had been involved in a road traffic accident (RTA). There were 101 participants in the cross-sectional study and 147 in the longitudinal. Most injuries (65% and 60%) were minor, few were life threatening (6% and 4%) and the remainder urgent (29% and 36%). Over 80% were discharged within 24 hours. The cross-sectional study interviewed them once, whereas the longitudinal study interviewed them four times over a six months period. They measured two aspects of rumination:
1.       Rumination in relation to intrusions about the trauma and its consequences, via the Responses to Intrusions questionnaire (Clossy & Ehlers, 1999).
2.       Rumination about depressive symptoms via the Response Style questionnaire (Nolen-Hoeksema & Morrow, 1991).
What they found was that rumination about the trauma was “significantly and substantially correlated with the severity of PTSD symptoms from 2 weeks after the trauma. Rumination was not only related to concurrent PTSD symptoms, but also predicted subsequent symptoms at 6 months” (Ehring et al., 2008, p.500). They also discovered that the reduced concreteness of rumination by itself couldn’t predict PTSD severity but when you added in frequency of rumination, then it could (Ehring et al., 2008, p.502). The study also showed that “depressive rumination assessed prior to the traumatic experience significantly predicted post-trauma symptoms of depression” (Ehring et al., 2008, p.501).  It has been argued that depression is a maintaining factor of PTSD as it prevents modification of the negative appraisals of the trauma and its sequelae (Ehlers and Steil, 1995). This paper adds a further dimension by suggesting that depressive rumination leads to depression which maintains PTSD.

Critique

The sample size of this study was large with 248 people which enables us to generalise these findings more easily to the wider clinical population. The results were found consistent over the different measurement points in the longitudinal study, so we can use these findings more comfortably at different times after the trauma. Consequently, if a client presents with high levels of rumination at a time after trauma we can predict PTSD severity levels.
A potential weakness however is that the paper correlated rumination with symptom severity and not persistence which would indicate maintenance. However Shalev et al. (1997) show that severity of PTSD symptoms does predict persistence.  
The generalizability of the results should be questioned in terms of severity of PTSD. The PDS values of participants are not revealed but rather only its relation to rumination. Only 5%-6% had life threatening injuries which could indicate low PDS values. Of course witnessing a traumatic incident which in itself is not life threatening can produce severe PTSD (Marmar 2006). However, without the figures about PTSD severity, caution must be shown when drawing on the conclusions of the study.

Segue

From this paper then we are left seeing a relationship between rumination and severity of PTSD and an inconclusive position relating abstractness of rumination to severity. To look further at this position I turn to the following paper.

Ehring et al. (2009)

This paper seeks to “test the hypothesis that the abstractness of thinking is responsible for the dysfunctional effects of trauma-related rumination” (Ehring et al., 2009, p.285). All 83 participants were university students, 67% of them female. The study split the participants into three groups to test: distraction, abstract rumination and concrete rumination. The researchers played participants a video of a real life RTA with commentary and then had them complete a computer task.
The task for the abstract group was to ruminate on an abstract thought displayed on a computer screen which related to the video, before pressing a button revealing additional abstract thoughts.  The concrete group did the same as the abstract group but with concrete thoughts. The distraction group had an easy computer task unrelated to their video.
The results showed that the video produced a fear response and then PTSD symptoms. The abstract group produced longer negative mood and arousal in comparison to the concrete group. The distraction group showed the highest number of intrusive recollections in response to reminders, whereas there was no significant difference between the abstract and concrete groups.

Critique

The study excluded type 2 traumas thereby enabling us to generalise for PTSD from type 1 trauma. Rumination was also examined in both its abstract and concrete aspects giving us a clearer understanding of the relationship between rumination and PTSD.
This was an analogue test of an RTA so questions can be raised as to its generalizability to actual trauma both of similar and different type. Holmes and Bourne (2008), have argued that you can generalise from analogue to actual trauma, but, in this particular study, the trauma that has been induced is of low severity, so it remains to be seen whether the results can be generalised to more severe trauma.
Also, the high number of female participants in this study reduces the generalizability of its results to men in light of Kessler et al.’s (1995), finding that women are more likely to develop PTSD in response to trauma.

Segue

What the previous papers have looked at is the relationship between post trauma rumination to PTSD. However, what they haven’t done is to look at rumination levels before trauma (i.e. trait levels) and this is something that is addressed in the next paper.

Laposa and Rector (2012)

This paper examines three areas:
1.       Whether trait rumination correlates with intrusion severity.
2.       Whether peritraumatic processes, and rumination in response to traumatic intrusions correlate to intrusion development.
3.       Whether post-state anxiety in intrusions, and anxiety may be related to both peritraumatic processing and rumination.

Improving on previous papers, Lapsoa and Rector refine the notion of rumination distinguishing between anxious rumination and rumination in response to intrusions. Anxious rumination is where individuals focus on ruminative content themes pertaining to gaining control and coping “with future uncertainty” (Laposa & Rector, 2012, p.878). Rumination in response to intrusions is ruminating about the content of the intrusion, triggered by the intrusion.

The study used the distressing film paradigm which provides an analogue trauma. It tested 91 female university students with a mean age of 20, excluding anyone who had had a car accident in the last 6 months. Participants were shown a film of invasive surgery of a person who subsequently died as a result of an RTA. Their intrusions were then measured over the following week via self-report and an intrusions diary.
The results the study found were that:
·         “Anxious rumination was not significantly correlated with intrusions” (Laposa & Rector, 2012, p.881). 
·         “Rumination in response to intrusion was correlated with intrusion frequency” (Laposa & Rector, 2012, p.880).  
·         “Trait rumination was not a vulnerability factor in the development of intrusions” (Laposa & Rector, 2012, p.882).

Critique

There was a large sample size of 91 in this study, which helps us generalise to the wider clinical population. The researchers broke rumination down into both its state and trait aspects as well as distinguishing different types of rumination, (i.e. anxious rumination and rumination in relation to intrusions), which was not something done in the previous papers. 
The difficulty with the work, however, is firstly the ability to generalise the findings given that the study only examined female university students. As with Ehring et al.’s (2009) study discussed above, this weakens our ability to generalise to men in light of Kessler’s findings that females are more likely than men to develop PTSD (Kessler et al., 1995).
Also, the higher than average levels of intelligence of university students again weakens the ability to generalise the results to people of lower than average intelligence levels.

All Papers

Critique

A problem that spans all papers is the ability to measure rumination.   There is one method, self-report, and that is done currently or retrospectively.  As Gorin and Stone (2001) demonstrate retrospective reports are prone to inaccuracy. Also, as we have seen in Wells and Sembi (2004), increasing your meta-cognitions has an impact on your rumination and thus reporting on your current ruminations may have an impact on those ruminations. Thus the act of measuring changes what is measured.
The difficulty in accuracy in measuring rumination thus weakens the findings of all papers presented and it will only be through studies with large participant sizes and cross referencing with different types of studies that the findings above would be corroborated and gain increased validity.
In all studies bar Laposa and Rector (2012), there is no mention of the client’s trait rumination levels. Having this knowledge of pre trauma levels of rumination would allow a more accurate correlation to PTSD severity.  If, for example, a client generally ruminated at a level of 10 ruminations pre trauma and then 15 ruminations post trauma, it would seem reasonable to relate the rise of 5 ruminations to the PTSD severity. However, none of the papers examined in this essay were able to gain such specific and measurable data.  Whilst Laposa and Rector (2012) showed there was no relation between trait rumination levels and PTSD severity, it would seem helpful to rule this out in the other papers.
               



Synthesis

There are two related strands to this paper: 1) what is it about rumination that can predict PTSD severity\persistence and 2) does treating rumination move PTSD sufferers to recovery? If rumination maintains PTSD then if we treat rumination we should improve PTSD symptoms and also be able to correlate rumination levels with PTSD severity.
The clinical application of rumination as a maintenance factor of PTSD is shown in Wells and Sembi (2004). Here we see impressive results for treating rumination and moving PTSD clients with MDD to recovery.  However, the validity of the results are weakened both by the aforementioned criticisms  including its lack of  generalizability, and by Michael et al.’s (2007) paper which showed that metacognitive beliefs about rumination are not correlated with PTSD severity which is part of the theory Wells used to underpin his work.
The predictive aspect of rumination as a maintenance factor of PTSD is firstly looked at in Michael et al. (2007). What was important from this paper is that it showed that people who have trauma but not PTSD ruminate as well. This led to him arguing that it is not rumination per se that predicts PTSD severity, (something which earlier papers had claimed) but rather rumination plus a range of additional factors (negative feelings before and after ruminating, occurrence of “what if” and “why” questions and compulsion to ruminate). However as he treated rumination as a single entity rather than classifying it by its types (depressive, trauma and anxious) this would suggest further research is required before these results can be deemed reliable.
Ehring et al. (2008) refined the predictive ability of rumination by distinguishing between different types of rumination (e.g. trauma rumination and depressive rumination). This highlighted different maintaining factors of rumination. Firstly trauma rumination is a maintaining factor due to not enabling the processing of the intrusions of PTSD due to cognitive avoidance (Borkovec et al., 2004). Secondly depressive rumination is a maintaining factor as it maintains the negative appraisal of the trauma and its sequelae Ehlers and Steil (1995).
Whilst Michael et al. (2007) made yet further refinements by looking at different types of rumination  and meta aspects of them,  what they didn’t do was to refine the definition of rumination and its types. The question they asked to ascertain rumination levels was about “dwelling on the assault” (Michael et al., 2007, p.315).  This leaves us not knowing what occasioned the rumination, nor what aspect of the assault was of concern. In future, it could be within a more precise approach that we could start to understand what specific type of rumination maintains PTSD.
We see further developments within Laposa and Rector’s (2012) study, which looked at anxious ruminations and intrusion rumination. Their findings that anxious ruminations doesn’t predict severity but intrusion ruminations does, further improves our knowledge base, notwithstanding the critiques of the paper mentioned above.
The sense of abstraction of rumination was looked at as an active ingredient of rumination.  The importance of this is the underlying theory that because rumination is abstract it reduces imaginal engagement and distressing affect (Stöber & Borkovec, 2002) which prevents the processing of situational accessible memories (SAM) into verbally accessible memories (VAM) (Brewin et al., 1996). Moving memories from SAM to VAM, reduces the “nowness” of memory and reduces memory retrieval triggered by sense data, which are two key aspects of intrusions.
Ehring et al. (2008) looked to correlate reduced concreteness to PTSD severity. Their results show abstractness plus frequency can correlate with PTSD severity.  Ehring et al. (2009) then showed that abstractness didn’t correlate with intrusion frequency but did correlate with longer negative mood. What they appear to be pointing towards is a weakening of the theory that it is the abstraction of rumination per se that maintains PTSD (Stöber & Borkovec, 2002). If this theory were unequivocally true then abstraction should correlate with PTSD severity without mediation.

Implications

Clinical

Whilst each paper had its weaknesses and we can’t draw strong conclusions from any, there nevertheless seem to be some potentially useful clinical implications.
The refinement of our understanding of rumination as a maintaining factor in PTSD provided by these papers, enables better indicators of treatment types as follows:
1.       Intrusion rumination: prevents processing of trauma memory into autobiographical memory (Ehlers & Clark 200) and is predictive of PTSD severity. Treating this could be a precursor to reliving.
2.       Depressive rumination:  maintains negative appraisals of the trauma and its sequelae and is predictive of PTSD. Treating this could be a precursor to cognitive restructuring.
The scope of these ideas both extends to someone with PTSD and someone who has had trauma for more than 2 weeks but hasn’t developed PTSD. The combined weight of the papers reviewed and referenced here suggest a strong correlation between rumination levels and PTSD, although further work is needed to be clear on the type of rumination and its meta properties to increase validity.
The financial implications of this are encouraging, namely that we could treat people in fewer sessions as time consuming reliving and rescripting would be needed less. Likewise we can see when PTSD is likely to develop, treat it earlier and thereby prevent the loss of functionality and additional treatment costs that would ensue should PTSD develop.

Further Study

The implications of the papers reviewed call, I believe, for more empirical support to two topics.
1.       What are the active ingredients of rumination that maintains PTSD?
2.       The clinical efficacy of treating rumination first with PTSD.

The recommendations for future papers would be to:
1.       Use a strict definition of rumination, its types and meta-properties.
2.       Use a variety of design types and large cohorts to address the difficulty in measuring rumination.
3.       Use a mixed sex cohort of mixed educational ability to increase generalizability.

Limitations of this review

It must be highlighted that this paper only specifically reviewed 5 papers, so the emerging recommendations are tentative and should be subject to further empirical testing.

Conclusions

The above papers add weight to the clinical utility of treating rumination first in PTSD and prospectively adds weight to the position that it is not rumination levels per se that predicts PTSD but type of rumination plus other factors.  There is inherent weakness however of measuring rumination and any cognitive activity that doesn’t have a behavioural correlate as mentioned above. The difficulty of accurate measurement cannot deter research in this field as this would prevent empirical support to cognitive factors. Whilst absolute accuracy is unattainable, existing studies   offer some encouraging, albeit not yet entirely validated clinical outcomes (e.g. Wells and Sembi (2004)).  Consequently, whilst measuring rumination for predictive studies is not entirely accurate, the fact that treating rumination eliminates the symptoms of PTSD suggests  there is still some value in undertaking such research.
This paper posed the question of “Does rumination maintain PTSD and what are its active ingredients?” The tentative answer to this would be: yes it can maintain PTSD but there must be other factors involved for this to be the case. We need to be clear on the type of rumination and what aspect of PTSD it maintains so we can be clear on treatment. This is also crucial in terms of determining the active ingredients of rumination. This review suggests that abstractness is not an active ingredient per se but added to “what if questions”, compulsion to ruminate and negative mood before then it is. However, as these weren’t studied in relation to type of rumination we must be cautious in our application of these findings.




References

American Psychiatric Association (2000). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: DSM-IV-TR: Fourth Edition Text Revision. Washington DC: American Psychiatric Association.

Borders, A., Earleywine, M., & Jajodia, A. (2010). Could Mindfulness Decrease Anger, Hostility, and Aggression by Decreasing Rumination? Aggressive Behavior, 36, 28-44.

Borkovec, T. D., Alcaine, O. M., & Behar, E. (2004). Avoidance theory of worry and generalized anxiety disorder. In R. G. Heimberg, C. L. Turk, & D. S. Mennin (Eds.), Generalized anxiety disorder:
Advances in research and practice (pp. 77–108). New York, NY: Guilford.

Brewin, C. R., Dalgleish, T., & Joseph, S. (1996). A dual representation theory of post traumatic stress disorder. Psychological Review, 103 (4), 670–686.

Clohessy, S., & Ehlers, A. (1999). PTSD symptoms, response to intrusive memories and coping in
ambulance service workers. The British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 38, 251–265.

Davidson, J. (1996). Davidson Trauma Scale. New York: Multi-Health Systems Inc.

Ehring, T., Szeimies, A. & Schaffrick, C., (2009). An experimental analogue study into the role of abstract thinking in trauma-related rumination.  Behaviour Research and Therapy, 47, 285–293. Elsevier.

Ehlers, A., & Clark, D. M. (2000). A cognitive model of posttraumatic stress disorder. Behaviour
Research and Therapy, 38, 319–345.

Ehlers, A., & Steil, R. (1995). Maintenance of intrusive memories in PTSD: a cognitive approach. Behavioral and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 23, 217-249.

Foa, E. B. (1995). Posttraumatic stress diagnostic scale manual. Minneapolis MN: National Computer
Systems.

Gorin, A. & Stone, A. (2001). Recall biases and cognitive errors in retrospective self-reports: A call for momentary assessments.  In A. Baum, T. Revenson and J. Singer (Ed.), Handbook of Health Psychology 405–413. Erlbaum,: New Jersey.

Grey, N. (2009). A Casebook of Cognitive Therapy for Traumatic Stress Reactions. Routeledge.

Hanks, P. (Ed.) (1988). Collins dictionary of the English Language (Second Edition). Collins.

Harvey, A.G., Sharpley, A.L. & Ree, M.J., Stinson, K. and Clark, D.M. (2007). An open trial of cognitive therapy for chronic insomnia. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 45, 2491-2501.

Holmes, A. & Bourne, C., (2008). Inducing and modulating intrusive emotional memories: A review of the trauma film paradigm. Acta Psychologica, 127(3), 553-566.

Kessler, R.C., Sonnega, A., Bromet, E., Hughes, M. & Nelson, C.B. (1995). Posttraumatic stress disorder in the National Comorbidity Survey. Arch Gen Psychiatry, 52, 1048–1060.

Laposa, J. & Rector, N. (2012). The prediction of intrusions following an analogue traumatic event: Peritraumatic cognitive processes and anxiety-focused rumination versus rumination in response to intrusions. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 43, 877-883.

Marmar, C., McCaslin, S., Metzler, T., Best, S., Weiss, D., et al. (2006). Predictors of posttraumatic stress in police and other first responders, 1071:1–18. Ann. NY Acad. Sci.

Murray, J., Ehlers, A., & Mayou, R. A. (2002). Dissociation and posttraumatic stress disorder: Two
prospective studies of motor vehicle accident survivors. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 180, 363–
368.

National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. (2005), PTSD Full guideline, Retrieved October 24, 2012, from http://publications.nice.org.uk/post-traumatic-stress-disorder-ptsd-cg26/full-guideline.

Nolen-Hoeksema, S., & Morrow, J. (1991). A prospective study of depression and posttraumatic stress symptoms after a natural disaster: The 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 115–121.

Nolen-Hoeksema, S., Wisco, B., & Lyubomirsky, S.  (2008).  Rethinking rumination.  Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3, 400-424.

Ogden, J. & Lo, J. (2011). How meaningful are data from Likert scales? An evaluation of how ratings are made and the role of the response shift in the socially disadvantaged.  Journal of Health Psychology, 17, 350-361.

Shalev, A. Y., Freedman, S., Peri, T., et al. (1997). Predicting PTSD in trauma survivors: prospective evaluation of self-report and clinician-administered instruments. British Journal of Psychiatry, 170, 558–564.

Steil, R., & Ehlers, A. (2000). Dysfunctional meaning of posttraumatic intrusions in chronic PTSD. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 38, 537-558.

Stein, M., Walker, J., Hazen, A. & Forde, D. (1997). Full and partial posttraumatic stress disorder: findings from a community survey. Am J Psychiatry 154: 1114–19.

Stöber, J. (1998). Worry, problem elaboration and suppression of imagery: The role of concreteness. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 36, 751–756.

Stöber, J., & Borkovec, T. D. (2002). Reduced concreteness of worry in generalized anxiety disorder:
Findings from a therapy study. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 26, 89–96.

Watkins, E. (2004). Adaptive and maladaptive ruminative self-focus during emotional processing. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 42, 1037–1052.

Wells A. (1997). Cognitive therapy of anxiety disorders: A practice manual and conceptual guide. Wiley.

Wells, A. & Sembi, S. (2004). Metacognitive therapy for PTSD: a core treatment manual. Cognitive and Behavioral Practice, 11, 365–377.

Westbrook, D., Kennerley, H. & Kirk, J. (2007). An Introduction to Cognitive Behaviour Therapy: Skills and Applications. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.




[1] PDS=Posttraumatic stress diagnostic scale (Foa, 1995)

[2] Victim Support is a charitable organisation that offers support to victims of crime who have reported the incident to the police.

No comments :

Post a Comment