{"title":"创伤性失落:区分创伤后应激障碍和长期悲伤障碍的潜在风险因素的系统性回顾。","authors":"Philipp Jann, Jessica Netzer, Tobias Hecker","doi":"10.1080/20008066.2024.2371762","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> When traumatic events and losses intersect in the form of traumatic loss, these events can trigger both posttraumatic stress disorder and pathological grief.<b>Objective:</b> This systematic review investigates which characteristics differentiate between the development of the respective disorders or are associated with comorbidity.<b>Method:</b> A systematic literature search using Medline, PubMed, APA PsycInfo and Web of Science yielded 46 studies which met the inclusion criteria. In these studies, PTSD was assessed using 17 and pathological grief using 16 different validated instruments. In the quality assessment, 12 studies were classified as average, 30 as above average, and 4 as excellent. The investigated risk factors were categorized into 19 superordinate clusters and processed using narrative synthesis.<b>Results:</b> The relationship to the deceased, mental health issues, and religious beliefs seem to be associated specifically with pathological grief symptoms compared to PTSD symptoms. Social support and social emotions emerged as significant correlates and potential risk factors for both PTSD and pathological grief. Included studies had mainly cross-sectional designs.<b>Conclusions:</b> Differentiating factors between pathological grief and PTSD appear to exist. The results should be considered within the limitations of the heterogeneity of the included studies and the research field. There is a lack of studies (1) using a longitudinal study design, (2) starting data collection early following the traumatic loss, (3) using standardized, up-to-date measurement instruments and (4) including comorbidity in their analyses. Further research is urgently needed for more accurate (acute) screenings, prognoses, and interventions following traumatic loss.</p>","PeriodicalId":12055,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Psychotraumatology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11259072/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Traumatic loss: a systematic review of potential risk factors differentiating between posttraumatic stress disorder and prolonged grief disorder.\",\"authors\":\"Philipp Jann, Jessica Netzer, Tobias Hecker\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/20008066.2024.2371762\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background:</b> When traumatic events and losses intersect in the form of traumatic loss, these events can trigger both posttraumatic stress disorder and pathological grief.<b>Objective:</b> This systematic review investigates which characteristics differentiate between the development of the respective disorders or are associated with comorbidity.<b>Method:</b> A systematic literature search using Medline, PubMed, APA PsycInfo and Web of Science yielded 46 studies which met the inclusion criteria. In these studies, PTSD was assessed using 17 and pathological grief using 16 different validated instruments. In the quality assessment, 12 studies were classified as average, 30 as above average, and 4 as excellent. The investigated risk factors were categorized into 19 superordinate clusters and processed using narrative synthesis.<b>Results:</b> The relationship to the deceased, mental health issues, and religious beliefs seem to be associated specifically with pathological grief symptoms compared to PTSD symptoms. Social support and social emotions emerged as significant correlates and potential risk factors for both PTSD and pathological grief. Included studies had mainly cross-sectional designs.<b>Conclusions:</b> Differentiating factors between pathological grief and PTSD appear to exist. The results should be considered within the limitations of the heterogeneity of the included studies and the research field. There is a lack of studies (1) using a longitudinal study design, (2) starting data collection early following the traumatic loss, (3) using standardized, up-to-date measurement instruments and (4) including comorbidity in their analyses. Further research is urgently needed for more accurate (acute) screenings, prognoses, and interventions following traumatic loss.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12055,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Psychotraumatology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11259072/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Psychotraumatology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/20008066.2024.2371762\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/18 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Psychotraumatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20008066.2024.2371762","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:当创伤事件和损失以创伤性损失的形式交织在一起时,这些事件可能会引发创伤后应激障碍和病态悲伤:本系统性综述研究了哪些特征可区分创伤后应激障碍和病态悲伤,或与这两种障碍的并发症相关:方法:使用 Medline、PubMed、APA PsycInfo 和 Web of Science 进行系统性文献检索,结果有 46 项研究符合纳入标准。在这些研究中,创伤后应激障碍和病态悲伤分别使用了 17 种和 16 种不同的有效工具进行评估。在质量评估中,12 项研究被评为一般,30 项研究被评为高于一般,4 项研究被评为优秀。所调查的风险因素被分为 19 个上位群组,并采用叙事综合法进行处理:与创伤后应激障碍症状相比,与逝者的关系、心理健康问题和宗教信仰似乎与病态悲伤症状特别相关。社会支持和社会情感是创伤后应激障碍和病态悲伤的重要相关因素和潜在风险因素。所纳入的研究主要采用横断面设计:结论:病态悲伤和创伤后应激障碍之间似乎存在区别因素。结论:病态悲伤和创伤后应激障碍之间的区别因素似乎是存在的,但应考虑到所纳入研究的异质性和研究领域的局限性。目前缺乏以下研究:(1)采用纵向研究设计;(2)在创伤性失落发生后尽早开始数据收集;(3)采用标准化的最新测量工具;(4)在分析中纳入合并症。为了在创伤性失能后进行更准确的(急性)筛查、预后和干预,迫切需要开展进一步的研究。
Traumatic loss: a systematic review of potential risk factors differentiating between posttraumatic stress disorder and prolonged grief disorder.
Background: When traumatic events and losses intersect in the form of traumatic loss, these events can trigger both posttraumatic stress disorder and pathological grief.Objective: This systematic review investigates which characteristics differentiate between the development of the respective disorders or are associated with comorbidity.Method: A systematic literature search using Medline, PubMed, APA PsycInfo and Web of Science yielded 46 studies which met the inclusion criteria. In these studies, PTSD was assessed using 17 and pathological grief using 16 different validated instruments. In the quality assessment, 12 studies were classified as average, 30 as above average, and 4 as excellent. The investigated risk factors were categorized into 19 superordinate clusters and processed using narrative synthesis.Results: The relationship to the deceased, mental health issues, and religious beliefs seem to be associated specifically with pathological grief symptoms compared to PTSD symptoms. Social support and social emotions emerged as significant correlates and potential risk factors for both PTSD and pathological grief. Included studies had mainly cross-sectional designs.Conclusions: Differentiating factors between pathological grief and PTSD appear to exist. The results should be considered within the limitations of the heterogeneity of the included studies and the research field. There is a lack of studies (1) using a longitudinal study design, (2) starting data collection early following the traumatic loss, (3) using standardized, up-to-date measurement instruments and (4) including comorbidity in their analyses. Further research is urgently needed for more accurate (acute) screenings, prognoses, and interventions following traumatic loss.
期刊介绍:
The European Journal of Psychotraumatology (EJPT) is a peer-reviewed open access interdisciplinary journal owned by the European Society of Traumatic Stress Studies (ESTSS). The European Journal of Psychotraumatology (EJPT) aims to engage scholars, clinicians and researchers in the vital issues of how to understand, prevent and treat the consequences of stress and trauma, including but not limited to, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depressive disorders, substance abuse, burnout, and neurobiological or physical consequences, using the latest research or clinical experience in these areas. The journal shares ESTSS’ mission to advance and disseminate scientific knowledge about traumatic stress. Papers may address individual events, repeated or chronic (complex) trauma, large scale disasters, or violence. Being open access, the European Journal of Psychotraumatology is also evidence of ESTSS’ stand on free accessibility of research publications to a wider community via the web. The European Journal of Psychotraumatology seeks to attract contributions from academics and practitioners from diverse professional backgrounds, including, but not restricted to, those in mental health, social sciences, and health and welfare services. Contributions from outside Europe are welcome. The journal welcomes original basic and clinical research articles that consolidate and expand the theoretical and professional basis of the field of traumatic stress; Review articles including meta-analyses; short communications presenting new ideas or early-stage promising research; study protocols that describe proposed or ongoing research; case reports examining a single individual or event in a real‑life context; clinical practice papers sharing experience from the clinic; letters to the Editor debating articles already published in the Journal; inaugural Lectures; conference abstracts and book reviews. Both quantitative and qualitative research is welcome.