This randomized clinical trial compared cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), applied relaxation (AR), and wait-list control (WL) in a sample of 65 adults with a primary diagnosis of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). The CBT condition was based on the intolerance of uncertainty model of GAD, whereas the AR condition was based on general theories of anxiety. Both manualized treatments were administered over 12 weekly 1-hour sessions. Standardized clinician ratings and self-report questionnaires were used to assess GAD and related symptoms at pretest, posttest, and at 6-, 12-, and 24-month follow-ups. At posttest, CBT was clearly superior to WL, AR was marginally superior to WL, and CBT was marginally superior to AR. Over follow-up, CBT and AR were equivalent, but only CBT led to continued improvement. Thus, direct comparisons of CBT and AR indicated that the treatments were comparable; however, comparisons of each treatment with another point of reference (either waiting list or no change over follow-up) provided greater support for the efficacy of CBT than AR.

Objective Despite their essential role during this health crisis, little is known about the psychological distress of mental health workers (MHW). Method A total of 616 MHW and 658 workers from the general population (GP) completed an online survey including depressive, anxiety, irritability, loneliness, and resilience measures. Results Overall, MHW had fewer cases with above cut‐off clinically significant depression (19% MHW vs. 27%) or anxiety (16% MHW vs. 29%) than the GP. MHW in high‐incidence regions of COVID‐19 cases displayed the same levels of depressive and anxiety symptoms than the GP and higher levels compared to MHW from low‐incidence regions. MHW in high‐incidence regions presented higher levels of irritability and lower levels of resilience than the MHW in low‐incidence regions. Moreover, MHW in high‐incidence regions reported more feelings of loneliness than all other groups. Conclusion Implications for social and organizational preventive strategies to minimize the distress of MHW in times of crisis are discussed.

No abstract

The factor structure of a French adaptation of the Posttraumatic Diagnostic Scale (PDS-F) based on the original scale by Foa, Cashman, Jaycox, and Perry (1997) was examined in 287 community members. Confirmatory factor analysis evaluated three models: the three symptom clusters of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) defined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th Edition (DSM-IV; American Psychiatric Association, 1994), the 4-factor King, Leskin, King, and Weathers (1998) model and the 4-factor Simms, Watson, and Doebbelling (2002) model. The data's fit to the DSM-IV model was unacceptable. Both 4-factor models demonstrated a good fit; however, the Simms et al. (2002) model with intrusions, avoidance, dysphoria, and hyperarousal factors showed the best fit. Scores calculated for the Simms et al. (2002) factors showed good reliability and validity.The study also examined lifetime stressful event reporting and PTSD severity. "Stressful" events not traditionally defined as "traumatic" (e.g., death of a loved one) were frequently endorsed as the respondent's most stressful event (i.e., index event) and corresponded to a possible PTSD diagnosis. Furthermore, PTSD severity was associated with negative emotional appraisals of the index event (DSM-IV criterion A2 for PTSD) and lifetime cumulative stressful event intensity whereas PTSD severity was not associated with the degree of physical harm of the index event (criterion A1). Lifetime stressful experiences are discussed in light of evidence supporting a dysphoria component in PTSD.

Lifetime exposure to traumatic events was assessed retrospectively among a representative sample of city bus drivers (228 men and 54 women) from Montréal, Canada. Among them, 68.1% reported at least one exposure to a traumatic event of any type. Among the 68% exposed. 70.4% reported multiple traumatic exposures (M = 2.6, SD = 1.67), with ratings ranging from 0 to 12. This report underlines the fact that the prevalence of traumatic events is not yet well known. Epidemiological research should devote more effort to assess fully the lifetime prevalence of traumatic events and not only cases of PTSD.

Le Posttraumatic Cognitions Inventory (PTCI) is one of the most used instruments to assess posttraumatic cognitions. Since its release, many studies have tried to validate and translate this questionnaire, but they had difficulty to confirm its structure and then suggested alternatives. Faced with no consensus, a short version in nine statements was developed and showed good psychometric properties. To date, no French version of the PTCI has been validated, thereby preventing studies from investigating the role of posttraumatic cognitions in French speaking populations. Objectives In order to validate a French version of the PTCI, this study investigates two objectives using two French speaking samples: (1) test 10 factor structures identified in prior studies, and (2) assess the other psychometric properties of the best fitting factor structure. Method The PTCI was translated in French using a reverse translation method and administered to 202 university students and 114 aid workers. Suitability indexes of the appropriate factor structures previously identified in prior studies were examined. Internal consistency, correlations between subscales and convergent, divergent and discriminant validities in the most appropriate structure were evaluated. Results Results support that only Wells et al.'s short 9-item version of the PTCI and three factors shows excellent suitability indexes. This version also outlines an excellent internal consistency and solid convergent, divergent, and discriminant validities. Conclusions This study confirms the empirical validity, fidelity, and utility of Wells et al.'s short version of the PTCI. This is the first PTCI French validation, which is a major advantage when it comes to assess posttraumatic cognitions in French trauma victims.

No abstract

La nécessité de développer des traitements efficaces pour les nombreuses victimes de violence et de catastrophes rend incontournable la compréhension des mécanismes de développement, de maintien et de résorption du trouble de stress post-traumatique (TSPT). L'article présente les modèles cognitifs-comportementaux du TSPT les plus influents et en effectue une brève analyse critique. Les modèles écologiques sélectionnés sont ceux de Mowrer (1960), de Foa et al. (1989), de Jones et Barlow (1990), de Chemtob et al. (1988) et de Janoff-Bulman (1985). Ces modèles sont comparés entre eux et des pistes de réflexion sont formulées.The necessity of developping efficient treatment for the numerous victims of violence and catastrophes render essential the understanding of the mechanisms of development, maintainance and resorption of the Posttraumatice Stress Disorder (PTSD). Consequently, this article presents the most influential behavior and cognitive models followed by a brief critical analysis. The etiological models chosen are those of Mowrer (1960), Foa and al. (1989), Jones and Barlow (1990), Chemtob and al. (1988) and Janoff-Bulman (1985). Finally these models are compared and discussed