Abstract
A trauma-informed approach is a framework for organisational (synonym system) change interventions that address the universal prevalence and impact of trauma. This mixed methods systematic review assessed the effects of trauma-informed approaches on psychological, behavioural, and health outcomes in healthcare providers and adult patients in primary care and community mental healthcare. We searched five databases and grey literature and consulted experts for reports published in January 1990-June 2021. The quantitative descriptive and qualitative framework syntheses were integrated through a line of argument and mapped onto a logic model. We included six non-randomized studies that evaluated eight interventions with varied theoretical development, components, and outcomes. The most common components were budget allocation, workforce development, identification/response to violence and trauma, and evaluation. Evidence for intervention effects was limited and conflicting. Four studies reported improvement in provider readiness and sense of community, while three reported conflicting effects on provider behaviour regarding delivery of trauma-informed care. Four studies reported some improvement in patient readiness for disease management and access to services; however, the evidence for patient satisfaction was conflicting. Two studies found that patients and providers felt safe.
While one study reported improvement in patient quality of life and chronic pain, another found no effect on substance use, and three studies reported conflicting effects on mental health. Interventions mechanisms included a package of varied components, tailoring to the organisational needs, capacities, and preferences, staff education and self-care, creating safe environments, shared decision-making. Intervention effects were moderated by contextual (health system values, policies, governance, business models, trauma-informed movement, organisational culture, social determinants of health) and intervention factors (buy-in from all staff, collective learning through conversations, equal attention to staff and patient well-being, sustainable funding). No studies measured adverse events/harm, cost effectiveness, or providers’ health. We need more methodologically robust evaluations of trauma-informed organisational change interventions.
A preprint of this article has previously been deposited in the preprint server for health sciences [1].
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Protocols
https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/11/2/e042112
Funding Statement
This study was funded by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust and the University of Bristol [grant number BRC-1215-20011]. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
This revision 2 incorporated changes in response to comments from five new peer reviewers. We have: 1) clarified terminology regarding organisational/system change interventions and bespoke interventions throughout; 2) Introduction: distinguished between secondary traumatisation and vicarious trauma; 2) Materials and methods: shortened section; added authors positionality in the critical realism paradigm; shortened table with inclusion/exclusion criteria; explained that each line of argument is an integrated outcome category, intervention mechanism, or moderator; 3) Results: shortened and restructured to align with research questions; 4) Discussion: added paragraph about organisation domain of the trauma-informed approach to be the pre-condition which enables and helps sustain trauma-informed changes in clinical practices by individual healthcare providers; rewrote paragraph about screening as not a necessary component of a trauma-informed approach; 5) Tables: moved tables summarising definitions of a trauma-informed approach, included intervention models, and modifying factors to supplementary material.
Data Availability
The quantitative and qualitative data supporting this systematic review were extracted from previously reported studies, which have been cited. The processed data are included within the article and supplementary material file.
