Abstract
Importance Pediatric post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a common and debilitating mental disorder. Yet, a comprehensive network meta-analysis examining the efficacy of psychological interventions is lacking.
Objective To synthesize all available evidence on psychological interventions for pediatric PTSD in a comprehensive network meta-analysis.
Data Sources PsycINFO, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and PTSDpubs were searched from inception to January 2nd 2024 and 74 related systematic reviews were screened.
Study Selection Two independent raters screened publications for eligibility. Inclusion criteria were: Randomized controlled trial (RCT) with ten or more patients per arm examining a psychological intervention for pediatric PTSD compared to a control group in children and adolescents (< 19 years) with full or subthreshold PTSD.
Data Extraction and Synthesis PRISMA guidelines were followed to synthesize and present evidence. Two independent raters extracted data and assessed risk of bias with Cochrane criteria. Random effects network meta-analyses were run.
Main Outcome and Measures Standardized mean differences (Hedges’ g) in PTSD severity.
Results In total, 70 RCTs (N = 5,528 patients) were included. Most RCTs (74%) examined trauma-focused cognitive behavior therapy interventions (TF-CBTs). At treatment endpoint, TF-CBTs, EMDR, multi-disciplinary treatments (MDTs), and non-trauma-focused interventions (non-trauma-focused interventions) were all efficacious in reducing PTSD when compared to passive control conditions, with large pooled effects (gs ≥ 0.86, all ps < .001) in the random effects network meta-analysis. TF-CBTs produced the strongest short-term effects relative to both passive and active control conditions and across all sensitivity analyses. In a sensitivity analysis including only trials with parent involvement, TF-CBTs were significantly more efficacious in reducing PTSD than non-trauma-focused interventions (g = 0.35, p = .026). Results for mid-term (up to 5 months posttreatment) and long-term data (6-24 months posttreatment) were very similar.
Conclusions and Relevance The present network meta-analysis is the most comprehensive summary of psychological treatments for pediatric PTSD to this date. Results confirm that TF-CBTs can efficaciously reduce PTSD symptom severity in children and adolescents in the short-, mid-, and long-term. More long-term data are needed for EMDR, MDTs, and non-trauma-focused interventions. Results of TF-CBTs are encouraging and disseminating these results may help reduce common treatment barriers.
Question How efficacious are psychological treatments for pediatric PTSD?
Findings Trauma-focused cognitive behavior therapies (TF-CBTs) are currently the most evaluated treatment for pediatric PTSD (74% of included studies). Data for other interventions are emerging. At short-term, TF-CBTs, Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR), non-trauma-focused interventions, and multi-disciplinary treatments (MDTs) all significantly reduced pediatric PTSD relative to no treatment. TF-CBTs produced the strongest short- and long-term treatment effects. EMDR and MDTs had insufficient long-term data.
Meaning TF-CBTs should be the first-line treatment recommendation for pediatric PTSD. While data for other treatment approaches emerged with some promising findings, more data (including long-term data) are needed to draw firmer conclusions.
Competing Interest Statement
THH, MJ, LW, AK, PS and NM declare no competing interests. JM is funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Maudsley Biomedical Research Centre at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust and King's College London. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. RM occasionally receives payment (from universities and private training providers) for training therapists in the delivery of cognitive therapy for PTSD for children and adolescents; is a co-investigator or chief investigator on four National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR)-funded or Medical Research Council-funded clinical trials of psychological therapies, particularly cognitive therapy for PTSD in children and young people; and was the chair of a steering committee for a trial addressing the online treatment of PTSD in adults. RM institution (University of East Anglia) has received payment through the following research grants: "Addressing the trauma-related distress of young people in care: a randomised feasibility trial across social-care and mental health services" (NIHR RfPB NIHR200586); "Internet-delivered Cognitive Therapy (iCT) for young people with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)" (MRC DPFS MR/P017355/1); "Supporting services to deliver trauma-focused cognitive behavioural therapy for care-experienced young people: a pilot implementation study", NIHR Applied Research Collaboration West; "Cognitive Behavioural Therapy for the treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in youth exposed to multiple traumatic stressors: a phase II randomised controlled trial" (NIHR CDF-2015-08-073). RM institution part owns the intellectual property for an online guided self-help version of cognitive therapy for PTSD for children and young people as a result of RM involvement in one of these trials.
Funding Statement
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
All data analyzed were extracted from published journal articles. No new data were created. Ethical approval is not applicable for the present work.
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, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
The following changes have been conducted: - The sensitivity analysis concerning multiple trauma trials (i.e., >= 50% of sample with two or more traumatic experiences) was removed. - A sensitivity analysis concerning samples with mean age below 12 years (involving mainly children) was added. - A sensitivity analysis concerning samples with mean age 12 years and older (involving mainly adolescents) was added. - A new search wave was added (literature between 04.2023 and 01.2024). Thus, the literature search now covers the timespan from inception to 01.2024. The literature search yielded a total of 70 independent RCTs. The manuscript (e.g., PRISMA flow chart) has been updated accordingly. - The discussion has been extended to include more nuanced conclusions (as well as results of added sensitivity analyses) and more limitations (and what to do about those in future research).
