Developing a brief clinical screening tool for trauma and its impact

  • Research type

    Research Study

  • Full title

    Development of a brief clinical screening tool for trauma and post traumatic reactions in people with psychosis

  • IRAS ID

    187370

  • Contact name

    Miriam Fornells-Ambrojo

  • Contact email

    miriam.fornells-ambrojo@ucl.ac.uk

  • Sponsor organisation

    University College London

  • Duration of Study in the UK

    0 years, 7 months, 30 days

  • Research summary

    It is well established that people with psychosis or schizophrenia-spectrum disorders experience more traumatic events compared to the general population (Grubaugh et al, 2011). Trauma in psychosis is associated with higher rates of PTSD, more severe psychotic symptoms and worse functional and clinical outcomes (Varese et al, 2012). Given this, the National Institute for Social Care and Clinical Excellence (NICE, 2014) recommend that trauma and PTSD should be assessed in psychosis services.

    However, trauma is rarely routinely assessed by clinicians, which appears to partly be due to a lack of a sufficiently efficient, valid and reliable screening tool. Existing trauma measures tend to be lengthy, or only focus on certain types of traumatic events and there are currently no validated measures which specifically assess for traumas related to the experience of psychosis (e.g. restaint, involuntary sedation).

    This study therefore aims to develop and establish the psychometric properties of a brief, comprehensive clinical screening tool of traumatic events, that can be used routinely in psychosis services. A secondary aim will be to investigate the experience of distressing trauma memories in a subgroup of participants, to inform our understanding of post-traumatic stress in psychosis and the development of targeted trauma-focused treatments for this clinical group.

  • REC name

    London - Queen Square Research Ethics Committee

  • REC reference

    15/LO/1486

  • Date of REC Opinion

    9 Oct 2015

  • REC opinion

    Further Information Favourable Opinion