Faculty Bibliography

Self-efficacy is a key construct in behavioral science with significant impact on mental health and wellbeing. A growing body of work has shown that perceptions of self-efficacy can be increased through recall of autobiographical episodes (AEs) of mastery ("self-efficacy memories") in experimental settings. Doing so contributes to improvements in clinically relevant processes, such as emotion regulation and problem solving. Here we examine whether the recall of self-efficacy AEs contributes to more adaptive appraisals for personally experienced negative memories. Seventy-five healthy individuals each identified an idiosyncratic personal negative memory that was screened for emotional attributes. Participants were then asked to either recall self-efficacy (SE, n = 25) or positive (POS, n = 25) autobiographical episodes. We investigated induction effects on subsequent reappraisals of the personal negative memories. The SE induction was associated with significant reductions in distress, and subjective physiological responses as compared to the POS induction. No significant induction effects emerged in autonomic regulation. These findings suggest that recalling self-efficacy episodes may promote adaptive self-appraisals for negative memories, which in turn may contribute to recovery from stressful events and, with further research, may prove to be a useful adjunctive strategy for treatments such as CBT. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

BACKGROUND:In 2017, accidents and other acts of violence were the fifth most common cause of death in Switzerland. Moreover, there are increasing numbers of refugees and asylum seekers (AS), who often exhibit distinct disease profiles from those of the natives of the host country. If these differences could be clearly identified, this might help to develop and implement strategies to prevent injuries in health care programs for refugees and asylum seekers. The aim of this study was to examine the types and characteristics of physical trauma profiles in patients from the two largest groups of AS in Switzerland-from Eastern Africa (EA) and the Middle East (ME)-who consulted a Swiss Emergency Department (ED) in 2017/2018. Furthermore, the physical trauma profiles of Swiss national (SN) patients were examined in order to explore potential differences. METHODS:Descriptive retrospective study of adult trauma patients consulting the ED of a Swiss University Hospital between 01/2017 and 12/2018. The study included 157 asylum seeking trauma patients from EA and ME were included in the study. These were matched by gender and age to 157 Swiss trauma patients consulting the ED in the study period. RESULTS:There were significant differences between the groups with respect to type of admission, level of severity, localization and mechanisms of injury. While SN had higher levels of injuries related to road traffic or work, AS had higher levels of injuries related to attempted suicide or to assault. CONCLUSIONS:There were differences between AS and the local population with respect to the characteristics and patterns of injury, so that strategies for preventing injuries and promoting health must be tailored to the target population. Moreover, the observed high rates of outpatient treatment for both groups underline the increasing role of EDs as primary care providers for the population served.

BACKGROUND:Since the emergence of COVID-19, health care workers and first responders have been at a high risk for mental health symptoms owing to their exposure to the virus and increased work stress during the pandemic. Although interventions exist to address mental health issues following exposure to disasters, emergencies, and humanitarian crises, considerably less is known about web-based unguided interventions to help mitigate the negative impacts of such events. Additionally, in contexts in which emergencies reduce access to in-person care, remote forms of support are critical, yet there are limited studies on the use of such interventions. Evidence-based, easy-to-use, scalable interventions are direly needed for this population. OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to develop and test the feasibility of an unguided electronic mental health program, COVID-19 Anxiety and Stress Resilience Training (COAST), tailored to first responders and health care personnel, based on scientific evidence and empirically based techniques. METHODS:We developed COVID-19-specific training modules focusing on several domains that are previously reported as key to resilience and stress recovery: self-efficacy, mindfulness, sleep quality, and positive thinking. The program was made available to 702 first responders between May and August 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic. Sociodemographic, work-, and COVID-19-related information was collected, and psychometric questionnaires were completed. We examined user acceptance and user activity, including module choice and participant feedback. RESULTS:In total, 52 of 702 (7%) first responders to whom we reached out used the program at least once. COAST use was independent of age, sex, or baseline levels of self-efficacy, mindful awareness, sleep quality, and positive thinking (for all, P>.39). First responders who had tested positive and those who had been quarantined were more likely to engage in the program. A click count analysis per module showed that participants used the self-efficacy and mindfulness modules most often, with 382 and 122 clicks, respectively, over 15 weeks. Overall, first responders expressed satisfaction with the program. CONCLUSIONS:Engagement of first responders in the multimodule web-based COAST program was feasible and the first responder cohort expressed overall satisfaction with the program. Those in more difficult circumstances, including those in quarantine and those who tested positive, may be more likely to engage in such programs. Further controlled studies could pave the way for efficacy studies and the development of additional modules, including just-in-time interventions or blended interventions combining individual use of an unguided self-help intervention, such as COAST, with subsequent individual psychotherapy for those who continue to experience stress and psychological symptoms.

The recent COVID-19 pandemic is having profound impacts on every sector of society, and New York City (NYC) emerged as an early epicenter of the disease. Given the novelty and scale of the disease, information surrounding COVID-19 has been marked by considerable uncertainty and confusion. Although various factors have been associated with COVID-19 distress, little is known about the relations between levels of intolerance of uncertainty (IU) and anxiety symptoms and behaviors. This cross-sectional study sought to examine potential correlates and pathways between anxiety and precautionary behaviors with the two levels of IU: prospective and inhibitory. Individuals from NYC (N = 99) completed an online survey through Amazon Mechanical Turk. Findings revealed that fear of COVID-19 accounts for associations between prospective IU and greater anxiety symptoms and behaviors, whereas precaution adherence accounts for associations between prospective IU and reduced anxiety symptoms and behaviors. In addition, precaution adherence accounts for associations between inhibitory IU and greater anxiety symptoms and behaviors. The results shed light on ways in which variations in IU may be associated with anxiety symptoms and behaviors in the context of COVID-19 and future pandemic scenarios.

Chronic pain is consistently associated with the presence of mental health disorders. Although previous research has shown relations between low levels of self-efficacy with chronic pain severity as well as comorbid mental health symptoms, the link between self-efficacy and mental health symptoms in chronic pain is not well understood. This study examined whether pain centrality, the extent to which pain is viewed as central to self-identity, may underlie these associations. Individuals with a diagnosis of chronic pain (N = 89) recruited through MTurkcompleted self-report measures including demographics, self-efficacy, pain centrality, pain severity, depression, and anxiety. Pain severity was associated with higher levels of pain centrality, depression, anxiety, and lower levels of self-efficacy. Path analysis demonstrated pain centrality significantly mediated the relationship between self-efficacy and pain severity, depression, and anxiety. Future studies would benefit from testing whether modifying pain centrality beliefs shift perceptions of control as well as pain and psychological outcomes.

BACKGROUND:People tend to believe that they continuously improve over time. In fact, Temporal Self-Appraisal Theory ("Chump to Champ") has found that people are motivated to derogate their past selves in favor of their present selves. Studies on temporal self-appraisals following trauma is less clear, with some studies showing perceived improvement whereas other studies show appraisals of decline. METHOD/METHODS:Utilizing Latent Profile Analysis (LPA), we tested for discrete patterns of temporal self-appraisals in undergraduate college students (N = 740) following trauma exposure. We then explored various trauma-related characteristics as predictors of profile membership. RESULTS:LPA revealed three distinct profiles of appraisal styles (Profile 1: optimistic, Profile 2: chump to champ, Profile 3: pessimistic). The optimistic profile was associated with lower levels of PTSD and depression symptoms, whereas the optimistic and chump to champ profiles were associated with greater trauma centrality. LIMITATIONS/CONCLUSIONS:Findings are limited in that this study utilized cross-sectional data from a sample of predominantly undergraduate females, thus conclusions regarding temporal relations among study constructs cannot be made and findings may not generalize to other populations. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Temporal self-appraisals following trauma exposure may reflect prototypical patterns in which individual appraise adaptation to potentially traumatic stress and may confer risk for psychopathology. Such findings have implications for approaches to intervention with clinical and non-clinical populations following trauma exposure.

THE ISSUE/OBJECTIVE:by March of 2020. Given the rapid acceleration of transmission, and the lack of preparedness to prevent and treat this virus, the negative impacts of COVID-19 are rippling through every facet of society. Although large numbers of people throughout the world will show resilience to the profound loss, stress, and fear associated with COVID-19, the virus will likely exacerbate existing mental health disorders and contribute to the onset of new stress-related disorders for many. RECOMMENDATIONS/CONCLUSIONS:The field of traumatic stress should address the serious needs that will emerge now and well into the future. However, we propose that these efforts may be limited, in part, by ongoing gaps that exist within our research and clinical care. In particular, we suggest that COVID-19 requires us to prioritize and mobilize as a research and clinical community around several key areas: (a) diagnostics, (b) prevention, (c) public outreach and communication, (d) working with medical staff and mainstreaming into nonmental health services, and (e) COVID-19-specific trauma research. As members of our community begin to rapidly develop and test interventions for COVID-19-related distress, we hope that those in positions of leadership in the field of traumatic stress consider limits of our current approaches, and invest the intellectual and financial resources urgently needed in order to innovate, forge partnerships, and develop the technologies to support those in greatest need. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Background/UNASSIGNED:United Nations (UN) personnel address a diverse range of political, social, and cultural crises throughout the world. Compared with other occupations routinely exposed to traumatic stress, there remains a paucity of research on mental health disorders and access to mental healthcare in this population. To fill this gap, personnel from UN agencies were surveyed for mental health disorders and mental healthcare utilization. Methods/UNASSIGNED:= 17 363) from 11 UN entities completed online measures of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), major depressive disorder (MDD), posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), trauma exposure, mental healthcare usage, and socio-demographic information. Results/UNASSIGNED:Exposure to one or more traumatic events was reported by 36.2% of survey responders. Additionally, 17.9% screened positive for GAD, 22.8% for MDD, and 19.9% for PTSD. Employing multivariable logistic regressions, low job satisfaction, younger age (<35 years of age), greater length of employment, and trauma exposure on or off-duty was significantly associated with all the three disorders. Among individuals screening positive for a mental health disorder, 2.05% sought mental health treatment within and 10.01% outside the UN in the past year. Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:UN personnel appear to be at high risk for trauma exposure and screening positive for a mental health disorder, yet a small percentage screening positive for mental health disorders sought treatment. Despite the mental health gaps observed in this study, additional research is needed, as these data reflect a large sample of convenience and it cannot be determined if the findings are representative of the UN.

Chronic pain is associated with high levels of mental health issues and alterations in cognitive processing. Cognitive-behavioral models illustrate the role of memory alterations (e.g., autobiographical memory and future thinking) in the development and maintenance of chronic pain as well as in mental health disorders which frequently co-occur with chronic pain (e.g., anxiety and mood disorders). This study aims to expand our understanding of specific cognitive mechanisms underlying chronic pain which may in turn shed light on cognitive processes underlying pain-related psychological distress. Individuals (N = 84) who reported a history of chronic pain and individuals who reported no history of chronic pain (N = 102) were recruited from MTurk to complete an online survey including standardized measures of anxiety and depression and two sentence completion tasks that assessed autobiographical memory and future thinking specificity and content. Chi square analyses revealed that participants who endorsed experiencing chronic pain were significantly more likely to recall at least one painful and negative event and to imagine at least one anticipated painful event in their future. Two ANCOVAs were performed to examine the degree to which chronic pain endorsement influenced specificity in memory and future imagining. Individuals with a history of chronic pain and higher levels of depression symptom severity generated autobiographical memories with significantly less specificity; whereas, individuals with a history of chronic pain also generated future autobiographical events with significantly less specificity. In addition, individuals with a history of chronic pain were more likely to generate episodes related to pain when asked to recall the past or imagine the future. Further research is needed to improve our understanding of the etiology of autobiographical memory and future thinking specificity and content in the pathogenesis of mental health conditions in the context of chronic pain.