Chemtob 2002.
Methods | Randomised trial of individual therapy vs group therapy or wait list | |
Participants |
Included (n = 248) Children in grades 2 to 6 who met criteria for disaster exposure measured by a score at or above the 94th percentile for trauma symptom severity on the Kauai Recovery Index. Age: 6 to 12 years (mean, 8.2 years). Female: 61.4%. Hawaiian or part‐Hawaiian 30.1%; white 24.9%; Filipino 19.7%; Japanese 9.2%. 88% met DSM‐IV criteria for self reported PTSD Excluded Not reported Setting Ten elementary public schools on a Hawaiian island 2 years after a major hurricane, 1995 to 1996 |
|
Interventions |
Individual therapy Therapists were provided a standard box of art and play materials, and therapy was guided by treatment manuals. The 4 weekly sessions covered safety and helplessness, loss, mobilising competence, issues of anger and ending and going forward. Themes were explored through a combination of play, expressive art and talk Group therapy As for individual therapy, except that co‐operative play and discussion were used in group sessions of 4 to 8 children Therapists Therapists were 3 school counsellors and 1 social worker experienced at working with children in schools who received 4 ½ days of training and 3 hours of supervision each week |
|
Outcomes |
PTSD symptoms Scale: Kauai Recovery Index (24‐item) Rater: child When At 1 and 12 months |
|
Notes | Sample numbers were not reported, and these data could not be obtained from study authors | |
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | SPSS used to generate randomisation sequence. Randomised to 1 of 3 cohorts, then randomised to group or individual treatments |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Not reported |
Blinding of participants (performance bias | High risk | Participants probably were aware of whether they had been allocated to individual or group therapy or wait list |
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | High risk | Outcome assessment could not be blinded, as the only measure was self reported |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | Loss to follow‐up not clear |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | All outcomes appear to have been reported |
Other bias | Low risk | No other bias was apparent |