Numerous interventions to address posttraumatic stress (PTS) in youth exposed to mass trauma have been delivered and evaluated. It remains unclear, however, which interventions work for whom and under what conditions. This report describes a meta-analysis of the effect of youth mass-trauma interventions on PTS to determine if interventions were superior to inactive controls and describes a moderator analysis to examine whether the type of event, population characteristics, or income level of the country where the intervention was delivered may have affected the observed effect sizes. A comprehensive literature search identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of youth mass-trauma interventions relative to inactive controls. The search identified 2,232 references, of which 25 RCTs examining 27 trials (N = 4,662 participants) were included in this meta-analysis. Intervention effects were computed as Hedge’s g estimates and combined using a random effects model. Moderator analyses were conducted to explain the observed heterogeneity among effect sizes using the following independent variables: disaster type (political violence versus natural disaster); sample type (targeted versus non-targeted); and income level of the country where the intervention was delivered (high- versus middle- versus low-income). The correlation between the estimates of the intervention effects on PTS and on functional impairment was estimated. The overall treatment effect size was converted into a number needed to treat (NNT) for a practical interpretation. The overall intervention effect was statistically significant (g = 0.57; P < .0001), indicating that interventions had a medium beneficial effect on PTS. None of the hypothesized moderators explained the heterogeneity among the intervention effects. Estimates of the intervention effects on PTS and on functional impairment were positively correlated (Spearman’s r = 0.90; P < .0001), indicating a concomitant improvement in both outcomes. These findings confirm that interventions can alleviate PTS and enhance functioning in children exposed to mass trauma. This study extends prior research by demonstrating improvement in PTS with interventions delivered to targeted and non-targeted populations, regardless of the country income level. Intervention populations and available resources should be considered when interpreting the results of intervention studies to inform recommendations for practice.

Evidence-based practice requires the use of data grounded in theory with clear conceptualization and reliable and valid measurement. Unfortunately, developing a knowledge base regarding children’s coping in the context of disasters, terrorism, and war has been hampered by a lack of theoretical consensus and a virtual absence of rigorous test construction, implementation, and evaluation. This report presents a comprehensive review of measurement tools assessing child and adolescent coping in the aftermath of mass trauma, with a particular emphasis on coping dimensions identified through factor analytic procedures. Coping measurement and issues related to the assessment of coping are reviewed. Concepts important in instrument development and psychometric features of coping measures used in disasters, terrorism, and war are presented. The relationships between coping dimensions and both youth characteristics and clinical outcomes also are presented. A discussion of the reviewed findings highlights the difficulty clinicians may experience when trying to integrate the inconsistencies in coping dimensions across studies. Incorporating the need for multiple informants and the difference between general and context-specific coping measures suggests the importance of a multilevel, theoretical conceptualization of coping and thus, the use of more advanced statistical measures. Attention also is given to issues deemed important for further exploration in child disaster coping research.

Pfefferbaum B, Nitiéma P, Jacobs AK, Noffsinger MA, Wind LH, Allen SF. Review of Coping in Children Exposed to Mass Trauma: Measurement Tools, Coping Styles, and Clinical Implications. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2016;31(2):169–180.

How did the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing differ from prior disasters and what implications did it have for disaster mental health services and service delivery? The federal disaster mental health approach in this country developed largely out of experiences with natural disasters. The 1995 Oklahoma City bombing differed in several important ways, including the large number of human casualties, higher rates of psychopathology, and an extended period of concern due to the criminal investigation and trials, which suggested the need to consider modifications in the program. Outreach was extensive, but psychiatric morbidity of direct victims was greater than that of victims of natural disasters, emphasizing the need for attention to the triage and referral process. Other concerns that warrant consideration include practices related to record keeping and program evaluation.

Empirical data from research studies are vital to guiding mental health interventions following disasters. However, few data are available for this purpose. Important advances in policy and procedures for the conduct of organized research emerged from the Oklahoma City bombing, yielding cooperative working relationships among researchers and culminating in the ethical attainment of informative research data. However, the academic community was again caught off guard after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

Suggestions to surmount these obstacles include incorporating research infrastructures into disaster preparedness plans in advance; organizing the community of researchers; and working closely with major funding organizations. Methodological issues pertaining to measurement of psychopathology include the importance of obtaining diagnostic data; interpreting the meaning of symptoms in the absence of a psychiatric disorder; differentiating preexisting symptoms from those that emerged after the disaster, and optimal timing of postdisaster assessment.

Children face innumerable challenges following exposure to disasters. To address trauma sequelae, researchers and clinicians have developed a variety of mental health interventions. While the overall effectiveness of multiple interventions has been examined, few studies have focused on the individual components of these interventions. As a preliminary step to advancing intervention development and research, this literature review identifies and describes nine common components that comprise child disaster mental health interventions. This review concluded that future research should clearly define the constituent components included in available interventions. This will require that future studies dismantle interventions to examine the effectiveness of specific components and identify common therapeutic elements. Issues related to populations studied (eg, disaster exposure, demographic and cultural influences) and to intervention delivery (eg, timing and optimal sequencing of components) also warrant attention.

PfefferbaumB, SweetonJL, NitiémaP, NoffsingerMA, VarmaV, NelsonSD, NewmanE. Child Disaster Mental Health Interventions: Therapy Components. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2014;29(5):1-9.

Objective: Several studies have provided prevalence estimates of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) related to the September 11, 2001 (9/11) attacks in broadly affected populations, although without sufficiently addressing qualifying exposures required for assessing PTSD and estimating its prevalence. A premise that people throughout the New York City area were exposed to the attacks on the World Trade Center (WTC) towers and are thus at risk for developing PTSD has important implications for both prevalence estimates and service provision. This premise has not, however, been tested with respect to DSM-IV-TR criteria for PTSD. This study examined associations between geographic distance from the 9/11 attacks on the WTC and reported 9/11 trauma exposures, and the role of specific trauma exposures in the development of PTSD.

Methods: Approximately 3 years after the attacks, 379 surviving employees (102 with direct exposures, including 65 in the towers, and 277 with varied exposures) recruited from 8 affected organizations were interviewed using the Diagnostic Interview Schedule/Disaster Supplement and reassessed at 6 years. The estimated closest geographic distance from the WTC towers during the attacks and specific disaster exposures were compared with the development of 9/11–related PTSD as defined by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, Fourth Edition, Text Revision.

Results: The direct exposure zone was largely concentrated within a radius of 0.1 mi and completely contained within 0.75 mi of the towers. PTSD symptom criteria at any time after the disaster were met by 35% of people directly exposed to danger, 20% of those exposed only through witnessed experiences, and 35% of those exposed only through a close associate’s direct exposure. Outside these exposure groups, few possible sources of exposure were evident among the few who were symptomatic, most of whom had preexisting psychiatric illness.

Conclusions: Exposures deserve careful consideration among widely affected populations after large terrorist attacks when conducting clinical assessments, estimating the magnitude of population PTSD burdens, and projecting needs for specific mental health interventions.

(Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2011;5:S205-S213)

In substantial numbers of affected populations, disasters adversely affect well-being and influence the development of emotional problems and dysfunctional behaviors. Nowhere is the integration of mental and behavioral health into broader public health and medical preparedness and response activities more crucial than in disasters such as the 2009-2010 H1N1 influenza pandemic. The National Biodefense Science Board, recognizing that the mental and behavioral health responses to H1N1 were vital to preserving safety and health for the country, requested that the Disaster Mental Health Subcommittee recommend actions for public health officials to prevent and mitigate adverse behavioral health outcomes during the H1N1 pandemic. The subcommittee's recommendations emphasized vulnerable populations and concentrated on interventions, education and training, and communication and messaging. The subcommittee's H1N1 activities and recommendations provide an approach and template for identifying and addressing future efforts related to newly emerging public health and medical emergencies. The many emotional and behavioral health implications of the crisis and the importance of psychological factors in determining the behavior of members of the public argue for a programmatic integration of behavioral health and science expertise in a comprehensive public health response.

(Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2012;6:67–71)

The close interplay between mental health and physical health makes it critical to integrate mental and behavioral health considerations into all aspects of public health and medical disaster management. Therefore, the National Biodefense Science Board (NBSB) convened the Disaster Mental Health Subcommittee to assess the progress of the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) in integrating mental and behavioral health into disaster and emergency preparedness and response activities. One vital opportunity to improve integration is the development of clear and directive national policy to firmly establish the role of mental and behavioral health as part of a unified public health and medical response to disasters. Integration of mental and behavioral health into disaster preparedness, response, and recovery requires it to be incorporated in assessments and services, addressed in education and training, and founded on and advanced through research. Integration must be supported in underlying policies and administration with clear lines of responsibility for formulating and implementing policy and practice.

(Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2012;6:60–66)

Although increasing evidence suggests that children are at particular risk from disasters and evidence-based practices have been developed to triage and treat them effectively, no strategy or concept of operations linking best practices for disaster response is currently in place. To our knowledge, this report describes the first effort to address this critical gap and outlines a triage-driven children's disaster mental health incident response strategy for seamless preparedness, response, and recovery elements that can be used now. The national children's disaster mental health concept of operations (NCDMH CONOPS) details the essential elements needed for an interoperable, coordinated response for the mental health needs of children by local communities, counties, regions, and states to better meet the needs of children affected by disasters and terrorism incidents. This CONOPS for children proposes the use of an evidence-based, rapid triage system to provide a common data metric to incident response and recovery action and to rationally align limited resources to those at greater need in a population-based approach.

(Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2012;6:174–181)

Clinical work and research relative to child mental health during and following disaster are especially challenging due to the complex child maturational processes and family and social contexts of children's lives. The effects of disasters and terrorist events on children and adolescents necessitate diligent and responsible preparation and implementation of research endeavors. Disasters present numerous practical and methodological barriers that may influence the selection of participants, timing of assessments, and constructs being investigated. This article describes an efficient approach to guide both novice and experienced researchers as they prepare to conduct disaster research involving children. The approach is based on five fundamental research questions: “Why?, Who?, When?, What?, and How?” Addressing each of the “four Ws” will assist researchers in determining “How” to construct and implement a study from start to finish. A simple diagram of the five questions guides the reader through the components involved in studying children's reactions to disasters. The use of this approach is illustrated with examples from disaster mental health studies in children, thus simultaneously providing a review of the literature.

PfefferbaumB, NoffsingerMA, SherriebK, FranH., NorrisFH.. Framework for Research on Children's Reactions to Disasters and Terrorist Events. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2012;27(6):1-10.

Exposure to mass trauma has contributed to increasing concern about the well-being of children, families, and communities. In spite of global awareness of the dramatic impact of mass trauma on youth, little is known about how children and adolescents cope with and adapt to disasters and terrorism. While coping has yet to be fully conceptualized as a unified construct, the process of responding to stress includes recognized cognitive, emotional, and behavioral components. Unfortunately, research on the complex process of adaptation in the aftermath of mass trauma is a relatively recent focus. Further study is needed to build consensus in terminology, theory, methods, and assessment techniques to assist researchers and clinicians in measuring children's coping, both generally and within the context of mass trauma. Advancements are needed in the area of coping assessment to identify internal and external factors affecting children's stress responses. Additionally, enhanced understanding of children's disaster coping can inform the development of prevention and intervention programs to promote resilience in the aftermath of traumatic events. This article examines the theoretical and practical issues in assessing coping in children exposed to mass trauma, and includes recommendations to guide assessment and research of children's coping within this specialized context.

Pfefferbaum B, Noffsinger MA, Wind LH. Issues in the assessment of children's coping in the context of mass trauma. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2012;27(3):1-8.