Abstract
Objectives: With the acceptance of Complex Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (Complex PTSD) as a recognized diagnosis, supporters of unimodal approaches to traditional PTSD (e.g., trauma-focused cognitive behavioral therapies) claim that these modalities should be extended to Complex PTSD, whereas other practitioners stress the need for more gradual phase-oriented treatment plans within this population. This article examines the extant literature base and arguments for each position. Method: A critical literature review and commentary on the clinical area. Findings: Both therapy perspectives appear to share more commonalities than differences in routine clinical practice. Several issues raised by each therapeutic approach (e.g., lack of evidence base, destabilizing effects on complex clients) may be artifacts of clinician identity and examples of a “straw man” fallacy rather than legitimate concerns. Conclusions: An alternative synthesized view may be more helpful in advancing the area of Complex PTSD rather than a perpetuation of long-held polarized opinions. Adopting this stance, the present article makes a number of research recommendations to increase understanding of both unimodal and phased interventions. Suggestions for clinical practice, including a focus on bespoke formulations, and enhanced training programs for Complex PTSD to assist this consolidation process are also discussed.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 869-876 |
Number of pages | 8 |
Journal | Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy |
Volume | 13 |
Issue number | 8 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 01 Nov 2021 |
Externally published | Yes |
Bibliographical note
Publisher Copyright:© 2021 American Psychological Association
Keywords
- complex PTSD
- evidence-based trauma treatment
- phase-oriented therapy
- trauma focused therapy
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Social Psychology
- Clinical Psychology