Shame, Dissociation, and Complex PTSD Symptoms in Traumatized Psychiatric and Control Groups: Direct and Indirect Associations With Relationship Distress

Objectives: Elevated shame and dissociation are common in dissociative identity disorder (DID) and chronic posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and are part of the constellation of symptoms defined as complex PTSD. Previous work examined the relationship between shame, dissociation, and complex PTSD and whether they are associated with intimate relationship anxiety, relationship depression, and fear of relationships. This study investigated these variables in traumatized clinical samples and a nonclinical community group.

Method: Participants were drawn from the DID (n = 20), conflict-related chronic PTSD (n = 65), and nonclinical (n = 125) populations and completed questionnaires assessing the variables of interest. A model examining the direct impact of shame and dissociation on relationship functioning, and their indirect effect via complex PTSD symptoms, was tested through path analysis.

Results: The DID sample reported significantly higher dissociation, shame, complex PTSD symptom severity, relationship anxiety, relationship depression, and fear of relationships than the other two samples. Support was found for the proposed model, with shame directly affecting relationship anxiety and fear of relationships, and pathological dissociation directly affecting relationship anxiety and relationship depression. The indirect effect of shame and dissociation via complex PTSD symptom severity was evident on all relationship variables.

Conclusion: Shame and pathological dissociation are important for not only the effect they have on the development of other complex PTSD symptoms, but also their direct and indirect effects on distress associated with relationships.

Conservative fluid management or deresuscitation for patients with sepsis or acute respiratory distress syndrome following the resuscitation phase of critical illness: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

It is unknown whether a conservative approach to fluid administration or deresuscitation (active removal of fluid using diuretics or renal replacement therapy) is beneficial following haemodynamic stabilisation of critically ill patients.

Purpose

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of conservative or deresuscitative fluid strategies in adults and children with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), sepsis or systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) in the post-resuscitation phase of critical illness.

Methods

We searched Medline, EMBASE and the Cochrane central register of controlled trials from 1980 to June 2016, and manually reviewed relevant conference proceedings from 2009 to the present. Two reviewers independently assessed search results for inclusion and undertook data extraction and quality appraisal. We included randomised trials comparing fluid regimens with differing fluid balances between groups, and observational studies investigating the relationship between fluid balance and clinical outcomes.

Results

Forty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Marked clinical heterogeneity was evident. In a meta-analysis of 11 randomised trials (2051 patients) using a random-effects model, we found no significant difference in mortality with conservative or deresuscitative strategies compared with a liberal strategy or usual care [pooled risk ratio (RR) 0.92, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.82–1.02, I2 = 0 %]. A conservative or deresuscitative strategy resulted in increased ventilator-free days (mean difference 1.82 days, 95 % CI 0.53–3.10, I2 = 9 %) and reduced length of ICU stay (mean difference −1.88 days, 95 % CI −0.12 to −3.64, I2 = 75 %) compared with a liberal strategy or standard care.

Conclusions

In adults and children with ARDS, sepsis or SIRS, a conservative or deresuscitative fluid strategy results in an increased number of ventilator-free days and a decreased length of ICU stay compared with a liberal strategy or standard care. The effect on mortality remains uncertain. Large randomised trials are needed to determine optimal fluid strategies in critical illness.