Ready et al (abnormal + cog)

Question 1

Aim

Answer 1

To compare the effectiveness of VRET and PCT in Vietnam veterans with PTSD.

Question 2

Procedure

Answer 2

• 11 male Vietnam vet participants (6 VRET, 5 PCT)
  VRET: ten 90-minute sessions
  - Experienced one of two scenarios, whichever most strongly replicated their experience, participants rated their distress every 5 minutes
  - Therapist had control over stimuli in the VR, they adjusted it to correspond with stress-level of participant (reducing when overwhelmed, increasing when not engaged)
  - Participants also asked to listen to audio recordings of the scenario daily
• PCT: ten 90-minute sessions
  - Avoided talk of trauma, focused on solving problems “here and now”
• Measures were taken pre and post treatment, 6 month follow-up including a CAPS score

Question 3

Findings

Answer 3

• Mean CAPS score reduced by approx 25 points for PCT group at post-treatment
• Mean CAPS score reduced by approx 30 points for the VRET group at post-treatment
• Differences were not significant due to small sample size
• Provides some support for both treatments, VRET appearing to be more effective then PCT, but statistically not significant

Question 4

Limitations

Answer 4

• Sample size (ended with 9 participants) – Nothing statistically significant found
• Resistance from vets to participate (thought VR would be too overwhelming), could be connected to age (lack of comfort with computers)
• No mention of drug therapy (could have an influence)

Question 5

Ethical Considerations

Answer 5

• Informed Consent
  - Important to let participants know when treatments are not recommended
  - PCT is still underdeveloped

Question 6

Research Method

Answer 6

Experiment (lab or true)