Trauma- and Stressor-Related Disorders

Chapter 7
Trauma- and Stressor-Related Disorders


The term trauma refers to an emotional response to a severely distressing event such as combat, sexual assault, a severe accident, abuse, or exposure to a natural or human-caused disaster (Halpern & Tramontin, 2007; Norris & Elrod, 2006; Ursano, McCaughey, & Fullerton, 1994). Traumatic or stressful events or circumstances may be physically or emotionally harmful to an individual and can involve a single experience or a long-lasting or repetitive event or events. Trauma and stress affect clients in a variety of ways, all of which can threaten their physical, social, cognitive, emotional, or spiritual well-being (Gerrity & Flynn, 1997; Halpern & Tramontin, 2007; Norris et al., 2002). There is one common factor encompassing all traumatic experiences—these situations overwhelm a person’s ability to cope (Halpern & Tramontin, 2007; Norris & Elrod, 2006).


Major Changes From DSM-IV-TR to DSM-5


The Trauma- and Stressor-Related Disorders chapter in the DSM-5 is a new chapter of disorders that includes PTSD, acute stress disorder, adjustment disorders, reactive attachment disorder (RAD), and a new category, disinhibited social engagement disorder (DSED). In the DSM-IV-TR, PTSD and acute stress disorder were categorized as anxiety disorders; RAD was categorized as disorders usually first diagnosed in infancy, childhood, and adolescence; and adjustment disorders had its own diagnostic category. The DSM-5 placed these disorders together based on their common roots in external events or triggers (APA, 2013a). Categorizing these disorders according to common etiology (i.e., trauma or psychological stressors preceding the disorder), as opposed to common phenomenology, has both clinical utility and heuristic value (First, 2010; First et al., 2004). Because many of these disorders are similar enough to be grouped together but distinct enough to subsist as separate disorders, counselors can more easily distinguish them from one another. For example, including PTSD and adjustment disorders in the same diagnostic classification allows counselors to more easily identify marked differences between these diagnoses. Second, because these disorders are grouped according to cause as opposed to symptoms, researchers can easily create testable theoretical explanations for trauma-based disorders (Friedman et al., 2011).


Aside from being an entirely new chapter, the most significant change for this section is the stressor criterion for acute stress disorder and PTSD. Acute stress disorder and PTSD now note that a traumatic event can be either directly or indirectly experienced or witnessed (APA, 2013a). This means that a traumatic event that was experienced by a close family member or friend can result in possible PTSD or acute stress disorder for the client. There have also been significant changes for children in this chapter. The diagnostic threshold for PTSD has been modified to include children and adolescents, and the DSM-5 contains developmentally appropriate criteria for children 6 years or younger. The childhood diagnosis RAD formerly had two subtypes, inhibited and disinhibited. However, in the DSM-5, these subtypes are now separate disorders, RAD and DSED. Both disorders address a child’s ability to form meaningful/secure attachments as a result of social neglect or other stressors and have common etiology of gross neglect from caregivers. The difference, however, is that children diagnosed with DSED can have some form of attachment to their caregivers. Unlike children diagnosed with RAD, children diagnosed with DSED struggle to conform to social boundary norms and can be in danger of inappropriate interactions with strangers. Most other changes to disorders within this section are primarily semantic.


Essential Features


Potentially traumatic events include combat, sexual and physical assault, robbery, being kidnapped or taken hostage, terrorist attacks, torture, disasters, severe automobile accidents, child abuse, and life-threatening illnesses (Frances, 2013; Halpern & Tramontin, 2007). Trauma also extends to witnessing death or serious injury by violent assault, accidents, war, or disaster. References to stressor-related events in the DSM-5 include circumstances that cause less adverse emotional effects for a shorter period of time (APA, 2013a). Whereas these events can still markedly disturb an individual, sometimes to the point of social or occupational impairment, adverse emotional effects decrease once the stressor is removed (APA, 2013a). Examples of stressor-related events include relationship breakups, business difficulties or loss of a job, marital problems, or living in a crime-ridden neighborhood. Developmental events, such as going away from school or retiring, can also cause serious stress.


Note



Counselors should note that different people will react differently to similar events. One person may experience an event as traumatic whereas another person would not suffer trauma as a result of the same event. Not all people who experience a potentially traumatic event will become psychologically traumatized.


logo


As with many disorders found within Part One of this book, prevalence of trauma-based disorders among the general population is high (APA, 2013a; Morrison, 2006). According to the National Comorbidity Survey Replication (Kessler, Berglund, et al., 2005), the past year prevalence of PTSD was 3.5%, with a 3.6% lifetime prevalence among men and 9.7% prevalence among women. Currently, no population-based epidemiological studies have been conducted to examine prevalence rates in children; however, children who have been exposed to specific traumatic events are at greater risk of prevalence of PTSD. Depending on the trauma or stressor, prevalence rates for acute stress disorder vary from 6% to 94% (Gibson, 2007). The prevalence of RAD is estimated to be 1% of children under age 5 (Widom, Czaja, & Paris, 2009). However, children who are orphaned or placed in foster care at an early age have a higher chance of developing RAD. The prevalence of adjustment disorders has been reported to be between 2% and 8% in community samples of children, adolescents, and older adults (Portzky, Audenaert, & van Heeringen, 2005). In general hospital settings, 12% of inpatients are referred to mental health treatment for adjustment disorders, compared with 10% to 30% of individuals in mental health outpatient settings. Individuals from low socioeconomic status backgrounds have a higher chance of being treated for adjustment disorders due to increased exposure to life stressors (Portzky et al., 2005).


Differential Diagnosis


The onset of trauma-related disorders discussed in this chapter can be associated with increased risk of anxiety, depression, disordered eating, sleep disturbances, substance use problems, and suicidal ideation (APA, 2013a; Friedman et al., 2011). It is not uncommon for individuals diagnosed with a traumatic disorder to also exhibit symptoms of somatic symptom disorder, impulse-control disorder, and ADHD. Symptoms of these disorders have also been linked to dissociative disorders. Many survivors of traumatic events, especially children, are often misdiagnosed with ADHD (Gibson, 2007; Widom et al., 2009). Children diagnosed with RAD are often mistaken for children with ADHD or ODD and often have behavioral problems during childhood and adolescence (Widom et al., 2009).


Etiology and Treatment


In the DSM-I (APA, 1952), individuals were diagnosed with gross stress reaction resulting from psychological problems that arose as a result of military or civilian experiences (Friedman et al., 2011). However, the concept of gross stress reaction was criticized for not providing a solid foundation for diagnosing criteria. The DSM-II (APA, 1968) disposed of that diagnosis and developed the alternative diagnosis of, situational reaction. Clinicians felt this diagnosis captured both traumatic and unpleasant events resulting from traumatic exposure. Both gross stress reaction and situational reaction were identified as being reversible and temporary disorders. However, in the late 1970s, mental health clinicians noticed patients were presenting with severe, chronic, and irreversible symptoms as a result of exposure to traumatic events. This resulted in the DSM-III (APA, 1980) diagnostic criteria for PTSD that remain in existence until now. Through the development of the diagnostic criteria for PTSD, the possible symptoms increased from 12 to 17 and the symptom clusters shifted (Friedman et al., 2011).


Implications for Counselors


It is important that counselors understand that the fundamental feature of trauma rather than anxiety served as the driving force for the movement of trauma- and stressor-related disorders into a separate chapter. This modification follows revisions within ICD-10 that also separate trauma from anxiety disorder (WHO, 2007). However, unlike the ICD-10, which keeps trauma and anxiety disorder in the same larger category, the sequential order of this chapter in the DSM-5 following anxiety disorders and obsessive-compulsive and related disorders reflects the close relationship between trauma and anxiety disorders. In addition to diagnostic similarities, these disorders were also grouped together in an effort to increase clinical utility (First, 2010).


The new Trauma- and Stressor-Related Disorders chapter will require counselors to closely examine traumatic and stressor-related experiences and closely evaluate new diagnostic criteria to categorize trauma and stressor-related impairments. With the lower diagnostic threshold for acute stress disorder and PTSD, counselors will need to be on alert for diagnostic inflation, especially as it relates to children under the age of 6 (Frances, 2013).


To help readers better understand changes from the DSM-IV-TR to the DSM-5, the rest of this chapter outlines each disorder within the Trauma- and Stressor-Related Disorders chapter of the DSM-5. Readers should note that we have focused on major changes from the DSM-IV-TR to the DSM-5; however, this is not a stand-alone resource for diagnosis. Although a summary and special considerations for counselors are provided for each disorder, when diagnosing clients, counselors need to reference the DSM-5. It is essential that the diagnostic criteria and features, subtypes and specifiers (if applicable), prevalence, course, and risk and prognostic factors for each disorder are clearly understood prior to diagnosis.


313.89 Reactive Attachment Disorder (F94.1)



We adopted John when he was 6 years old. He has never known his birth parents and, prior to our adoption, was shuffled from institution to institution. After having been with us for 1 year, John continued to be severely withdrawn, refusing any forms of affection even when he is upset. He doesn’t seem to interact with any other children or seems fearful of anyone getting close to him. Even when others try to interact with him or comfort him he doesn’t respond.—Emma (John’s mom)


Reactive attachment disorder (RAD) is characterized by markedly disturbed and developmentally inappropriate social relatedness in children before the age of 5 (APA, 2013a; Schechter & Willheim, 2009; Widom et al., 2009). There is broad consensus among clinicians that this disorder results from an extremely inadequate caregiving environment and is directly associated with grossly pathological care. Children diagnosed with RAD continuously fail to initiate or respond to social interactions.


Essential Features


Typically seen before the age of 5, children diagnosed with RAD have not had the opportunity to form stable attachments and have experienced persistent disregard of their basic physical and emotional needs for comfort, stimulation, and affection (APA, 2013a; Schechter & Willheim, 2009; Widom et al., 2009). Symptoms of RAD include detachment, unresponsiveness or resistance to comforting, holding back emotions, withdrawal from others, and a mixture of approach and avoidance behaviors (APA, 2013a; Zeanah & Gleason, 2010). Children diagnosed with RAD have no developmental delays. Little epidemiological data exist for this disorder, but it is relatively uncommon. Only a minority of children with severe caretaking deficiencies or abnormalities develop RAD.


Major Changes From DSM-IV-TR to DSM-5


Formerly located within the Disorders Usually First Diagnosed in Infancy, Childhood, or Adolescence chapter in the DSM-IV-TR, RAD included two specifiers: inhibited and disinhibited type. Disinhibited type, characterized by indiscriminate social skills marked by a child’s inability to exhibit appropriate attachments, is no longer included as a criterion for this disorder (APA, 2013a; Zeanah & Gleason, 2010). This specifier has been moved to a separate disorder (see next section).


Special Considerations


RAD is not diagnosed when children, despite abuse or maltreatment, can still form attachments and are not markedly maladjusted (Schechter & Willheim, 2009; Zeanah & Gleason, 2010). RAD should be differentiated from ASD, which can develop within a relatively supportive setting (APA, 2013a). Although RAD can present like ADHD, it is different because children who are diagnosed with ADHD will form attachments (Zeanah & Gleason, 2010). RAD is not applicable to children with developmental delays or neurological damage. Finally, RAD does not apply to rebellious behavior, which develops in preadolescent and adolescent children who previously had strong attachments with caregivers. Critics of this diagnosis point to limited research with contradictory findings (cf. Chaffin et al., 2006; Hanson & Spratt, 2000).


Common approaches to treating RAD are based on attachment theory and concentrate on increasing the responsiveness and sensitivity of the caregiver, or if that is not possible, placing the child with a different caregiver (Prior & Glaser, 2006). Prevention programs are also important, especially to target problematic early attachment behaviors in both children and caregivers. Cohen et al. (2010) identified important parameters mental health practitioners should focus on when working with children diagnosed with RAD. The first goal is ensuring the child is in a safe and stable environment that can provide for physical and emotional needs. The second goal focuses on how the child can begin to develop an appropriate, healthy attachment with his or her primary caregiver(s).


Counselors should be aware that neglected children are often at risk for developmental delays, dialectical deficits/disorders, and neglect of medical concerns (Prior & Glaser, 2006). Counselors must remember that all cases of abuse, neglect, and exploitation must be reported. Therefore, counselors need to be familiar with their local and state laws regarding mandated reporting, and their actions need to be in compliance with the ACA Code of Ethics (ACA, 2014).


Cultural Considerations


As stated previously, there has been little research on RAD (Zeanah & Gleason, 2010). This means that counselors should pay particular attention when making a diagnosis of RAD, especially for cultural groups in which attachment has not been thoroughly studied (APA, 2013a). Because attachment behavior varies greatly from one cultural group to another, counselors must use caution to ensure that the child’s attachment behavior is markedly disturbed and developmentally inappropriate as defined by the child’s cultural norms.


Differential Diagnosis


Pervasive developmental disorders or developmental delays are commonly considered as differential diagnoses from RAD (APA, 2013a). However, criticisms of RAD are that the criteria from the DSM-IV-TR focused too much on social behavior and not attachment behavior, for example, how a child seeks comfort, support, nurturance, and protection from a preferred attachment figure in times of fear or distress. Focusing on social behavior runs the risk of overlapping with ASD rather than an attachment disorder.


Coding, Recording, and Specifiers


There is only one diagnostic code for RAD: 313.89 (F94.1). There are two specifiers for this disorder: persistent, which is used when the disorder has been present for more than 12 months, and severe, when there is evidence of all symptoms and each has a relatively high level of occurrence. There are no codes associated with these specifiers.


313.89 Disinhibited Social Engagement Disorder (F94.2)



We do not know what to do. Jamaal runs up to strangers and is willing to run away with anyone. One day he even got into a stranger’s car while we were at the supermarket. He is distant from us and has been ever since we adopted him 1 year ago. I worry about his safety while at school or away from my partner and I.—Jamaal’s father


Disinhibited social engagement disorder (DSED) is a new diagnosis in the DSM-5 (APA, 2013a; Zeanah & Gleason, 2010). This disorder represents the indiscriminately social/disinhibited subtype of the DSM-IV-TR childhood diagnosis of RAD (Zeanah & Gleason, 2010). Now considered a distinct disorder, DSED is characterized by a pattern of behavior in which the child actively approaches and interacts with unfamiliar adults (APA, 2013a; Zeanah & Gleason, 2010).


Essential Features


Children diagnosed with DSED do not exhibit developmentally appropriate discretion with unfamiliar adults and may engage in overly familiar behavior with strangers (APA, 2013a; Zeanah & Gleason, 2010). In familiar or unfamiliar settings, these children may venture away from a primary caregiver and often are willing to go off with an unfamiliar adult with minimal or no hesitation. Like RAD, the origin of these symptoms is grossly inadequate caregiving that failed to meet the child’s basic emotional or physical needs and safety (Schechter & Willheim, 2009; Widom et al., 2009). Risk factors for DSED include repeated changes in caregivers or being raised in unconventional settings, such as an orphanage or institution that severely limited the child’s ability to form secure attachments.


Special Considerations


Counselors need to be careful not to overdiagnose RAD or DSED in children who are adopted, living in a foster home, or have been mistreated by their caregiver (APA, 2013a). Children with RAD and DSED are presumed to have grossly disturbed internal models for relating to others; therefore, treatment should involve both the caretaker and the child (Prior & Glaser, 2006). Counselors should not attempt to change the child but rather should focus on changing the child’s surroundings and creating positive interactions with caregivers. As with RAD, counselors must be sure the child with DSED is in a safe and stable environment where he or she can get appropriate care, and counselors should always be aware that neglected children are often at risk for developmental delays, dialectical deficits/disorders, and neglect of medical concerns (Prior & Glaser, 2006). All cases of abuse, neglect, and exploitation must be reported, and counselors need to be familiar with mandated reporting laws as well as the ACA Code of Ethics (ACA, 2014).


Cultural Considerations


There has been little research on DSED (Zeanah & Gleason, 2010). Similar to RAD, counselors should pay particular attention when making a diagnosis of DSED in cultures in which attachment has not been studied. Because attachment behavior varies greatly from one cultural group to another, counselors must use caution to ensure that the child’s attachment behaviors are inappropriate as defined by the child’s cultural norms.


Differential Diagnosis


DSED can be mistaken for ADHD (APA, 2013a; Frances, 2013). Although the symptoms of DSED are inattentiveness and impulsivity, the etiology of DSED, inadequate caregiving and neglect, is what differentiates this disorder from other impulse-control disorders or ADHD (Zeanah & Gleason, 2010). As with RAD, counselors must be sure to distinguish DSED from pervasive developmental disorders (Zeanah & Gleason, 2010). Counselors should also be sure the client does not have the genetic disorder Williams syndrome, characterized by mild to moderate intellectual disability (Zeanah & Gleason, 2010). Children with Williams syndrome have unique facial features and distinct personality traits of overfriendliness, anxiety, and high levels of empathy (National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, 2008).


Note



Counselors must be careful to differentiate RAD and DSED from PTSD. To do so, look for emotional regulation problems and aggression, as these are not core symptoms of either RAD or DSED. Whereas maladaptive care can be defined as trauma, problems with attachment to caregiver prior to 5 years old are distinct features of RAD and DSED and should not be misdiagnosed as PTSD.


logo


Coding, Recording, and Specifiers


There is only one diagnostic code for DSED: 313.89 (F94.2). Counselors will note the same ICD-9-CM code is used for RAD and DSED (i.e., 313.89). A similar code, with .2 as opposed to the .1 given for RAD, is listed under the ICD-10-CM. The reason these are the same in the ICD-9-CM but not the ICD-10-CM is because the disinhibited type specifier, formerly listed under RAD in the DSM-IV-TR, has now been included the DSM-5 and the ICD-10-CM as a separate diagnosis. There are two specifiers for this disorder. The specifier persistent is used when the disorder has been present for more than 12 months, and severe is used when there is evidence of all symptoms and each has a relatively high level of occurrence. There are no codes associated with these specifiers.


309.81 Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (F43.10)



About a year ago, I was in a major car accident. Although I sustained only minor injuries, two of my friends were killed. At first, the accident seemed like just a bad dream. Then the nightmares started. Now, the sights and sounds of the accident haunt me all the time. I have trouble sleeping at night, and during the day I feel “on edge.” I jump whenever I hear a siren or screeching tires, and I avoid TV altogether as I might find a program that shows a car chase or accident scene. I avoid driving when possible. —Amanda


Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) applies only if someone has been exposed to one or more traumatic or stressful events or circumstances. Without severe trauma, a diagnosis of PTSD cannot be made. A traumatic stressor is defined by the DSM-5 as “any event (or events) that may cause or threaten death, serious injury, or sexual violence to an individual, a close family member, or a close friend” (APA, 2013a, p. 830). Critics have argued that this definition does not include nonviolent trauma such as emotional abuse; therefore, counselors should be careful if considering traumas such as emotional neglect and verbal abuse as triggering stressors for PTSD (Frances, 2013).


As mentioned earlier, the past year prevalence of PTSD was 3.5%, with a 3.6% lifetime prevalence among men and 9.7% among women. No population-based epidemiological studies have been conducted to examine the prevalence rates in children; however, children who have been exposed to specific traumatic events are at greater risk of prevalence of PTSD.


Major Changes From DSM-IV-TR to DSM-5


PTSD was previously classified in the DSM-IV-TR as an anxiety disorder, but the criteria for it have undergone substantial changes in the DSM-5. Compared with the DSM-IV-TR, DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for PTSD include more explicit attention to what represents, and does not represent, a traumatic event. Within the diagnostic features description, APA (2013a) lists exposure to war as a combatant or civilian, childhood physical abuse, and threatened or actual sexual violence, with a wide range of examples, to give a clearer picture of traumatic exposure. References to concentration camps and being diagnosed with a life-threatening illness were removed, but the DSM-5 does clarify that medical illnesses in which a shocking or catastrophic event occurs (e.g., waking during surgery or anaphylactic shock) may be considered traumatic (APA, 2013a; Frances, 2013).

Stay updated, free articles. Join our Telegram channel

Dec 3, 2016 | Posted by in PSYCHOLOGY | Comments Off on Trauma- and Stressor-Related Disorders

Full access? Get Clinical Tree

Get Clinical Tree app for offline access