|
 |
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© 2007 American Public Health Association
DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2007.115436
RESEARCH AND PRACTICE |
B. Christopher Frueh is with the University of Hawai’i, Hilo. Anouk L. Grubaugh is with the Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, and the Ralph H. Johnson Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Charleston. Jon D. Elhai is with the Disaster Mental Health Institute, University of South Dakota, Vermillion. Todd C. Buckley is with the Blackstone Center for Cognitive and Behavioral Therapy, Hopkinton, Mass.
Correspondence: Requests for reprints should be sent to B. Christopher Frueh, PhD, Department of Psychology, University of Hawai’i, 200 W Kawili St, Hilo, HI 96720 (e-mail: frueh{at}hawaii.edu).
 |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
 TOP ABSTRACT References |
|---|
An accumulating body of empirical data suggests that current Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) psychiatric disability and rehabilitation policies for combat-related posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) are problematic. In combination, recent administrative trends and data from epidemiological and clinical studies suggest theses policies are countertherapeutic and hinder research efforts to advance our knowledge regarding PTSD. Current VA disability policies require fundamental reform to bring them into line with modern science and medicine, including current empirically supported concepts of resilience and psychiatric rehabilitation.
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) psychiatric disability compensation and rehabilitation policies for combat-related posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), although well intentioned, are more than 60 years old1 and seriously flawed. We review administrative trends and epidemiological and clinical studies to advance the argument that current VA psychiatric disability policies are countertherapeutic and likely undermine efforts to develop and evaluate PTSD interventions for veterans.
The number of veterans receiving VA disability payments for PTSD increased 79.5% from 1999 to 2004, whereas those receiving payments for other disabilities increased only 12.2%.2 This and other recent VA administrative trends indicating rapid expansion of PTSD disability compensation among veterans (see the box on this page) are troubling for various reasons.
Recent Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Administrative Trends Regarding Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) Disability
|
As epidemiological data from community samples have shown, the prevalence of PTSD declines sharply (> 50%) over time.7–9 Furthermore, recent, more rigorous estimates of PTSD prevalence among Vietnam War veterans are about 40%7 to 65%10 lower than original estimates, and there may be proportionally few cases of severe functional impairment in veterans with PTSD.11,12
Many treatment-seeking veterans (53%),13 especially those seeking disability compensation, show clear symptom exaggeration or malingering on psychological tests and forensic interviews.3,13–15 Some veterans’ reports of combat exposure change over time as a function of reported PTSD symptom severity,16–18 and some misrepresent combat exposure or war-zone deployment altogether.19,20 Thus, disability incentives may distort accurate clinical evaluation.
Many VA clinicians doubt the sincerity of veterans’ PTSD complaints, suspecting their treatment involvement is intended primarily to help obtain or maintain disability payments.21,22 This may impede compassionate and effective care.
Veterans with a PTSD diagnosis benefit far less23–25 from treatment compared with other patients with PTSD (e.g., rape victims).23,26,27 A recent meta-analysis found that 67% of the patients who completed psychotherapy for PTSD no longer met criteria for the disorder at posttreatment,23 but little evidence of efficacy was found among veteran samples. Furthermore, we are aware of no administrative data showing clinical improvement among veterans receiving treatment in VA programs. This is consistent with data showing that disability benefits unintentionally discourage full participation in vocational rehabilitation and result in significantly worse rehabilitation outcomes.28 As Hadler29(p2397) observed, "if you have to prove you are ill, you can’t get well."
The VA does not widely offer evidence-based vocational rehabilitation services for veterans with PTSD. Current policies and services are not in line with clinical evidence-based practices or psychiatric rehabilitation principles and programs.30 Instead, they are countertherapeutic, because physical, social, and employment activities are palliative,21 and veterans’ PTSD symptoms worsen when they stop working.31
Disability incentives may undermine the integrity of the PTSD knowledge base.14,15,32–35 An expert consensus panel recommended excluding compensation-seeking veterans from clinical research because of the likely bias created by disability incentives.36 This recommendation has been largely ignored, perhaps because up to 94%3 of treatment-seeking veterans also seek compensation, making it difficult for clinical researchers to recruit participants who are not seeking compensation. Thus, current disability policies likely undermine our ability to develop and evaluate PTSD interventions for veterans exposed to combat trauma, as well as to study other phenomenological aspects of the disorder.
Veterans deserve appropriate psychiatric treatment, rehabilitation services, and disability benefits necessary to readjust to civilian life. Yet the VA has signally failed to benefit from the lessons of 20th-century military psychiatry regarding social expectations and incentives.37–40 We may be instilling counterproductive social expectations that war-zone deployment will make veterans psychiatrically disabled,41 potentially a self-fulfilling prophecy.42 A review of British government war pension files from the Boer War through World War II suggested that disability incentives for combat-related psychiatric problems "inhibit the natural process of recovery and consolidate distressing symptoms."43(p378) Resilience is the most common response to trauma44–46; most survivors of combat or rape never develop PTSD.7,47 Yet VA policies are potentially harmful in encouraging chronically ill patient roles.
The VA’s disability policies require fundamental reform to create an effective, responsive, and flexible safety net for veterans with PTSD. We must ensure that veterans receive the best possible services and that finite resources are not misallocated and do not foster invalidism. Our goal should be work-force reintegration, incorporating current principles of psychiatric rehabilitation: vocational rehabilitation, assertive community treatment, supported employment, recovery-focused interventions, and disincentives-to-work principles (a set of principles that are thought to provide disincentives for people to participate in the workforce at maximum capacity).30,48,49 There is good evidence of success in policies and strategies for facilitating psychiatric rehabilitation among even the most severely mentally ill. The US Government Accountability Office also has recommended fundamental change, informed by current science, medicine, technology, and labor conditions,5 and the Institute of Medicine has called for comprehensive research to inform policy decisions.1
Appropriately revised disability policies would help neutralize concerns about symptom exaggeration, combat misrepresentation, unreliable evaluation procedures, and distortion of research findings. They also would reduce current disincentives to participate in and benefit from treatments efficacious for civilians with PTSD. Our returning warriors deserve to live as productive members of society. The VA should reconsider its disability policies to help veterans realize this goal.
|
Acknowledgments |
|---|
This work was partially financially supported by the National Institute of Mental Health (grant MH074468).
We acknowledge the valuable comments provided by Paul B. Gold and Richard J. McNally on an earlier draft of this brief.
Human Participant Protection
No protocol approval was needed for this study.
|
Footnotes |
|---|
Peer Reviewed
Note. All views and opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of their respective institutions or the Department of Veterans Affairs.
Contributors
All authors participated in the conceptual development of the opinions and arguments expressed herein, including review of the literature, writing, and editing, and all have seen and approved the final version.
Accepted for publication June 13, 2007.
|
References |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTReferences |
|---|
1. Institute of Medicine and National Research Council. PTSD Compensation and Military Service. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2007.
2. Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Inspector General. Review of State Variances in VA Disability Compensation Payments (#05-00765-137). Washington, DC: Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Inspector General; 2005.
3. Frueh BC, Elhai JD, Gold PB, et al. Disability compensation seeking among veterans evaluated for posttraumatic stress disorder. Psychiatr Serv. 2003;54: 84–91.
4. Sayer NA, Spoont M, Nelson D. Veterans seeking disability benefits for post-traumatic stress disorder: who applies and the self-reported meaning of disability compensation. Soc Sci Med. 2004;58: 2133–2143.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
5. US Government Accountability Office. Veterans’ Disability Benefits: Long-Standing Claims Processing Challenges Persist (#GAO-07–512T). Washington, DC: US Government Accountability Office; 2007.
6. Murdoch M, Hodges J, Cowper D, et al. Regional variation and other correlates of Department of Veterans Affairs disability awards for patients with posttraumatic stress disorder. Med Care. 2005;43: 112–121.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
7. Dohrenwend BP, Turner B, Turse NA, et al. The psychological risks of Vietnam for US veterans: a revisit with new data and methods. Science. 2006;313: 979–982.
8. Blanchard EB, Hickling EJ, Barton KA, Taylor AE, Los WR, Jones-Alexander JJ. One year prospective follow up of motor vehicle accident victims. Behav Res Ther. 1996;34:775–786.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
9. Ehlers A, Mayou RA, Bryant B. Psychological predictors of chronic posttraumatic stress disorder after motor vehicle accidents. J Abnorm Psychol. 1998;107: 508–519.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
10. McNally RJ. PTSD and Vietnam veterans [letter]. Science. 2007;315:186–187.[Web of Science]
11. Frueh BC. PTSD and Vietnam veterans. Science. 2007;315:184–187.[Web of Science][Medline]
12. McNally RJ. Psychiatric casualties of war. Science. 2006;313:923–924.
13. Freeman T, Powell M, Kimbrell TA. Measuring symptom exaggeration in veterans with chronic post-traumatic stress disorder. Psychiatry Res. In press.
14. Fairbank JA, Keane TM, Malloy PF. Some preliminary data on the psychological characteristics of Vietnam veterans with posttraumatic stress disorders. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1983;51:912–919.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
15. Frueh BC, Hamner MB, Cahill SP, et al. Apparent symptom overreporting among combat veterans evaluated for PTSD. Clin Psychol Rev. 2000;20: 853–885.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
16. Roemer L, Litz BT, Orsillo SM, et al. Increases in retrospective accounts of war-zone exposure over time: the role of PTSD symptom severity. J Trauma Stress. 1998;11:597–605.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
17. Southwick SM, Morgan CA, Nicolaou AL, et al. Consistency of memory for combat-related traumatic events in veterans of Operation Desert Storm. Am J Psychiatry. 1997;154:173–177.[Abstract]
18. Wessely S, Unwin C, Hotopf M, et al. Stability of recall of military hazards over time: evidence from the Persian Gulf War of 1991. Br J Psychiatry. 2003;183: 314–322.
19. Frueh BC, Elhai JD, Grubaugh AL, et al. Documented combat exposure of US veterans seeking treatment for combat-related post-traumatic stress disorder. Br J Psychiatry. 2005;186:473–475.
20. Sparr L, Pankrantz LD. Factitious posttraumatic stress disorder. Am J Psychiatry. 1983;140: 1016–1019.
21. Mossman D. Veterans Affairs disability compensation: a case study in countertherapeutic jurisprudence. Bull Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 1996;24: 27–44.[Web of Science][Medline]
22. Sayer NA, Thuras P. The influence of patients’ compensation-seeking status on the perceptions of Veterans Affairs clinicians. Psychiatr Serv. 2002;53: 210–212.
23. Bradley R, Greene J, Russ E, Dutra L, Westen D. A multidimensional meta-analysis of psychotherapy for PTSD [published erratum appears in Am J Psychiatry. 2005;162:832; Am J Psychiatry. 2006;163:330]. Am J Psychiatry. 2005;162:214–227.
24. Friedman MJ, Marmar CR, Baker DG, et al. Randomized, double-blind comparison of sertraline and placebo for posttraumatic stress disorder in a Department of Veterans Affairs setting. J Clin Psychiatry. 2007;68:711–720.[Medline]
25. Schnurr PP, Friedman MJ, Foy DW, et al. Randomized trial of trauma-focused group therapy for posttraumatic stress disorder: results from a Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative study. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2003;60:481–489.
26. Foa EB, Keane TM, Friedman MJ. Effective Treatments for PTSD. New York, NY: Guilford Press; 2000.
27. Foa EB, Hembree EA, Cahill SP, et al. Randomized trial of prolonged exposure of posttraumatic stress disorder with and without cognitive restructuring: outcome at academic and community clinics. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2005;73:953–964.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
28. Drew D, Drebing CE, Van Ormer A, et al. Effects of disability compensation on participation in and outcomes of vocational rehabilitation. Psychiatr Serv. 2001;52:1479–1484.
29. Hadler N. If you have to prove you are ill, you can’t get well: the object lesson of fibromyalgia. Spine. 1996;21:2397–2400.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
30. Cook JA. Employment barriers for persons with psychiatric disabilities: update of a report for the President’s Commission. Psychiatr Serv. 2006;57: 1391–1405.
31. Schnurr PP, Lunney CA, Sengupta A, Spiro A. A longitudinal study of retirement in older male veterans. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2005;73:561–566.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
32. McHugh PR, Treisman G. PTSD: a problematic diagnostic category. J Anxiety Disord. 2007;21: 211–222.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
33. McNally RJ. Progress and controversy in the study of posttraumatic stress disorder. Annu Rev Psychol. 2003;54:229–252.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
34. Rosen GM, Taylor S. Pseudo-PTSD. J Anxiety Disord. 2007;21:201–210.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
35. Buckley TC. PTSD and Vietnam veterans. Science. 2007;315:184–187.[Web of Science][Medline]
36. Charney DS, Davidson JRT, Friedman M, et al. A consensus meeting on effective research practice in PTSD. CNS Spectr. 1998;3:7–10.
37. Burkett BG, Whitley G. Stolen Valor: How the Vietnam Generation Was Robbed of Its Heroes and History. Dallas, Tex: Verity Press; 1998.
38. Shephard B. A War of Nerves: Soldiers and Psychiatrists in the Twentieth Century. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press; 2001.
39. Jones E, Wessely S. A paradigm shift in the conceptualization of psychological trauma in the 20th century. J Anxiety Disord. 2007;21:164–175.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
40. Wessely S. Risk, psychiatry, and the military. Br J Psychiatry. 2005;186:459–466.
41. Durodié B. Risk and the social construction of ‘Gulf War Syndrome.’ Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2006;361:689–695.
42. Summerfield D. The invention of post-traumatic stress disorder and the social usefulness of a psychiatric category. BMJ. 2001;322:95–98.
43. Jones E, Palmer I, Wessely S. War pensions (1900–1945): changing models of psychological understanding. Br J Psychiatry. 2002;180:374–379.
44. Bonanno G. Loss, trauma, and human resilience. Am Psychol. 2004;59:20–28.[CrossRef][Medline]
45. Rubin GJ, Brewin CR, Greenberg N, Simpson J, Wessely S. Psychological and behavioural reactions to the bombings in London on 7 July 2005: cross sectional survey of a representative sample of Londoners. BMJ. 2005;331:606.
46. Lee KA, Vaillant GE, Torrey WC, Elder GH. A 50-year prospective study of the psychological sequelae of World War II combat. Am J Psychiatry. 1995; 152:516–522.
47. Breslau N, Alvarado GF. The clinical significance criterion in DSM-IV post-traumatic stress disorder. Psychol Med. In press.
48. Cook JA, Leff HS, Blyler CR, et al. Results of a multisite randomized trial of supported employment interventions for individuals with severe mental illness. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2005;62:505–512.
49. Rosenheck R, Leslie D, Keefe R, et al. Barriers to employment for people with schizophrenia. Am J Psychiatry. 2006;163:411–417.
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  B. C. Frueh, A. L. Grubaugh, D. E. Yeager, and K. M. Magruder Delayed-onset post-traumatic stress disorder among war veterans in primary care clinics The British Journal of Psychiatry, June 1, 2009; 194(6): 515 - 520. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 B. P. Marx, M. W. Miller, D. M. Sloan, B. T. Litz, D. G. Kaloupek, and T. M. Keane MILITARY-RELATED PTSD, CURRENT DISABILITY POLICIES, AND MALINGERING Am J Public Health, May 1, 2008; 98(5): 773 - 774. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. C. Frueh, T. C. Buckley, A. L. Grubaugh, and J. D. Elhai FRUEH ET AL. RESPOND Am J Public Health, May 1, 2008; 98(5): 774 - 775. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. M. Rosen and R. L. Spitzer VA DISABILITY POLICIES AND POSTTRAUMATIC MORBIDITY Am J Public Health, May 1, 2008; 98(5): 775 - 775. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. C. Frueh, J. D. Elhai, A. L. Grubaugh, and T. C. Buckley FRUEH ET. AL RESPOND Am J Public Health, May 1, 2008; 98(5): 775 - 776. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |