Citation

Rosenblatt AS, Li R, Fortier C, Liu X, Fonda JR, Villalon A, McGlinchey RE, Jorge RE. Psychol. Trauma 2019; 11(4): 442-450.

Affiliation

Translational Research Center for TBI and Stress Disorders.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2019, American Psychological Association)

DOI

10.1037/tra0000399

PMID

30113187

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) has previously been employed to examine the latent factor structure of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms with mixed results. A limited number of studies examined PTSD factor structure among veterans of recent military conflicts. This study examined the relationship between PTSD factor structure and the hallmark conditions of these conflicts, mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) and close-range blast exposure (CBE).

METHOD: The fit of previously proposed PTSD factor models was compared in a cohort of 387 combat-exposed veterans, with stratified analyses comparing factor structure models between those with a history of military-related mTBI and CBE (n = 106) and those without either of these antecedents (n = 151). CFAs were conducted using criteria from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed.; DSM-IV; American Psychiatric Association, 1994).

RESULTS: The 4-factor emotional numbing (EN) model yielded the best fit when using a clinician-administered assessment of PTSD symptoms regardless of mTBI/CBE exposure status. However, when using a self-report measure of PTSD symptom severity, the EN model yielded best fit for those with mTBI/CBE exposure history while the 5-factor dysphoric arousal (DA) model was preferable among combat-exposed veterans with no history of mTBI/CBE exposure.

CONCLUSIONS: Factors including mTBI and blast exposure and type of assessment tools must be considered when determining preferable PTSD latent factor structure models. (PsycINFO Database Record

(c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

Language: en