Search

Adjustment disorder (AD) and complicated grief (CG) are serious mental conditions that have a high prevalence and are associated with significant impairments in social and work functioning. Recently, these categories have been better specified in the new ICD‐11 proposal. Empirical research on the efficacy of treatments for these problems is scarce. This study aims to offer long‐term efficacy data from a between‐groups controlled study that compares two treatment conditions (AD‐protocol applied in a traditional way: N = 18 and the same protocol supported by virtual reality (VR); VR‐protocol applied in a traditional way: N = 18) and a waiting list (WL) control group (N = 18). Both treatment conditions resulted in statistically significant improvements on both primary and secondary outcome measures, with large effect sizes, and this improvement did not occur in the WL. These changes were maintained in both treatment conditions in the medium (6‐month) and long‐term (12‐month follow‐up). Larger effect sizes were achieved in the VR condition in the long term. Furthermore, clinically significant change estimations on the primary outcome measures showed an advantage for the VR condition This is the first controlled study to compare a traditional face‐to‐face protocol for the treatment of stress‐related disorders with the same protocol supported by VR and a WL control group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Adjustment Disorders (AjD) are one of the most prevalent psychological problems in primary and hospital care. It is necessary to have evidence-based instruments to help professionals diagnose and better understand this problem, which has been little studied. This study presents an adaptation of the Inventory of Complicated Grief for the assessment of AjD symptoms, referred to as the Inventory of Stress and Loss (ISL), and explores the differences in the response to stressful situations between general and clinical Spanish populations. Methods: The general sample included 208 participants, and the clinical sample 91 patients with AjD. Results: Results showed that the ISL has high internal consistency. Confirmatory factor analysis showed one single factor, as in the original questionnaire. With respect to concurrent validity, the ISL correlated positively with the STAI-T. Finally, significant differences were found in the total score on the questionnaire between the clinical and general samples, and between men and women in the general sample. Conclusions: Results suggest that the ISL is a simple, useful assessment tool that exhibits good psychometric properties and makes it possible to differentiate normal reactions to a stressful situation from pathological reactions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]