The American Psychiatric Association (APA) has updated its Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, including with new information specifically addressed to individuals in the European Economic Area. As described in the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, this website utilizes cookies, including for the purpose of offering an optimal online experience and services tailored to your preferences.

Please read the entire Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. By closing this message, browsing this website, continuing the navigation, or otherwise continuing to use the APA's websites, you confirm that you understand and accept the terms of the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, including the utilization of cookies.

×
Letter to the EditorFull Access

New DSM-IV Diagnosis of Acute Stress Disorder

To the Editor: In criticizing the acute stress disorder diagnosis, Dr. Marshall et al. justifiably echoed previously expressed concerns (1). We question the evidence on which some of their conclusions are based. The retrospective studies of acute trauma reactions that they cite are flawed because mood-related memory bias renders questionable the accuracy of retrospective reports. Moreover, only one of the three prospective studies referred to employed a validated diagnostic measure of acute stress disorder (2). The authors did not cite four key prospective studies that found that between 78% and 83% of individuals with acute stress disorder subsequently developed PTSD (35; Brewin et al., 1999). The evidence indicates that the acute stress disorder diagnosis can identify a significant proportion of acutely traumatized individuals who develop PTSD. This is a useful development because early intervention with those diagnosed as having acute stress disorder can prevent the development of PTSD (6).

We agree that the current emphasis placed on acute dissociative responses is flawed. Recent studies (although not cited by Dr. Marshall et al.) have demonstrated that there are multiple pathways to PTSD and that most trauma survivors who display severe acute stress reactions without dissociation can develop PTSD (3, 4). The assertion by Dr. Marshall et al. that the diagnosis of PTSD should apply immediately after a trauma is problematic because it potentially “pathologizes” transient stress reactions. Discarding the acute stress disorder diagnosis now may also be an overreaction that “throws the baby out with the bath water.” Although the available evidence does not support the current criteria for acute stress disorder, prospective studies are beginning to identify constellations of acute symptoms that can predict PTSD with greater accuracy. Rather than prematurely deciding the worth of the acute stress disorder diagnosis at this time, it is important to conduct prospective studies that employ standardized measures that will define the optimal criteria for acute stress disorder and determine whether it deserves to survive in DSM-V.

References

1. Bryant RA, Harvey AG: Acute stress disorder: a critical review of diagnostic issues. Clin Psychol Rev 1997; 17:757–773Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar

2. Bryant RA, Harvey AG: Relationship between acute stress disorder and posttraumatic stress disorder following mild traumatic brain injury. Am J Psychiatry 1998; 155:625–629LinkGoogle Scholar

3. Harvey AG, Bryant RA: Relationship between acute stress disorder and posttraumatic stress disorder: a prospective evaluation of motor vehicle accident survivors. J Consult Clin Psychol 1998; 66:507–512Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar

4. Harvey AG, Bryant RA: The relationship between acute stress disorder and posttraumatic stress disorder: a two-year prospective evaluation. J Consult Clin Psychol 1999; 67:985–988Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar

5. Harvey AG, Bryant RA: Two-year prospective evaluation of the relationship between acute stress disorder and posttraumatic stress disorder following mild traumatic brain injury. Am J Psychiatry 2000; 157:626–628LinkGoogle Scholar

6. Bryant RA, Sackville T, Dang ST, Moulds M, Guthrie R: Treating acute stress disorder: an evaluation of cognitive behavior therapy and supportive counseling techniques. Am J Psychiatry 1999; 156:1780–1786Google Scholar