Treating Psychological Trauma in First Responders: A Multi-Modal Paradigm
Abstract
Responding to critical incidents may result in 5.9-22% of first responders developing psychological trauma and posttraumatic stress disorder. These impacts may be physical, mental, and/or behavioral. This population remains at risk, given the daily occurrence of critical incidents. Current treatments, primarily focused on combat and rape victims, have included single and double interventions, which have proven helpful to some but not all victims and one standard of care has remained elusive. However, even though the need is established, research on the treatment interventions of first responders has been limited. Given the multiplicity of impacts from psychological trauma and the inadequacies of responder treatment intervention research thus far, this paper proposes a paradigmatic shift from single/double treatment interventions to a multi-modal approach to first responder victim needs. A conceptual framework based on psychological trauma is presented and possible multi-modal interventions selected from the limited, extant first responder research are utilized to illustrate how the approach would work and to encourage clinical and experimental research into first responder treatment needs.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Paramedics are at increased risk of other workplace incidents such as needlestick injuries.
“Paramedics are also at increased risk of other workplace incidents such as needlestick injuries (Flannery, 2015; Larsson, Berglund, & Ohlsson, 2016; Rice et al., 2014).”
From Understanding the Occupational Factors that Influence Paramedic Health and Wellbeing (2024) · cites this paper as Flannery, 2015
Cites
Neria, Y., DiGrande, L., & Adams, B. G. (2011) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/a0024791 · Cited by 280 · see citing works
Simeon, D., Greenberg, J., Nelson, D., Schmeidler, J., & Hollander, E. (2005) · The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry · doi:10.4088/jcp.v66n0212 · Cited by 84 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Lawn, S., Roberts, L., Willis, E., Couzner, L., Mohammadi, L., & Goble, E. (2020) · BMC Psychiatry · doi:10.1186/s12888-020-02752-4 · Cited by 304 · see citing works
Understanding the Occupational Factors that Influence Paramedic Health and Wellbeing
Betts, C., Stoneley, A., Anderson, J., & Sutton, C. (2024) · International Journal of Paramedicine · doi:10.56068/mnrg8307 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
- Authors
- Flannery, R. B.
- Affiliations
- Cambridge Health Alliance (US)
- Corresponding author
- Flannery, Raymond B.
- ORCID
- Flannery, Raymond B.
- Venue
- Psychiatric Quarterly
- Published
- 2014-11-18
- Volume
- 86
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 261-267
- ISSN
- 0033-2720 (ISSN-L)
- 1573-6709
- OpenAlex
- W1986716852
- Cited by
- 50
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 3
- FWCI
- 1.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Psychiatric Quarterly (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Occupational Health and Performance
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › COVID-19 and Mental Health
- Keywords
- psychological trauma, first responders, post-traumatic stress disorder, critical incidents
- MeSH terms
- Psychological Trauma, Adult, Humans, Emergency Responders
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review