Cited by 964Posttraumatic Stress Disorder ResearchPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology ResearchTraumatic Brain Injury Research

Pilot study of secondary prevention of posttraumatic stress disorder with propranolol

Pitman, Roger K., Sanders, Kathy M., Zusman, Randall M., Healy, Anna R., Cheema, Farah, Lasko, Natasha B., Cahill, Larry, Orr, Scott P.·2002·Biological Psychiatry

Abstract

Background Preclinical considerations suggest that treatment with a beta-adrenergic blocker following an acute psychologically traumatic event may reduce subsequent posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms. This pilot study addressed this hypothesis. Methods Patients were randomized to begin, within 6 hours of the event, a 10-day course of double-blind propranolol (n = 18) versus placebo (n = 23) 40 mg four times daily. Results The mean (SD) 1-month Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS) score of 11 propranolol completers was 27.6 (15.7), with one outlier 5.2 SDs above the others' mean, and of 20 placebo completers, 35.5 (21.5), t = 1.1, df = 29, p =.15. Two propranolol patients' scores fell above, and nine below, the placebo group's median, p =.03 (sign test). Zero of eight propranolol, but six of 14 placebo, patients were physiologic responders during script-driven imagery of the traumatic event when tested 3 months afterward, p =.04 (all p values one-tailed). Conclusions These pilot results suggest that acute, posttrauma propranolol may have a preventive effect on subsequent PTSD.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0006-3223(01)01279-3

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Evidence is inconclusive on whether propranolol differs clinically importantly from placebo in reducing PTSD diagnosis at one month (k=1; n=41; RR=1.14, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.35).

    “The evidence is inconclusive and so it is not possible to determine if there is a clinically important difference between propranolol and placebo on reducing the likelihood of having a PTSD diagnosis at 1 month (k=1; n=41; RR=1.14, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.35).”
  • Limited evidence suggests placebo may be better than propranolol in reducing PTSD diagnosis at three months (k=1; n=41; RR=1.28, 95% CI 0.69 to 2.38).

    “There is limited evidence suggesting a difference favouring placebo over propranolol on reducing the likelihood of having a PTSD diagnosis at 3 months' follow-up (k=1; n=41; RR=1.28, 95% CI 0.69 to 2.38).18”
  • Beneficial effects of combining propranolol with trauma reactivation have been reported in a recent small randomised controlled trial and three earlier pilot studies; however, negative outcomes have also been reported.

    “Beneficial effects of combining propranolol with trauma reactivation have been reported in a recent small randomised controlled trial (Brunet et al., 2018) as well as in three earlier pilot studies (Brunet et al., 2008;Pitman et al., 2002;Vaiva et al., 2003); however, negative outcomes have also been reported (Hoge et al., 2012;Wood et al., 2015).”
  • Administration of propranolol (a beta-adrenergic antagonist) in the hours after trauma exposure limits subsequent reactivity to reminders.

    “administration of propranolol (a beta-adrenergic antagonist) in the hours after trauma exposure limits subsequent reactivity to reminders 68”
  • The initial trial of propranolol found that it resulted in reduced subsequent reactivity to trauma reminders, even though it did not reduce the severity of PTSD.

    “As noted above, the initial trial of propranolol found that it resulted in reduced subsequent reactivity to trauma reminders, even though it did not reduce the severity of PTSD 68 .”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pitman, R. K., Sanders, K. M., Zusman, R. M., Healy, A. R., Cheema, F., Lasko, N. B., Cahill, L., & Orr, S. P.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • University of California, Irvine (US)
Corresponding author
Pitman, Roger K.
Venue
Biological Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2002-01
Volume
51
Issue
2
Pages
189-192
ISSN
0006-3223 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2026396276
Cited by
964
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 32 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 41 · 2018: 65 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 30 · 2015: 51 · 2014: 51 · 2013: 49 · 2012: 53
FWCI
54.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Biological Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5r01mh058671-02)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (MH58671)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Traumatic Brain Injury Research
Keywords
post-traumatic stress disorder, propranolol, beta-blockers, secondary prevention, early intervention, script-driven imagery, physiological reactivity, Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale
MeSH terms
Accidents, Traffic, Adult, Arousal, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Double-Blind Method, Drug Administration Schedule, Emergency Service, Hospital, Female, Humans, Male, Pilot Projects, Propranolol, Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic

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