Mental health professionals’ attitudes toward patients with PTSD and depression

Figures & data

Table 1 Sociodemographic and professional characteristics of the two samples

	Mental health professionals specializing in psychotraumatology (n=226)	Residents specializing in general psychiatry (n=112)
Sex
Female	147 (65.0%)	52 (46.4%)
Male	73 (32.3%)	59 (52.7%)
Missing	6 (2.3%)	1 (0.9%)
Age (years)	M=50.5 (SD=9.6) Range: 24–79	M=35.8 (SD=7.1) Range: 25–66
Professional education (multiple entries)
Medicine	98 (43.4%)	108 (96.4%)
Psychology	92 (40.7%)	1 (0.9%)
Social work	15 (6.6%)	0 (0%)
Other education	28 (12.4%)	4 (3.6%)
Missing values	5 (2.2%)	0 (0%)
Years of experience with mentally ill patients
0–4	27 (11.9%)	88 (78.6%)
5–9	31 (13.7%)	17 (15.2%)
10 or more	160 (70.8%)	7 (6.3%)
Missing values	8 (3.5%)	0 (0%)
Clinical experience with PTSD patients
None	19 (8.4%)	28 (25.0%)
1–5 cases	48 (21.2%)	64 (57.1%)
6 or more cases	136 (60.2%)	19 (17.0%)
Missing values	23 (10.2%)	1 (0.9%)
Clinical experience with depressed patients
None	14 (6.2%)	4 (3.6%)
1–5 cases	14 (6.2%)	14 (12.5%)
6 or more cases	178 (78.8%)	93 (83.0%)
Missing values	20 (8.8%)	1 (0.9%)

Table 2 Attitudes toward patients with depression or PTSD in mental health professionals specializing in psychotraumatology (N=226)

	Diagnostic condition		ANOVA
Attitude variable	Depression (n=117) M (SD)	PTSD (n=109) M (SD)	F	df	p
Prosocial reaction toward patient	10.17 (1.97)	11.13 (1.95)	13.35	1, 200	<0.001
Stereotypes; patient estimated as
Dependent	5.37 (1.73)	4.63 (1.80)	9.57	1, 213	<0.01
Autonomous	4.23 (1.62)	4.79 (1.88)	5.65	1, 217	<0.05
Responsibility attributed	10.46 (2.00)	13.02 (2.59)	61.59	1, 196	<0.001
Case appraisal	13.24 (3.02)	15.70 (2.70)	39.97	1, 216	<0.001
Expected quality of therapeutic relationship	21.56 (3.52)	21.74 (3.32)	0.14	1, 200	ns
Prognosis with professional help	1.95 (0.89)	2.13 (0.98)	1.78	1, 213	ns
Prognosis without professional help	4.53 (1.14)	4.87 (1.08)	5.11	1, 209	<0.05

Maximum range of the sum scores: prosocial reaction 3–15 (3=not at all likeable; 15=very likeable); dependency 2–10 (2=not at all dependent; 10=very dependent); autonomy 2–10 (2=not at all autonomous; 10=very autonomous); responsibility 4–20 (4=one's own fault; 20=guilt of others); case appraisal 4–20 (4=not at all interesting; 20=very interesting); therapeutic relationship 6–30 (6=very poor relationship; 30=very good relationship); prognosis 1–6 (1=good prognosis; 6=poor prognosis).

Table 3 Attitudes toward patients with depression or PTSD in psychiatry residents (N=112)

	Diagnostic condition		ANOVA
Attitude variable	Depression (n=56) M (SD)	PTSD (n=56) M (SD)	F	df	p
Prosocial reaction toward patient	9.52 (1.58)	9.50 (1.90)	0.003	1, 108	ns
Stereotypes; patient estimated as
Dependent	5.16 (1.75)	5.18 (1.61)	0.003	1, 110	ns
Autonomous	4.20 (1.22)	4.50 (1.60)	1.23	1, 109	ns
Responsibility attributed	10.43 (1.88)	12.02 (2.57)	13.78	1, 108	<0.001
Case appraisal	11.75 (2.77)	13.20 (3.22)	6.50	1, 110	<0.05
Expected quality of therapeutic relationship	21.55 (2.76)	20.23 (2.69)	6.31	1, 106	<0.05
Prognosis with professional help	2.11 (0.68)	2.48 (0.99)	5.46	1, 110	<0.05
Prognosis without professional help	4.57 (1.16)	4.84 (1.10)	1.52	1, 109	ns

Maximum range of the sum scores: prosocial reaction 3–15 (3=not at all likeable; 15=very likeable); dependency 2–10 (2=not at all dependent; 10=very dependent); autonomy 2–10 (2=not at all autonomous; 10=very autonomous); responsibility 4–20 (4=one's own fault; 20=guilt of others); case appraisal 4–20 (4=not at all interesting; 20=very interesting); therapeutic relationship 6–30 (6=very poor relationship; 30=very good relationship); prognosis 1–6 (1=good prognosis; 6=poor prognosis).

Table 4 Differences in attitudes between professionals specializing in psychotraumatology and psychiatry residents (N=338)

	Group of participants		ANOVA
Attitude variable	Psychotraumatology group (n=226) M (SD)	Psychiatry residents (n=112) M (SD)	F	df	p
Prosocial reaction toward patient	10.6 (2.01)	9.5 (1.74)	24.715	1, 330	<0.001
Stereotypes; patient estimated as
Dependent	5.0 (1.80)	5.2 (1.67)	0.614	1, 325	ns
Autonomous	4.5 (1.77)	4.4 (1.42)	0.537	1, 328	ns
Responsibility attributed	11.7 (2.62)	11.2 (2.37)	2.249	1, 306	ns
Case appraisal	14.4 (3.12)	12.5 (3.08)	29.622	1, 328	<0.001
Expected quality of therapeutic relationship	21.6 (3.42)	20.9 (2.79)	3.782	1, 308	ns
Prognosis with professional help	2.0 (0.94)	2.3 (0.87)	5.853	1, 325	<0.05
Prognosis without professional help	4.7 (1.12)	4.7 (1.13)	0.002	1, 320	ns

Maximum range of the sum scores: prosocial reaction 3–15 (3=not at all likeable; 15=very likeable); dependency 2–10 (2=not at all dependent; 10=very dependent); autonomy 2–10 (2=not at all autonomous; 10=very autonomous); responsibility 4–20 (4=one's own fault; 20=guilt of others); case appraisal 4–20 (4=not at all interesting; 20=very interesting); therapeutic relationship 6–30 (6=very poor relationship; 30=very good relationship); prognosis 1–6 (1=good prognosis; 6=poor prognosis).

Table 5 Correlations between therapist variables and attitudes toward patients (N=338)

	Prosocial reactions	Dependency	Autonomy	Responsibility	Case appraisal	Therapeutic relationship	Prognosis with help	Prognosis without help
Diagnostic condition	0.15**	–0.14*	0.14**	0.43***	0.32***	–0.05	0.13*	0.14*
Age of participant	0.29***	–0.04	–0.04	0.08	0.23***	0.19***	–0.02	–0.03
Female sex of participant	0.10	–0.02	–0.01	–0.01	0.10	–0.08	–0.01	0.03
Social desirability	0.12*	–0.02	–0.09	–0.11*	0.07	0.04	0.00	0.05
Years of clinical experience	0.28***	0.00	0.01	0.11	0.24***	0.22***	–0.12*	0.01
Medical education	–0.06	–0.04	0.00	0.09	–0.09	0.05	0.09	–0.05

Pearson correlations. Diagnostic condition: 1=depression; 2=PTSD. Social desirability: 0–8 (0=very low; 8=very high). Medical education: 0=no (other education); 1=yes. For attitude variables, cf. Table 4.

*p≤0.05, *p≤0.01, ***p≤0.001.