Background: A necessary shift from in-person to remote delivery of psychotherapy (eg, teletherapy, eHealth, videoconferencing) has occurred because of the COVID-19 pandemic. A corollary benefit is a potential fit in terms of the need for equitable and timely access to mental health services in remote and rural locations. Owing to COVID-19, there may be an increase in the demand for timely, virtual delivery of services among trauma-affected populations, including public safety personnel (PSP; eg, paramedics, police, fire, correctional officers), military members, and veterans. There is a lack of evidence on the question of whether digital delivery of trauma-therapies for military members, veterans, and PSP leads to similar outcomes to in-person delivery. Information on barriers and facilitators and recommendations regarding digital-delivery is also scarce. Objective: This study aims to evaluate the scope and quality of peer-reviewed literature on psychotherapeutic digital health interventions delivered remotely to military members, veterans, and PSP and synthesize the knowledge of needs, gaps, barriers to, and facilitators for virtual assessment of and virtual interventions for posttraumatic stress injury. Methods: Relevant studies were identified using MEDLINE (Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online), EMBASE (Excerpta Medica dataBASE), APA (American Psychological Association) PsycINFO, CINAHL (Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature) Plus with Full Text, and Military & Government Collection. For collation, analysis, summarizing, and reporting of results, we used the CASP (Critical Skills Appraisal Program) qualitative checklist, PEDro (Physiotherapy Evidence Database) scale, level of evidence hierarchy, PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews), and narrative synthesis. Results: A total of 38 studies were included in this review. Evidence for the effectiveness of digital delivery of prolonged exposure therapy, cognitive processing therapy, behavioral activation treatment with therapeutic exposure to military members, veterans, and PSP was rated level 1a, whereas evidence for cognitive behavioral therapy was conflicting. The narrative synthesis indicated that virtual delivery of these therapies can be as effective as in-person delivery but may reduce stigma and cost while increasing access to therapy. Issues of risk, safety, potential harm (ie, suicidality, enabling avoidance), privacy, security, and the match among the therapist, modality, and patient warrant further consideration. There is a lack of studies on the influences of gender, racial, and cultural factors that may result in differential outcomes, preferences, and/or needs. An investigation into other therapies that may be suitable for digital delivery is needed. Conclusions: Digital delivery of trauma therapies for military members, veterans, and PSP is a critical area for further research. Although promising evidence exists regarding the effectiveness of digital health within these populations, many questions remain, and a cautious approach to more widespread implementation is warranted.

The work of public safety personnel (PSP) is inherently moral; however, the ability of PSP to do what is good and right can be impeded and frustrated, leading to moral suffering. Left unresolved, moral suffering may develop into moral injury (MI) and potential psychological harm. The current study was designed to examine if MI is relevant to frontline public safety communicators, firefighters, and paramedics. Semi-structured interviews (n = 3) and focus groups (n = 3) were conducted with 19 participants (public safety communicators (n = 2); paramedics (n = 7); and firefighters (n = 10)). Interviews and focus groups were audio-recorded, transcribed, coded, and constantly compared in accordance with the grounded theory method. A conceptual theory of “frustrating moral expectations” emerged, with participants identifying three interrelated properties as being potentially morally injurious: chronic societal problems, impaired systems, and organizational quagmires. Participants navigated their moral frustrations through both integrative and disintegrative pathways, resulting in either needing to escape their moral suffering or transforming ontologically. The current study results support MI as a relevant concept for frontline PSP. Given the seriousness of PSP leaving their profession or committing suicide to escape moral suffering, the importance of the impact of MI on PSP and public safety organizations cannot be ignored or underestimated. Understanding the similarities and differences of morally injurious exposures of frontline PSP may be critical for determining mental health and resilience strategies that effectively protect PSP.

Background: Military members are at elevated risk of operational stress injuries, including posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and moral injury. Although psychotherapy can reduce symptoms, some military members may experience treatment-resistant PTSD. Multimodular motion-assisted memory desensitization and reconsolidation (3MDR) has been introduced as a virtual reality (VR) intervention for military members with PTSD related to military service. The 3MDR intervention incorporates exposure therapy, psychotherapy, eye movement desensitization and reconsolidation, VR, supportive counselling, and treadmill walking. Objective: The objective of this study is to investigate whether 3MDR reduces PTSD symptoms among military members with combat-related treatment-resistant PTSD (TR-PTSD); examine the technology acceptance and usability of the Computer Assisted Rehabilitation ENvironment (CAREN) and 3MDR interventions by Canadian Armed Forces service members (CAF-SMs), veterans, 3MDR clinicians, and operators; and evaluate the impact on clinicians and operators of delivering 3MDR. Methods: This is a mixed-methods waitlist controlled crossover design randomized controlled trial. Participants include both CAF-SMs and veterans (N=40) aged 18-60 years with combat-related TR-PTSD (unsuccessful experience of at least 2 evidence-based trauma treatments). Participants will also include clinicians and operators (N=12) who have been trained in 3MDR and subsequently utilized this intervention with patients. CAF-SMs and veterans will receive 6 weekly 90-minute 3MDR sessions. Quantitative and qualitative data will be collected at baseline and at 1, 3, and 6 months postintervention. Quantitative data collection will include multiomic biomarkers (ie, blood and salivary proteomic and genomic profiles of neuroendocrine, immune-inflammatory mediators, and microRNA), eye tracking, electroencephalography, and physiological data. Data from outcome measures will capture self-reported symptoms of PTSD, moral injury, resilience, and technology acceptance and usability. Qualitative data will be collected from audiovisual recordings of 3MDR sessions and semistructured interviews. Data analysis will include univariate and multivariate approaches, and thematic analysis of treatment sessions and interviews. Machine learning analysis will be included to develop models for the prediction of diagnosis, symptom severity, and treatment outcomes. Results: This study commenced in April 2019 and is planned to conclude in April 2021. Study results will guide the further evolution and utilization of 3MDR for military members with TR-PTSD and will have utility in treating other trauma-affected populations. Conclusions: The goal of this study is to utilize qualitative and quantitative primary and secondary outcomes to provide evidence for the effectiveness and feasibility of 3MDR for treating CAF-SMs and veterans with combat-related TR-PTSD. The results will inform a full-scale clinical trial and stimulate development and adaptation of the protocol to mobile VR apps in supervised clinical settings. This study will add to knowledge of the clinical effectiveness of 3MDR, and provide the first comprehensive analysis of biomarkers, technology acceptance and usability, moral injury, resilience, and the experience of clinicians and operators delivering 3MDR. Trial Registration: ISRCTN Registry 11264368; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN11264368. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/20620

Background: Military members (MMs) and public safety personnel (PSP) are vulnerable to occupational stress injuries because of their job demands. When MMs and PSP transition out of these professions, they may continue to experience mental health challenges. The development and implementation of resilience-building mobile health (mHealth) apps as an emergent mental health intervention platform has allowed for targeted, cost-effective, and easily accessible treatment when in-person therapy may be limited or unavailable. However, current mHealth app development is not regulated, and often lacks both clear evidence-based research and the input of health care professionals. Objective: This study aims to evaluate the evidence-based quality, efficacy, and effectiveness of resilience-building mobile apps targeted toward the MMs, PSP, and veteran populations via a scoping literature review of the current evidence base regarding resilience apps for these populations and an evaluation of free resilience apps designed for use among these populations. Methods: The studies were selected using a comprehensive search of MEDLINE, CINAHL Plus, PsycINFO, SocINDEX, Academic Search Complete, Embase, and Google and were guided by PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews). A narrative synthesis of the resulting papers was performed. The Alberta Rating Index for Apps was used to conduct a review of each of the identified apps. The inclusion criteria consisted of apps that were free to download in either the Google Play Store or the Apple App Store; updated within the last 3 years; available in English and in Canada; and intended for use by MMs, veterans, and PSP. Results: In total, 22 apps met the inclusion criteria for evaluation. The resilience strategies offered by most apps included psychoeducation, mindfulness, cognitive behavioral therapy, and acceptance and commitment therapy. Overall, 50% (11/22) of apps had been tested in randomized controlled trials, 7 (32%) apps had been evaluated using other research methods, and 5 (23%) apps had not been studied. Using the Alberta Rating Index for Apps, the app scores ranged from 37 to 56 out of 72, with higher rated apps demonstrating increased usability and security features. Conclusions: The mHealth apps reviewed are well-suited to providing resilience strategies for MMs, PSP, and veterans. They offer easy accessibility to evidence-based tools while working to encourage the use of emotional and professional support with safety in mind. Although not intended to function as a substitute for professional services, research has demonstrated that mHealth apps have the potential to foster a significant reduction in symptom severity for posttraumatic stress disorder, depression, anxiety, and other mental health conditions. In clinical practice, apps can be used to supplement treatment and provide clients with population-specific confidential tools to increase engagement in the treatment process.

Background—Public safety personnel (PSP) are at heightened risk of developing mental health challenges due to exposures to diverse stressors including potentially psychologically traumatic experiences. An increased focus on protecting PSP mental health has prompted demand for interventions designed to enhance resilience. While hundreds of available interventions are aimed to improve resilience and protect PSPs’ mental health, research evidence regarding intervention effectiveness remains sparse. Methods—Focus groups with PSP elicited a discussion of psychoeducational program content, preferred modes of program delivery, when such training should occur, and to whom it ought to be targeted. Results—The results of thematic analyses suggest that PSP participants feel that contemporary approaches to improving mental health and resilience are lacking. While welcomed, the provision of sporadic one-off mental health and resilience programs by organizations was seen as insufficient, and the available organizational mental health supports were perceived as being questionable. The available programs also left participants feeling insufficiently prepared to deal with personal mental health problems and in discussing mental health concerns with co-workers. Conclusions—Participants reported needing more engaging methods for delivering information, career-long mental health knowledge acquisition, and a systems approach to improve the workplace culture, particularly regarding mental health.

Introduction: In the context of the global pandemic of the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus (COVID-19), healthcare providers (HCPs) have experienced difficult moral and ethical dilemmas. Research is highlighting the importance of moral injury (MI)–a trauma syndrome related to transgressing personal morals and values–in understanding the psychological harm and occupational impairment experienced by HCPs. To date, MI treatments have largely been developed for military personnel and veterans and rely on in-person one-on-one psychotherapy.Purpose: This project aims to explore the feasibility and acceptability of an evidence-informed online Acceptance and Commitment Therapy-based group therapy for MI in HCPs called “Accepting Moral Pain and Suffering for Healthcare Providers” (AMPS-HCP).Method: This feasibility and acceptability study included three separate phases with the first two phases focused on the development of the psychotherapeutic intervention and the third phase focused on the evaluation of the psychotherapeutic intervention. Eight participants (including registered nurses, practical nurses and respiratory therapists) completed seven 90-min sessions in an online group format. The focus of these sessions included ACT and MI psychoeducation and experientials. Qualitative semi-structured interview data was thematically analyzed while demographic and quantitative self-reported outcome data underwent descriptive analysis and non-parametric testing.Results: Results show that the intervention was highly feasible and acceptable to healthcare providers who worked on the frontline during COVID-19. Feasibility (referrals, eligibility, retention, participation engagement) was strong (8 out of 10 participants; 80% vs. desired >70% eligibility) and overall, 80% of participants completed 71% of the intervention. Data further supported the applicability and acceptability of the intervention. Preliminary data suggests that AMPS-HCP may supports HCPs to address MI.Discussion: This study is the first to report on the development and evaluation of an online MI group intervention for registered nurses, registered practical nurses, and respiratory therapists working during COVID-19. Results showed the use of both the online and group components of the intervention were acceptable and feasible during the third wave of COVID-19.