Cultural Adaptation of the PTSD Checklist- Military version (PCL-M) among Army Personnel in Ghana

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-42748/v1

Download PDF

Research

Cultural Adaptation of the PTSD Checklist- Military version (PCL-M) among Army Personnel in Ghana

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-42748/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Background: The type of deployment duties performed by military personnel differs across the world, as some perform combat related deployment, others are sent on peacekeeping duties. Due to the difference in events experienced when performing any of the deployment duties as combat veterans are more likely to encounter traumatic events than peacekeeping duties personnel, the occurrence of PTSD symptoms might differ. The study aims to construct a PTSD Checklist – Military version that is relevant to peacekeeping duty army personnel in Ghana (PCL-M-G), on the basis of the original scale by Weathers and colleagues.

Methods: A cross-sectional study was undertaken with a purposive and convenient sample of 189 army personnel of the Ghana Armed Forces who have returned from peacekeeping duties within the last year as at the time of data collection. The original scale containing 17 items was administered for data collection. Principal Component Analysis (PCA) with Varimax rotation was used in the extraction of factor structures. Cronbach’s Alpha was used to determine the internal consistency of the scale. Bivariate correlation was used to examine the external validity of the scale.

Results: 12 items with three factors, namely, Hyperarousal (Cronbach alpha= .92), Re-experience (Cronbach alpha= .92) and Avoidance (Cronbach alpha= .79) was identified. The three factors altogether explained 77.21% of the total variance. The scale had a significant positive correlation with post deployment transition experience over at most a year (r = .33), as this shows evidence of construct and discriminatory validity. Even though the factors identified in this study are similar to the original scale, there are some differences, indicating the significations of cultural diversity.

Conclusion: The current study of PCL=M among Ghanaian army personnel identified difference with regards to item factor loadings and dimension. It is suggested that the scale would be validated locally before it is used. The PCL-M-G is reliable and valid, therefore, researchers, clinicians as well as other health workers can cautiously use this scale when assessing PTSD symptoms among Ghanaian military personnel.

Internal Medicine

Validation

PCL-M-G

Ghana Armed Forces

Military work in general can be stressful for most personnel, however, the inclusion of deployment duties poses additional challenges for military personnel with respect to the development of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) symptoms as well as relating well with family members (Erbes, Meis, Polusny & Compton, 2011; Meis, Erbes, Polusny & Compton, 2010; Milliken Auchterlonie & Hoge, 2007). Post- traumatic stress disorder can be defined as a form of psychiatric disorder that occurs after an individual experiences any form of traumatic or non- traumatic event (Mol, Arntz, Metsemakers, Dinant, Vilters-van Montfort & Knottnerus, 2005). This indicates that people can develop PTSD symptoms even after encountering non-traumatic event such as divorce, unemployment, among others. There have been studies on military deployment that have linked PTSD symptoms to combat related stressors (Keen, Hutter, Niles & Krinsley, 2008; Weathers, Litz, Herman, Huska & Keane, 1993). However, other studies have also shown that military personnel can develop PTSD symptoms after from post deployment experiences which are most non traumatic (Michel, Lundin & Larsson, 2003; Sarren et al., 2010).

The experience of military personnel upon their return home is as significant as exposure to combat or deployment stressors as some studies have shown significant similarities with regards to the influence of post deployment transition and combat experience on the psychological well-being of soldiers (Afful, 2017; Bonanno et al., 2012) with one study findings suggesting that mental health of military personnel were affected the most by post deployment stressors than deployment or combat related events (Michel et al., 2003). It is therefore relevant to assess PTSD symptoms in the context of post-deployment military duties.

The Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Checklist- Military version(PCL-M) has become the most universally used instrument to measure PTSD symptoms with regards to military deployment. The PCL-M is a self-report instrument that was developed by Weathers et al. (1993) to measure the extent to which military personnel have experience any PTSD symptoms, namely, reexperiencing, avoidance and hyperarousal. The PCL-M is made up of 17 items and has been shown to have adequate levels or reliability and validity (Weather et al., 1993). It has been widely used in the Western world, particularly in the United States America and has shown an acceptable level of reliability across various studies (Forbes, Creamer & Biddle, 2001, Keen et al., 2008, Weathers et al., 1993). For most of these studies, PTSD symptoms has been linked with combat duty operations with less focus on post-peacekeeping operation experiences. However, deployment duties performed by most if not all Ghanaian soldiers are in the form of peacekeeping operations. Stressors related to combat operations are relatively different from post-peacekeeping operation related stressors. Therefore, using a scale that was originally designed using war veterans for service men returning from peacekeeping operations cannot be deemed entirely valid and reliable. Therefore, it is necessary to examine how PTSD symptoms correlates with post deployment experiences with regards to peacekeeping operations. No such measure has been developed specifically for Africa and Ghana to be precise. There is therefore the need to develop a new scale or adapt and validate an already existing one. It is more practical as well as economical to adapt and already existing scale as this also allows one to compare data from similar studies around the world.

Even though the scale has been widely used in studies across the world, it has not been validated in Ghana or Africa at large. Cross cultural adaptation and validation of the PCL-M for Ghana would indicate a significant progress in the assessment of PTSD symptoms in relation to post deployment transition among army personnel in Ghana as well as aid in enhancing collaborative studies with regards to comparing Ghanaian studies with others. In view of this, the aim of the current study was to validate the psychometric properties of the PCL-M in Ghana; assess the factor structure of the instrument as well as examine the construct validity or predictive power of the PCL-M among army personnel in Ghana by relating it to post deployment transition among army personnel who have returned from peacekeeping duties.

Sample and Participants

A total of one hundred and eighty-nine (N = 189) army personnel who have returned from peacekeeping operations were invited to partake in the study. Participants involved in the study were from five military barracks in the Greater Accra Region, namely, Flagstaff House barracks, Burma Camp barracks, El-Wak barracks, 37 Military Hospital barracks and Tema Michel Camp barracks. Participants were presented with questionnaires on PTSD symptoms as well as Post Deployment Transition and were all advised to respond to items on each scale. In the initial MPhil research project, 92 out 134 army personnel involved in the study have returned from peacekeeping operations. For the purpose of validating the cultural adaptation of the PDSS, an additional 97 army personnel were included in the study out 100 invited personnel. All personnel involved in the study were purposively and conveniently sampled. Demographic data obtained from the participants include age, gender, military status, educational level, years of service, number of children, religion, deployment status and post deployment duration.

The purpose of the study was explained to all participants and personnel were asked to a sign a consent form before data collection. Guidelines were given to participants with regards to responding to items on the questionnaire and were encouraged to draw the attention of the researcher or the research assistants when needed. For some, there was the need to explain some of the items in twi (local language) in order for them to be able to respond to them. Assurance was given to participants with respect to confidentiality and anonymity of responses while emphasizing the purely academic purpose of the study. Some of the questionnaires were given to participants and retrieved later on another day while others fill the questionnaire on the spot.

Instruments

Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Checklist – Military Version (PCL- M)

The PTSD Checklist- Military Version (PCL-M) was used to measure PTSD symptoms among participants. This scale addresses problems and complaints that military personnel face in response to a stressful military experience with regards to B symptoms (reexperiencing), C symptoms (avoidance/numbness) and D symptoms (hyper arousal). It has seventeen items which are measured on a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 to 5 (1 = Not at all, 2 = A little bit, 3 = Moderately, 4 = Quite a bit and 5 = Extremely) with a higher score indicating higher psychological challenges. The minimum and maximum score of the scale are 17 and 85 respectively. The original scale has demonstrated adequate internal consistency .93 as well as test-retest reliability of .96 (Weathers et al., 1993). The three subscales in the original scale, namely, B symptoms, C symptoms and D symptoms recorded internal consistency of .92, .92 and .97 respectively.

Human Issues Scale – Homecoming Attitudes (HIS- HA)

Homecoming Attitudes, which is a subscale of the Human Issues Scale was used to address issues that are of relevance to homecoming experiences of military personnel such as readjustment problems, positive attitudes/engagement and negative attitudes/disengagement (Murphy & Farley, 2000). It is a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 to 5 (Never = 1, Rarely = 2, Sometimes = 3, Frequently = 4 and Very frequently = 5) with a higher score indicating greater transition difficulty. It is a 23 item scale, however, item 18 is a double barrel item and therefore was divided into two separate item in this study, given the scale a total of 24 items. The scale has a minimum and maximum score ranging from 24 to 120 respectively. In a study conducted by Thompson and Blais (2000) the subscales in the scale recorded a Cronbach alpha ranging from .63 to .78.

Analytic Strategy

The Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 21 software program was employed in the analysis of data. Initially, descriptive analysis which includes Means, Standard Deviations, Frequencies and Percentages were examined as a form of data cleaning technique. Afterwards, in order to identify patterns, a Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and varimux rotation were also conducted. All items on the PDSSS were entered on an equal footing. In the initial PCA analysis, three (3) components were extracted with eigenvalues greater than 1 that would explain 70.45% of total variance. The prescribed PCA criteria used required that Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy (MSA) must be greater than 0.5 for each item and also the group of items for them to be included in further analysis. For the group of items included in the initial analysis, total MSA recorded was .93 with a significant Bartlett test of Sphericity probability of p < .001. None of the individual items had MSA of less than .50 however one item had a communality value of less than .50 and four items had loadings higher than .40 on more than one component. These variables were therefore not included in subsequently conducted analysis. From this step by step designated criteria, 12 items were used in the final PCA analysis. The scales internal consistencies were analyzed by calculating the Cronbach’s alpha and item-total correlation coefficients.

Descriptive Data

Out of a total number of 189 army personnel who participated in the study, 132 were males (69.8%) and 57 were females (39.2%). 3 participants were between the ages of 20–29, 128 participants were between the ages of 30–39 and 57 participants were aged 40 years and above representing 1.6%, 68.3% and 30.2% of the total number of participants. With regards to army ranks, personnel with the rank of staff sergeant constituted the highest number of participants (n = 39) and individuals with the rank of Warrant Officer Class One had the least number of participants (n = 18). Most of the participants (n = 81) reported Secondary Education as their highest form of education with a total of 14 participants having a Tertiary degree. Also, 141 participants involved in the study had spent 20 years or less in the service, representing 74.6% of the total participants involved in the study. In addition, all the army personnel in this study had at least one child as well as associated themselves with a formal religion with 141 personnel associating themselves with the Christian religion and 48 being Muslims. In addition, all participants had returned from deployment and have been at home for not more than a year as at the time of data collection with majority of them having spent between 6–9 months at home post deployment.

Inferential Analysis

Construction of Ghana Version of the PTSD Checklist-Military Version (PCL-M-G)

From the PCA analysis, a 12-item scale was identified with an internal consistency .92 that consisted of 3 main factors, namely, hyperarousal (5 items), reexperiencing (5 items) and avoidance (2 items) with each accounting for 54.65%, 13.39% and 9.17% of variance respectively. Factor 1 (Hyperarousal/D symptoms) recorded an internal consistency of .92, Factor 2 (reexperiencing/B symptoms) recorded an internal consistency of .92 and Factor 3 (avoidance/C symptoms) recorded an internal consistency of .79. In the final analysis, the total scale accounted for 77.21% of the total variance (Table 1) as well as an MSA of .91 with a significant Bartlett test of Sphericity probability of < .001. The arrangement of the factors identified in this study differ from the original scale, thus, in the original scale, B symptom (reexperiencing), C symptom (Avoidance/numbing) and D symptom (hyperarousal) indicates factor 1, 2 and 3 respectively. In addition, a moderate inter-item correlation was observed between the factors (Table 2). The scale’s external validity was examined by assessing the relationship between the scale and post deployment transition (Table 3). Each of the sub scales as well as the total scale indicate scores that had significant positive relationship with post deployment transition challenges.

Table 1: Factor Structure and Factor loading on the PCL-M-G using Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization

Components

M SD 1 2 3

FACTOR 1: HYPERAROUSAL

Trouble falling or staying asleep? 3.07 1.23 .830

Feeling irritable or having angry outbursts? 3.08 1.19 .747

Having difficulty concentrating? 2.94 1.29 .818

Being “super alert” or watchful on guard? 3.08 1.26 .799

Feeling jumpy or easily startled? 3.06 1.30 .806

FACTOR 2: RE-EXPERIENCE

Repeated, disturbing memories, thoughts, 3.17 1.16 .748

Or images of a stressful military experience?

Repeated, disturbing dreams of a stressful 3.11 1.19 .798

experience?

Suddenly acting or feeling as if a stressful 3.14 1.22 .881

Military experience were happening again

(as if you were reliving it)

Feeling very upset when something reminded 3.19 1.21 .789

you of a stressful military experience?

Having physical reactions (e.g., heart pounding, 3.10 1.21 .779

Trouble breathing, or sweating) when something

reminded you of a stressful military experience?

FACTOR 3: AVOIDANCE

Avoid thinking about or talking about a 3.40 1.07 .865

stressful military experience or avoid

having feelings related to it?

Avoid activities or talking about a stressful 3.28 1.05 .913

military experience or avoid having feelings

related to it?

Table 2: Inter-item Correlation Matrix of the factors of the PCL-M-G scale

Factors Total scale

Factor 1 (Hyperarousal) .69

Factor 2 (Re-experience) .70

Factor 3 (Avoidance) .65

Table 3: Correlation between the PCL-M-G scale and post deployment transition or experience

Source Hyperarousal Re-experience Avoidance Total scale

Re-experience .672**

(n= 187)

Avoidance .373** .318**

(n= 187)

Total scale .893** .910** .366**

(n= 186)

Post deployment transition .269** .329** .837** .326**

(n= 181)

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)

The current study was conducted to examine how practical as well appropriate the PTSD Checklist-Military version (PCL-M) is among active duty army personnel of the Ghana Armed Forces. Previously studies that have tested the psychometric properties of the scale have largely involved United States male veterans, disaster workers, New York City residents, female breast cancer survivors as well as other populations (Keen at al., 2008; Palmien & Weathers, Difede & King, 2007; Ruggiero, Rheingold, Resnick, Kilpatrick & Galea, 2006; Schinka, Brown, Borenstein & Mortimer, 2007). The scale as well as its sub scales recorded adequate reliability as well as validity. However, based on literature reviewed, the scale’s factorial dimension has never been validated in the region of Africa, specifically, Ghana and this study is the first of its kind to do that.

Findings from the study is consistent with that of the original study as well as other related studies as three factors, namely, B symptoms/reexperiencing, C symptoms/avoidance/numbing and D symptoms/hyperarousal were identified as being associated with Ghanaian army personnel who have returned from peacekeeping duties and have been home for not more than one year. However, there is a difference in the arrangements of the factors as identified by the present study as D symptoms loaded on Factor 1, B symptoms loaded on Factor 2 and D symptoms loaded on Factor 3. In addition, even though similar to the original PCL-M scale, this study recorded five items on the B symptoms and C symptoms each, only two items were retained on the C symptoms and both items measured avoidance only. This missing items on the scale implies cultural difference with respect to the experience of PTSD symptoms indicating that such items on the original scale are not relevant in the context of Ghanaian military personnel.

Factor 1 which was assigned the name “Hyperarousal” is consistent the ones Keen et al. (2008) in their study that examined the psychometric properties of the scale labelled as “Cluster D (Hyperarousal)”. This factor was labelled as “hyperarousal” because items loaded reflect hyperarousal symptoms that are related to PTSD occurrences among military personnel. and “B symptoms” respectively. Also, all the items under Factor 2 in this study was labelled as “Re-experience” as this is linked with similar items under the sub-scale “Cluster B(Reexperiencing)”. This factor was assigned the name re-experience as items loaded reflects reexperiencing events that are related to PTSD occurrences among military personnel. These similarly identified factors shows that, the experience of PTSD symptoms with regards to hyperarousal and reexperiencing in Ghanaian army personnel are similar to their counterparts in the United States of America. The Ghanaian culture coupled with the military culture, are cultures that do not encourage military personnel show any sign of weakness and be act “macho” all the time. Showing any signs of psychological problems with regards to relieving past events as well being super alert all the time, especially in Ghana is seen as a sign of weakness, Therefore the identification of these PTSD symptoms among Ghanaian military personnel is an eye opener and very interesting as well.

The term “Avoidance” was given to the third factor as this factor share some similarities with that of the sub scale labelled “Cluster C(Avoidance/Numbing)” in the scale’s psychometric study by keen et al. (2008). However, in this study, out of seven items identified by Keen et al. (2008) two items (Avoid thinking about or talking about a stressful military experience or avoid having feelings related to it? and Avoid activities or talking about stressful military experience or avoid feelings related to it?) loaded on the factor. This factor was labelled as “Avoidance” since items reflected military personnel’s intentions to avoid reflecting on their past experiences. It was also observed that none of the items that measured numbness loaded on this factor. This is indicative on the cultural difference with respect to PTSD symptoms relating to numbing one’s feelings. In other words, the numbing of ones’ feelings that was identified among United States of America war veterans does not apply to Ghanaian military personnel. This finding from the study could be as a result of Ghanaian army personnel being involved in peacekeeping operations. In other words, as oppose to combat related operations where soldiers are likely to encounter more traumatic events and therefore likely to numb their feelings in order not to relapse, soldiers on peacekeeping duties are less likely to experience any form of combat related trauma. In view of this, not experiencing any form of combat related trauma by Ghanaians army personnel unlike their combat veterans involved in Keen et al. (2008) study, they are less likely to show any PTSD symptoms relating to numbness trauma-related amnesia, diminished interest, detachment, restricted affect and foreshortened future. In addition, participants involved in this study were active duty personnel as opposed to veteran participants in Keen et al. (2008), therefore, the Ghanaian soldiers are less likely to suffer a numbness symptom like foreshortened future since they still remain in service after returning from deployment operations unlike the veterans. These factors explain why the Ghanaian army personnel involved in this study avoidance symptoms only but not numbness and this indicated relevance of cultural difference with respect to PTSD symptoms among military personnel.

The external validity of the scale was assessed by examining its relationship with post deployment transition challenges or experiences. By conducting a bivariate correlation, it was observed that factors that were identified in this study represents PTSD symptoms among military personnel as well as had a significant positive relationship with post deployment transition experiences. This indicates that PTSD symptoms among Ghanaian army personnel is an essential predictor of the how successful personnel will be with regards to their transition from deployment duties to being at home. In order, the higher the levels of PTSD symptoms among personnel, the more likely that they would experiences challenges transiting to daily lives at home and vice versa. In addition, the less challenges experienced by personnel when transiting back home after deployment, the lees likely that they would develop PTSD symptoms and vice versa.

The present study’s most significant finding has to do with the identification of important cultural difference with respect to the experience of PTSD symptoms among military personnel. It is therefore indicative that using a non-validate PCL-M in studies that involve army personnel in Ghana or Africa at large can result in findings that are not representative of the culture or population in question. Therefore, this paper encourages researchers and other stakeholders of the military organization to make use of the 12-item PCLM-G in Ghana since is culturally appropriate for use among army personnel of the Ghana Armed Forces. An adequate proportion of variance (77.21%), a high internal consistency (.92) as well as a satisfactory external validity was recorded by the scale. Nonetheless, care should be taken when interpreting this study’s findings since participants were selected purposively and conveniently from army personnel in Greater Accra Region of Ghana only and therefore generalizing it to all military personnel of the Ghana Armed Forces, especially, Air Force and Navy personnel who are also involved in peacekeeping duties in Ghana, would not be appropriate.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study is an extension of the author’s MPhil research project which was approved by the Ethics Committee on Humanities (ECH) of the University of Ghana and written informed consent was acquired from every individual who participated in the study.

Consent for publication

Not applicable

Availability of data and materials

All datasets used in this study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Competing interests

The author declares that he has no competing interest.

Funding

The current research had no form of funding from any agency.

Authors’ Contributions

Not applicable

Acknowledgements

Not applicable

Afful J. The effects of combat and reintegration experiences on the mental health of.
post-deployed soldiers of the Ghana Armed Forces. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. 2017; University of Ghana.
Bonanno GA, Mancini AD, Horton JL, Powell TM, LeardMann CA, Boyko EJ, Smith TC. Trajectories of trauma symptoms and resilience in deployed US military service members: Prospective cohort study. The British Journal of Psychiatry. 2012. doi:10.1192/bjp.bp.111.096552.
Erbes CR, Meis LA, Polusny MA, Compton JS. Couple adjustment and posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms in National Guard Veterans of the Iraq War. J Fam Psychol. 2011;2(4):479–87.
Forbes D, Creamer M, Biddle D. The validity of the PTSD checklist as a measure of symptomatic change in combat-related PTSD. Behav Res Ther. 2001;39:8:977–86.
Keen SW, Kutter CJ, Niles BL, Krinsley KE. Psychometric properties of PTSD Checklist in sample of male veterans. Journal of Rehabilitation Research Development. 2008;45:465–74.
Meis LA, Erbes CR, Polusny MA, Compton JS. Intimate relationships among returning soldiers: The mediating and moderating roles of negative emotionality, PTSD symptoms, and alcohol problems. J Trauma Stress. 2010;23(5):564–72.
Michel PO, Lundin T, Larsson G. Stress reactions among Swedish Peacekeeping Soldiers serving in Bosnia: A longitudinal Study. J Trauma Stress. 2003;16(6):589–93.
Milliken CS, Auchterlonie JL, Hoge CW. Longitudinal assessment of mental health problems among active and reserve component soldiers returning from the Iraq war. J Am Med Assoc. 2007;298:2141–8.
Mol SSL, Arntz A, Metsemakers JFM, Dinant GJ, Vilters-van Montfort PAP, Knottnerus JA. Symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder after non-traumatic events: Evidence from an open population study. The British Journal of Psychiatry. 2005;186(6):494–9.
Murphy PJ, Farley KMJ. Morale, cohesion and confidence in leadership. The Human Command. 2000; 311–331.
Palmieri PA, Weathers FW, Difede J, King DW. Confirmatory factor analysis of the PTSD Checklist and the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale in disaster workers exposed to the World Trade Center Ground Zero. J Abnorm Psychol. 2007;116(2):329–41.
Ruggiero KJ, Rheingold AA, Resnick HS, Kilpatrick DG, Galea S. Comparison of two widely used PTSD-screening instruments: Implications for public mental health planning. J Trauma Stress. 2006;19(5):699–707.
Sareen J, Stein MB, Thoresen S, Belik SL, Zamorski M, Asmundson GJG. Is peacekeeping peaceful? A systematic review. Can J Psychiat. 2010;55(7):464–72.
Schinka JA, Brown LM, Borenstein AR, Mortimer JA. Confirmatory factor analysis of the PTSD checklist in the elderly. J Trauma Stress. 2007;20(3):281–89.
Thompson M, Blais L. Psychometric assessment and refinement of the homecoming issues inventory of the Human Dimensions of Operations (HDO) project. Defence R. & D Canada. 2000; 1–77.
Weathers FW, Litz BT, Herman DS, Huska JA, Keane TM. The PTSD Checklist (PCL): Reliability, validity, and diagnostic utility. Poster presented at the annual meeting of the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies, San Antonio, TX. 1993.

Download PDF

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Cultural Adaptation of the PTSD Checklist- Military version (PCL-M) among Army Personnel in Ghana

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Introduction

Method

Sample and Participants

Instruments

Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Checklist – Military Version (PCL- M)

Human Issues Scale – Homecoming Attitudes (HIS- HA)

Analytic Strategy

Results

Descriptive Data

Inferential Analysis

Construction of Ghana Version of the PTSD Checklist-Military Version (PCL-M-G)

Discussions

Conclusion

Declarations

References

Status:

Version 1