Can digital tools help people with PTSD symptoms? An integrative literature review
Mustikkamaa, Anniina (2025)
2025
All rights reserved. This publication is copyrighted. You may download, display and print it for Your own personal use. Commercial use is prohibited.
Julkaisun pysyvä osoite on
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:amk-2025061122570
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:amk-2025061122570
Tiivistelmä
Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) is a complex mental health condition that stems from traumatic experiences and affects a significant portion of the population. Traditional therapeutic approaches, including cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) and exposure therapy are often effective, but they can be limited by factors such as accessibility, stigma, and cost. Digital self-help tools offer individuals an immediate, low-cost/no-cost and easy access to coping strategies, psychoeducation, and symptom management techniques. These tools can sometimes be the only source of help for PTSD, such as in humanitarian disasters.
This thesis investigates research on PTSD-focused digital tools through an integrative literature review (ILR) using original research articles. The objective is to study the results of use of the digital tools by individuals with PTSD symptoms. Various outcomes associated with tool usage, such as changes in PTSD symptoms and other health-related indicators, are reviewed. Factors impacting outcomes are also examined. The goal of this thesis is to explore the potential for digital tools to aid individuals with PTSD symptoms.
The theoretical framework draws on existing literature related to digital health interventions and PTSD symptom management. The articles for the ILR were found from ProQuest, EBSCOhost APA Psych Articles and PubMed using a structured search. 162 articles were found, out of which 27 went through a full-text review and 9 were finally included in the review.
Key results indicate that while there is no consistent statistically significant improvement in PTSD symptoms among digital tool users compared to control groups, some findings hint at the effectiveness of these tools, although the difference to a control group is often small and not statistically significant. Clinically significant change was more common in the groups using a digital tool. External or personal factors such as age, gender or race, and peer support did not significantly influence outcomes. Users generally found the tools easy to navigate and reported moderate satisfaction levels. Notably, digital tool usage was deemed safe, with no significant adverse effects reported, encouraging its use as a supplementary resource or when traditional mental health services are inaccessible. Caution should be used in generalizing findings as the studies had a variety of population types, some had rather small samples, and there was significant variation in control group conditions across studies.
In conclusion, digital tools for PTSD present an interesting option for enhancing care, but they currently cannot be recommended as stand-alone treatment unless no traditional support is available. While the evidence of efficacy remains mixed, the low cost, safety, and potential wide reach of these tools warrant further study. Future research should explore the specific content and user engagement strategies that might optimize tool effectiveness for diverse populations, and include large-scale, long-term studies with a control group.
This thesis investigates research on PTSD-focused digital tools through an integrative literature review (ILR) using original research articles. The objective is to study the results of use of the digital tools by individuals with PTSD symptoms. Various outcomes associated with tool usage, such as changes in PTSD symptoms and other health-related indicators, are reviewed. Factors impacting outcomes are also examined. The goal of this thesis is to explore the potential for digital tools to aid individuals with PTSD symptoms.
The theoretical framework draws on existing literature related to digital health interventions and PTSD symptom management. The articles for the ILR were found from ProQuest, EBSCOhost APA Psych Articles and PubMed using a structured search. 162 articles were found, out of which 27 went through a full-text review and 9 were finally included in the review.
Key results indicate that while there is no consistent statistically significant improvement in PTSD symptoms among digital tool users compared to control groups, some findings hint at the effectiveness of these tools, although the difference to a control group is often small and not statistically significant. Clinically significant change was more common in the groups using a digital tool. External or personal factors such as age, gender or race, and peer support did not significantly influence outcomes. Users generally found the tools easy to navigate and reported moderate satisfaction levels. Notably, digital tool usage was deemed safe, with no significant adverse effects reported, encouraging its use as a supplementary resource or when traditional mental health services are inaccessible. Caution should be used in generalizing findings as the studies had a variety of population types, some had rather small samples, and there was significant variation in control group conditions across studies.
In conclusion, digital tools for PTSD present an interesting option for enhancing care, but they currently cannot be recommended as stand-alone treatment unless no traditional support is available. While the evidence of efficacy remains mixed, the low cost, safety, and potential wide reach of these tools warrant further study. Future research should explore the specific content and user engagement strategies that might optimize tool effectiveness for diverse populations, and include large-scale, long-term studies with a control group.